Interactive Learning Fails Reading Test 299
motivator_bob writes to tell us the Sydney Morning Herald is reporting that the latest craze of interactive computer software is actually hurting the education level rather than helping it. From the article: "Parents have also bought into the enthusiasm for technology, spending millions on educational computer games for their young. However, research published in the journal Education 3 to 13 has found that pupils who use interactive programs cannot remember stories they have just read because they are distracted by cartoons and sound effects."
I'll say (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I'll say (Score:2)
Re:I'll say (Score:5, Informative)
I know from experience at a company that makes a very successful literacy program that a computer reading a stories to children and providing exercises in phonics, vocabulary, and comprehension can help children's reading and writing skills immensely. At that company, competing "edutainment" programs were dismissed as inferior, and this study proves that the "entertainment" portion just distracts kids away from the education part of the activity.
Re:I'll say (Score:4, Insightful)
> and this study proves that the "entertainment" portion just distracts kids away
> from the education part of the activity.
The problem I think is parents dont dismiss those ones as inferior because they hold the attention of kids more and the kids sit there agog at the pretty lights and the pictures and the animations and it distracts them and acts just like the television as a babysitter. And so the kids end up dumb and can't read and the parents end up getting time to themselves and a way out of having to actually 'parent' the kids.
people like that should have their kids forcibly removed and the parents sent to prison. its unethical.
Re:I'll say (Score:3, Insightful)
And another way of looking at it:
Parents have been told for years, nearly decades, that computers make their kids smarter. Open the newspaper and see the local school district asking to raise taxes to buy new computers. Read about teache
Swamp Gas (Score:2, Interesting)
I must say, the best computer learning game I ever used was Swamp Gas (and Swamp Gas Europe). I memorized random facts about the states (or the european countries) so that I could 'beat' the game. This would then unlock a few relatively fun arcade games. After I ran out of lives, it was back to the learning so I could get back into the arcade.
Oh ya, Oregon Trail was fun too. Stupid Buffalo.
Re:Hear, Hear! (Score:5, Interesting)
That being said, there are some great tools that students can use for science, but they are not necessarily "educational", just happen to be good in schools. I know the ed software business is big business, educators, administrators, and parents get all warm and fuzzy over "kids and computers", but nothing beats a good book, and even more than that, nothing replaces the writing process. Kids today barely read at all, and their writing is awful. I rather suspect the inundation of computers and whiz-bang technology has jaded their outlooks. But, there is no substitute for reading a book. The problem with most ed software I've seen is that it is rather limited in developing critical thinking and analysis. Students tend to stay on the low end of Bloom's taxonomy. For example, how do you get them (in my discipline, history) to see cause and effect?
I use Keynote on my iBook all the time, but a teacher using a computer to present material is a far cry from kids playing on the computer. But that's just my experience. 10 years worth.
I'm not buying it.... (Score:4, Interesting)
The funny thing is that prior to my first word processor, I don't believe I ever received a single grade higher than a C on any writing assignment. Immediately following my family getting a word processor, I started getting As. I still attribute some of that to lazy teachers who graded on how pretty your handwriting was, but a lot of it was that changing a single word in the middle of a paper didn't require an extra half of an hour to rewrite the paper.
Maybe I was the exception, but I'm not buying that immediate feedback and shifting effort to the actual task (as opposed to busywork) does not improve the learning process for kids. I also call BS on the "nothing beats a book" line. I can't count the number of times I've heard it. There is only one thing that reading a book gets you that watching TV doesn't. You learn to read better. Now, I am not saying that reading well is not a good thing, but that is all reading has on TV.
Re:I'm not buying it.... (Score:3, Interesting)
Try to get a job as an engineer, lawyer, doctor, or other 'knowledge worker' type job, based on TV skills or other immediate gratification skills (i.e., 'edutainment'). Communication and social interaction is so fundamental to the future of our non-manufacturing economy, that I'd even say that playing team sports trumps both reading and TV for learning how to deal with the politics and
Re:I'm not buying it.... (Score:4, Insightful)
While the rest of your comments are well-taken, this one is a bit erroneous. Reading and watching TV exercise very different parts of the brain. Reading is an exercise in symbolic cognition, a faculty of the brain that underlies logical thought. The ability to reason symbolically is one of the fundamental aspects of higher human thought, and it is something that watching TV does not help develop.
