I'd be interested to see if its the ipads that are actually improving learning or the method of teaching (problem based, which is how my med school taught) vs "old school". The tech companies are pushing the agenda for an ipad or tablet in every school. Helps their bottom line, and I bet they also have Apple (or Google) funded "research" to back that up. Also, much of the research on ipad usage, in education, is based on survey or anecdotal evidence. That's nice but I'm not sure its break the education budget nice.

I agree with what you say here. I cannot say this technology push is really justified, because of the costs, but the kids (and new teachers) coming up are knee deep in a big technology world. Its all they know so paper and pen may be foreign to them, as computers were foreign to some of us when we were growing up.

And as far as teacher pay is concerned, I think more value should be placed on our teachers, especially the great ones (anyone who has been in school knows their great teachers). These people are responsible for the learning of future generations so their contribution to society is humongous.

I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Can you elaborate?

Example: I work in data science. My reports can be slow because of the structure of my dataset, and the overall speed of the servers (in layman's terms). I can control the former, and cannot control the latter because it's run by a different department. The expectation is that I come up with a solution on the data structure to make what improvements I have control over. It may not be the fastest report possible, but it will be a faster report than it was before the redesign.

However, if instead of "data structure" and "server speed" we talk about "teacher quality" and "parental guidance," it is VERY common for people to say, "well the parents are the biggest factor," and then move on with life satisfied that something beyond our control has been identified and that "not much can be done."


.........yet we look for the best studios to send our kids to to learn karate, or the best teachers to