Re:Hear, Hear! (Score:3, Informative)
That's just not fair. People have been using the "kids today" argument since the beginning of time. Your parents complained about "kids today" when you were a kid, and your grandparents complained about "kids today" when they were a kid. Kids today are the same as kids have always been. Some read plenty, some write well, and many are just plain stupid. I'm 27, and I remember wondering why so few of my classmates enjoyed reading. I also remember wond
Re:Hear, Hear! (Score:3, Funny)
Anecdotal evidence is a far more valid!
People going around with actual knowledge aren't welcome on Slashdot. It's all supposition, one-off experiences, bizarre conspiracy theories and wild guesses around here.
Sadly.
Re:Hear, Hear! (Score:3, Interesting)
On the other hand, there is software and there are sites which are actually very useful for learning. For example, I was recently curious as to whether a US president had ever been impeached when his party controlled Congress. W
Re:Hear, Hear! (Score:3, Insightful)
Genuinely educational software is only accidentally so. Microsoft Word probably exposes more educational possibilities than anything in the reader rabbit series. Your friendly GCC compiler (or even javascript) is far better at teaching math and logic than that stupid frog. And Photoshop / Maya 3D will give kids a far deeper understanding of
Re:I'll say (Score:5, Insightful)
You're missing the fundamental point of the article, which is OOH SHINY!
Sorry, the point of the article is "We've got to sell papers by scaring you, and this is going to get your attention for the thirty seconds we've conditioned you to spend on a newspaper article that can't possibly do justice to the topic at hand."
On a serious note, ration access to the things. "Interactive" is not necessarily a good thing. You thought TV was bad for attention spans? You thought old-style video games were bad? Heh... use the right things at the right time, and in the right proportions. The problem is, many parents who wouldn't dream of letting their kids veg out in front of the television simply substitute one electronic babysitter for another.
Read to your kids, encourage them to read, let them play interactive titles like the Broderbund stuff assessed, and let them watch TV and DVDs. They all complement each other.
Reading to kids exposes them to material they wouldn't be able to access themselves because of the reading level required, but which they may well be able to understand - kids can generally listen and speak several years ahead of their reading level, and if they gain knowledge that there's all this interesting stuff in books and see adults reading they'll get interested in gaining the skills needed to read it themselves.
Interactive stuff makes for good reading-drills - it gets their attention and gets them practicing the skill, and they don't even know that they're doing it. Just don't expect them to be able to absorb a whole story in a single sitting. They're just not designed that way. They're frequently either non-linear, or have an overall linear progression that allows diversions along the way - that's deliberate, and is meant to enhance the long-term playability and make it easier to get the kids to repeat the practice reading exercises hidden as sets of directions or comments on objects or people. They're good for picking up related facts, but picking a narrative out of them could be difficult because the reader/player partially directs how things unfold rather than passively following a narrative that already exists. If they're related to other dead-tree materials, like the Little Monster title is, it could be a good way to get an interest in the related books too.
TV, videos and DVDs also allow some complex ideas to be presented if done right, and can encourage imagination and thought. I'm not talking about reruns of Magilla Gorilla... I think we all know what kind of crap has been on television... but there is a lot of stuff out there that can stretch the imagination, get kids thinking about moral and behavioural issues at an early age etc. Care Bears, good targetted kids sci-fi of the kind that our national broadcaster seems to show from time to time, kiddy documentary-style series and the like can help provide an interest in what's right and wrong and an interest in people and the world. We don't sit around reading the bible and Pears Cyclopedia to the family by gaslight any more, so the old "do unto others" and "things are interesting out there" messages aren't quite so common in everyday family activities these days - education is in some ways all about programming your kids to be the best people they can be, and their flexible and absorbent little minds will be shaped by what you expose them to, so look at this as an opportunity to expose them to new, interesting and challenging material rather than a way to keep them out of your hair while you watch the news.
As for purely entertaining interactive titles, like video games, they're not necessarily bad either. Reasoning, imagination, memory skills, attention to detail, cause-and-effect and the like are all things that their gameplay can rely on. They're all important life skills too.
Just because kids couldn't remember what they saw in the program the previous day is no reason to assume the technology is evil
Re:I'll say (Score:5, Insightful)
What's missing in all of these educational products is a human being. This is why I don't believe that video games have any more than a marginal effect on behaviour; they simply don't have the emotional influence of another human being, especially of a parent. In order for any of these things to have a deeply significant impact, the child would have to be starved of human contact, and the damage caused by this would probably outweigh all other influences combined.
Re:I'll say (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I'll say (Score:4, Funny)
Kiki's gone into ferret-shock! (Score:3, Funny)
accelerated reader (Score:5, Interesting)
AR had you take a test at the beginning of the year to determine your "reading level", and it had a "reading level" for practically every book out there. Kids were intentionally doing poorly on the test so that they could read 2nd-grade level books. Because the kids were only graded on what they could take an AR test on, these kids were given high grades for reading books that did them absolutely no good (whereas only one other student and I were actually reading above the 7th grade level).
Sometimes, educational software (and software in the schools) can be useful, but the biggest problem is that it seems like we use computers for the sake of using computers, and not for the sake of learning. Despite the fact that AR was KILLING our reading classes, the administration demanded that we continue to use it simply so they could brag about their computer software.
Re:accelerated reader (Score:5, Interesting)
What they found out over a few years time was that the average performance of the pupils was about the same. But, looking closer, they discovered that motivated kids were learning MORE and the average kid was learning LESS. I remember spending long classroom hours making clay log cabins and such. The experience set me back severely in some areas but raced me forward in others. Within a few years of the time I attended the school, walls and much more structure had been added. It was viewed a failure.
I wish, in a way, that I had been given a regular education, though it's always hard to say what difference it might have made.
Re:accelerated reader (Score:2)
Less 'trons, more math and reading. I was several years ahead, but then we moved north (the life of a Navy brat) and I just slimed my way through the rest of school.
Education, as a subset of life, is something from which you take what you desire.[1]
As much as I enjoyed Animal House/Tommy Boy, the American Asshat archetype is probably the biggest threat to the education system going.
But maybe that's more of a feature than a bug: "W
Re:accelerated reader (Score:2)
Re:accelerated reader (Score:5, Interesting)
I went through the same "accelerated reader" program except that the administrators my school did what the program suggested and required each student accumulate a certain number of points. The harder books rewarded students with more points requiring them to read fewer, and the slower students had to read more easy books forcing them to catch up. The scoring system created healty competition and without that program I surely would have never read Anna Karina in middle school. (It had the highest point value of any of the books on the list.)
The Pedants are Revolting... (Score:5, Funny)
> Anna Karina
So would you say your recollection of Anna Kar-en-ina [wikipedia.org] was at all affected by the reading program?
(And where's my -1 Pedant mod, hmmm? It's 2006 already, and still no Pedant mod...)
Re:accelerated reader (Score:2)
Re:accelerated reader (Score:2)
In 1973, I was in second grade. My parents had naively bought a house in a neighborhood with really bad schools (we moved away the next year). My school sucked big time, but had gotten some money for computer-aided instruction. That meant a room full of noisy teletypes, with a woman running them who wore earplugs to avoid hearing damage. The teletype would spit out a problem like 12x3, and I was supposed to type in 36. Once you had demonstrated mastery of a particular subject, it would aut
Re:accelerated reader (Score:4, Insightful)
I recall it fondly, ever since they started requiring it in 6th grade, I've hated reading. I'm now a junior in high school.
The system was so broken. 11th grade level nonfiction books were virtually worthless, and since that's what I liked to read, I was not allowed to read them anymore. I had to read a bunch of crappy fiction books instead. And even then they'd ask stupid questions that were way too specific that nobody in their right mind could remember. And of course, reading a book that didn't have the AR sticker on it was FORBIDDEN! How DARE you read a non-AR book!
AR is an example of technology that's NOT right. I was taught to read stuff that was of value and to enjoy those things. Fiction was not one of those things. So then they made sure to break non-fiction for me too. Thank goodness we have Accelerated Reader!
Re:accelerated reader (Score:3, Insightful)
Another thing that I hate is the fact that other kids are forbidden to read books that are ABOVE their level. I can understand not letting them read ones that are below, but ABOVE?
And even after we reached our required 5 books, we STILL weren't allowed to read non-AR books. I feel your pain, brother.
Fortunately, I still love to read.
Re:accelerated reader (Score:2)
They'd set limits based on points and encourage people to get as many as possible. There was a waiting list for all the Harry Potter books as they were worth huge points. People read for the awards, not for the reading. Thus defeating the purpose.
Re:accelerated reader (Score:2)
Re:accelerated reader (Score:2)
Also, ONLY our first 5 books mattered. If I wanted to read more, then they didn't count for my grade. I tried talking the teacher into a variety of things (including having the new test grades replace the old or only co
Re:accelerated typing-Mavis Beacon (Score:3, Insightful)
1. The fact that the computer really isn't neccessary for reading.
2. The way my school was using it (and spending TONS of money on it).
Although, I do have to say that typing programs are not as effective as instant messengers and things like that (as long as the kids aren't saying stuff like "LoL" constantly).
Education is not Entertainment (Score:3, Insightful)
Entertainment amuses and distracts.
Education is not and cannot be entertainment.
It's a dangerous fad, I think ultimately brought on by the entertainment power of TV; children can be so involved in TV it's hard to get them to focus on education, so the idea arrives that if the TV can be used for education...
However, entertainment is fundamentally antagonistic to education.
Everything education is, entertainment is not.
Neil Postman wrote about this in "Amusing Ourselves to Death", a book which inspired Roger Waters epochial album, "Amused to Death"; a recommended read and a recommended listen.
Re:Education is not Entertainment (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Education is not Entertainment (Score:2)
After all, if they really were facts, you wouldn't be able to change them.
You can in my church.
Re:Education is not Entertainment (Score:3, Insightful)
Ah. I read Amusing Ourselves To Death for summer reading this past summer. It was indeed a good look at what newer, more "glitzy" forms of media have done to the basic ways we communicate information. One example was television news: In "olden times," you would get your news from a local newspaper, and it tended to be things relevant to you personally, or to people you knew around the neighborhood. But now that we have satellite links and the ability to basically broadcast video to everyone's houses fr
Entertainment can be Educating, however. (Score:3, Interesting)
But it's one of those things that depend on the activity and subject. If you teach something in videos or whatever, there are tons of history or language or geometry things that would go along with it. But reading isn't one of those automated-type activities. Reading is learned simply because you see the use for it and have the d
Re:Education is not Entertainment (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm all for making learning fun when it can be, but we often sacrifice too much in order to achieve those ends. Sometimes you just have to sit down and memorize your multiplication tables, read your textbooks, and do your problem sets. Sadly, no amount of fun will get you there faster than that.
Re:Education is not Entertainment (Score:3, Interesting)
I think it's possible (sometimes) both to educate and entertain. My daughter (not quite 3) seems to have learnt quite a bit from some of the videos and TV shows she's watched - letters, numbers, names of things, etc.
And what people find entertaining varies from person to p
Re:Education is not Entertainment (Score:2)
Education should not be a labor either (Score:2)
You need to be careful with your definition of "entertainment".
If "entertainment" includes all of the things we choose to do for the enjoyment of it, then I've got to disagree. Want to teach kids about ecosystems, animal habitats, plant biology, simple thermodynamics, simple geology, and a whole lot more? Go on a camping trip in the mountains (or backwoods... whatever's local) and insist that the GameBoy be left in the car. There are uncountable things to be l
Re:Education is not Entertainment (Score:2)
7, 7, yay we love 7. how many is 7?
7 chocolate cream pies!
If the kids Can't Read....Use speach recognition. (Score:2, Interesting)
After all book learnin is over rated.
Re:If the kids Can't Read....Use speach recognitio (Score:3, Funny)
Re:grammer police (Score:2)
LordMaxxon, would you come back here for a minute please?
Do you see that up there?
What do you mean "where"? In xoip's post [slashdot.org]... right there, in the misspellings. Yes, that's it right there!
That, m'Lord, is what is known as "The Point". It seems you missed it entirely.
P.S. Intentionally misspelling "grammar" is no longer funny. (Uhh, that was intentional wasn't it?)
Computers should supplement learning (Score:2, Insightful)
Classical education theory suggests that people can be categorized by visual, aural, touch, smell, etc learning capacities. I found that a careful combination of each of the senses works for me.
Irrespective, I think that interactive learning
Re:Computers should supplement learning (Score:5, Insightful)
Not "book learning". Literacy.
In summary, learn to fucking read.
What was that? (Score:3, Funny)
Creative Juices (Score:2, Insightful)
Let's just all IMAGINE then... (Score:2, Insightful)
We can just imagine up computer manuals. Or better yet, let's just pretend we are computer experts who know how to write software to fly airplanes! Then we can imagine that the software passes the FAA certification process. And we can imagine that that plane just didn't fall out of the sky, killing hundreds of the passengers on b
Re:Let's just all IMAGINE then... (Score:2)
I agree on this point- I've noticed that if I take a break for even a month from certain activities it takes me a while to ease back into them because I've
Cartoons and sound effects? (Score:3)
Re:Cartoons and sound effects? (Score:2)
To some extent multiplayer games are pushing beyond that right now, and the study of emergent behaviour may offer a second avenue out of the straight jacket.
Think "Diebold does Schoolhouse Rock". (Score:2, Informative)
A couple of points (Score:5, Insightful)
The other half used an interactive program which, in addition to telling the story, encourages pupils to click the computer mouse on page illustrations, triggering almost 300 animations and sound effects.
Only two-thirds of the pop-up cartoons were relevant to the storyline.
-----
Firstly and seriously, of course children will be distracted by animations and sound effects. Knowing this, and if they are irrelevent, why did the writers of the software put them there? Why not add some animations that explained part of the story? Fair enough no kid's book should read like a tech manual (and vice versa), but putting in distractions will distract the reader - child or otherwise.Secondly and less seriously... they're surprised 'only' two thirds of the popups are relevent? Put the kids on the net instead of using that software and we'll see how many 'relevent' popups they get.
Actually, that might not be such a good idea...
Re:A couple of points (Score:2)
Blaming the medium for the message (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course, given that people often judge video games, comics, genre fiction, etc. only by their worst examples, why should anyone be surprised by this conclusion?
Re:A couple of points (Score:2)
A day after the exercise, children were asked to recall the story and the characters in it. The findings showed that 90 per cent of the group that used the first program had good or excellent recall of the story.
It doesn't seem like the researchers are testing reading ability, they're "just" testing memory. And of course you're going to have poor memory when you have multiple distracting events going on as well. It looks
Of course, paper books are just as bad... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Of course, paper books are just as bad... (Score:2)
Duh. (Score:3, Interesting)
And guess what? It's not just kids and "educational" programs,
the same thing applies to adults and movies/TV..
Think about it...
The Rise of MS English (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm no speeling or grammar fiend but even I am horrified by the basic language errors that now appear in supposedly edited works (e.g., the New York Times and in books). Some people claim the trend is due to e-mail/IM, but I'd argue that a well trained person doesn't make such basic mistakes even on a fast first draft.
I blame the pubic school system (Score:3, Funny)
That little gem has even appeared in The Washington Post. When even old time print media is coasting on the spell checker, maybe it's a lost cause.
Lab rats (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Lab rats (Score:2)
TA's are told be the professor that the students by definition do not give a "wrong" answer. Instead, students should simply discuss their results and it does not matter what their results are.
Sounds appropriate to philosophy, not science.
Does Zork count? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Does Zork count? (Score:2)
More insightful words have never been spoken?
Re:Does Zork count? (Score:4, Insightful)
When I was a kid, educational software like Zork really helped, typing and spelling especially.
Yes, it does. And it is a good example for how educational software should be:
For me it was "Wishbringer" and "Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy". Since my first language is German, it was even more usefull, since I usually had no opportunity to really try my English communication skills in my natural habitat. SimTalk is way more efficient than NoTalk.
Chriss
--
memomo.net - free online language training [memomo.net]
Re:Does Zork count? (Score:2)
The Solution is Obvious (Score:2)
Ugh, I knew it. (Score:3, Insightful)
A day after the exercise, children were asked to recall the story and the characters in it. The findings showed that 90 per cent of the group that used the first program had good or excellent recall of the story.
This figure dropped to 30 per cent with the children who had used the interactive program.
Hmm, one program had 2/3 superfluous material and their story retention dropped by 2/3. What a coincidence.
READ a WHAT? (Score:2)
From the article: "The children were more highly motivated to read a talking story than a conventional book."
Shouldn't she have said "listen to a talking story"? Apparently the teachers need some help. If nothing else, they should try reading stories to the kids.
Also: "the vast spending on information and communication technology has had little or no impact on standards."
That's true in the corporate world, too. I guess we truly are preparing the kiddies for real life!
So we may deduce.... (Score:2)
Proof is in the pudding.
I think the fact they are using a computer (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:I think the fact they are using a computer (Score:2)
Phony test (Score:5, Insightful)
Man, do I hate those studies. What the hell were they measuring? Two groups of six years old listening to a story while the text ist displayed on a computer screen.
When asked about the story, 90% of group A will remember it correctly, but only 30% of group B. So what is the conclusion? Maybe that distractions, especially those that are not related to what you are currently doing will harm your concentration and therefore you will remember not as well as if you were left alone? No, the conclusion is:
Interactive learning fails reading test
WTF?
I don't claim that it is impossible that interactive learning is the wrong educational tool for six years old. I don't believe it, but I just can't prove it. But I'm annoyed by all these stupid studies making statements based on unprecise conditions, which will not allow to deduce verifyable conclusions, but will be picked up by the press (and slashdot) nonetheless.
They're just like those studies that claim over and over again that playing counterstrike will turn kids into brutal killers. Proven wrong again and again, but nobody cares.
Chriss
--
memomo.net - free online language training [memomo.net]
skip organic children entirely (Score:2)
What is Learning? (Score:3, Interesting)
Guys like Edward De Bono [edwdebono.com] have made a career by claiming to have the inside track on creative learning. I've studied epistemology since my mid teens and in answer to the question 'what is learning?' I've acquired a vast ignorance. Ultimately, for me, learning is a nurtured drive with inherent requirements, that is nourished by the new, by information, difference that makes a difference (Bateson). The high of learning comes when one recognizes that nature has given rise to you, an individual with the potential to encompass the principles of life in the small shell that houses your brain.The truth is most people are driven by the more primitive drives and default to being entertained.
Gregory Bateson [edge.org] suggested we can learn to learn, possibly learn to learn to learn; but, first we must experience what it means to learn. I believe that learning is a unique multifaceted experience that, once experienced, can, depending on the individual, entice the practioner ever onward.
The day my older sister took me by the hand and walked me into the nearest library I was hooked. I knew how to, read, loved to read, but had no idea of the universes of knowledge available. Yet even into grade 1 I stubbornly refused to learn to write. I read, I had lots to read, other people were doing the writing, what need had I to write?
Whatever learning is, whether it be as simple as deriving new patterns, or, as profound as Archimedes' Eureka!, we first must introduce children to the joy of learning. Most of them can take it from there.
just my loose change.
What the.. (Score:3, Funny)
Additional sources on the subject (Score:2, Funny)
with all the float-over windows with sound and graphics
Finally (Score:5, Insightful)
Parents are willing to spend an arm and a leg "for their child's education", but would be appalled at buying that child an equally-priced "toy".
It seems that all any company has to do anymore is design something that has more than a few words and numbers in it, call it a "learning device" or "educational system" and it sells like you wouldn't believe.
The newest leapfrog toy, "the fly", seems like a really useful invention again passed of as an educational device without any real educational content.
It can mimic a $5 pocket calculator, a $3 pocket dictionary, and a $0.50 pen all while taking up way too much space and being much to loud/obnoxious/distracting.
The potential of this technology is immensely great, but of course, what does that matter if it won't sell and make the company lots and lots of money? Best to strip it down, paint it bright colors, have it make noise, and say it helps kids learn.
Computers Considered Harmful (Score:3, Insightful)
A computer can alleviate some of the drudgery in education, but it cannot replace or even significantly augment the teacher. We are impovershing our children if we think otherwise.
Re:Computers Considered Harmful (Score:5, Insightful)
I would have to mostly disagree. Even though I think computers in education are the most wasteful, overhyped thing in decades, I think a properly made computer program probably could teach you to read. And I know you can learn math from a computer: in college, I took M311 (Linear Algebra and Matrix Theory) by correspondence, and I did just fine in it and got an "A", despite not being that great at math (for example, I failed second-semester calculus the first 4 times I took it).
In fact, that Linear Algebra experience taught me just how superfluous the teacher can be. I just had a book and a guide that told me what to read and what problems to work, and I did fine. I had the same experience with the other correspondence course I took, which was US History. All I did was read the book and mail in an essay for each chapter to be graded. I got an A in that too, and I still remember what the prof wrote on one of my essays: "I have rarely seen this kind of insight from an undergraduate."
Now, this might all have more to do with my learning style than anything. But the point is that I was able to learn just fine without ever even meeting the teacher and just reading a book. Obviously, any content you can put in a book, you can put on a computer, so you should be able to learn anything from a computer that you can learn from a book. Of course, that does require that the software isn't so brain-damaged that it detracts from learning.
My experience with a flypen and my nephews (Score:2)
First, let me say that I was already familiar with the principle since I worked with Anoto a little (I ran a show in Toyko where we showed the Anoto pen), they make the underlying technology. This may have contributed to unfulfilled expectations.
In case you don't know what it is, the Flypen [flypentop.com] (very heavy flash site!)is a pen-shaped device based on Anoto [anoto.com]'s techno
Basic eLearning 101 (Score:2)
He wrote a great introductory book (with Ruth Colvin ClarK) on how to use multimedia to improve student learning, rather than hinder it [amazon.com].
For a good look at an online course done pretty much right (at least based on current, peer reviewed research) see the WCLN's Flow course on water resource use & river management [wcln.org] (click the login as guest button).
And see the adaptation n
How to teach kids to read (Score:3, Interesting)
2. Synthetic phonics [wikipedia.org]
3. Visit the library, buy them their favourite books as presents
4. Upgrade to meta-reading using this [amazon.com].
At no point in the above does a computer feature as anything other than a source of readables.
An interesting article (Score:3, Funny)
never trust anyone over 30 (Score:3, Insightful)
If you don't agree, read about the furors over dime store novels, talking movies, or, greatest horror of horrors, the dramas that Plato complained of.
I don't do instant messaging, but at least I have the wisdom to know that it is because I am old and not because I am wise.
Hmm. Ok, I will go login to gaim, out of shame at being so old, it just doesn't excite me though....
Hans
perhaps... (Score:3, Funny)
Perhaps that would explain all the dupes on slashdot. The editors are too busy looking at the shiny icons and banner ads, so they can't remember the stories they have just read.
Re:So what? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:So what? (Score:5, Funny)
Yes, it goes on and on my friend!
Some people started singing it
not knowing what they'd done,
and they'll continue singing it
forever just because...
This is the song that doesn't end...
(EVERYONE! [walmart.com])
Re:So what? (Score:2)
This is the song that never ends.
It goes on and on my friends.
Someone started singing it not knowing what it was,
and they'll continue singing it forever just because...
So how well do you know the songs you think you know?
Re:It'll work itself out (Score:2, Insightful)
Will it work itself out? (Score:5, Insightful)
There is no time for evolution to help the human mind adapt, we're basically stuck at this point in evolution. There's a limit to what our hunter/gatherer/tinkerer primate brains can handle and still work efficiently, and that we can't pass our progress on to our children genetically to help them get past that limit.
I'd be inclined to argue that we, doing more at one time with our minds than people a century ago, are very likely functioning less efficiently in many ways, though the progress of technological tools to aid us has more than made up the difference, so far.
Are you sure about that? (Score:2, Insightful)
What will be so different about our children and ourselves? I mean, are we going to genetically engineer them to be geniuses from day one or something? Because as far as I can tell, children receive genes from their parents and are pretty similar in intelligence (there is a correlation, although not 100%). So, what you'
Re:It'll work itself out (Score:3, Interesting)
Sadly the reality is that kids today don't learn half of what we did many many years ago. I was taught to read by my Dad. He used the book Robinson Crusoe to teach me. I seriously doubt that kids today read anything like that or would ever study calculus. They are to busy playing video games or listening to music.
Re:It'll work itself out (Score:2, Interesting)
You clearly weren't around half a century ago. I was.
You're full of the arrogance of the modern.
What's more I have spent some time living in ancient fashions, right down to the neolithic. The mind always fills itself to its capacity and just because your modern mind is blind to the stimuli and thought processes needed to survive and prosper in a neolithic world does not imply that those stimuli and thought processes d
Re:Filtering (Score:2)
You mean they have stories too? I've never noticed.
Insightful by Accident? (Score:4, Insightful)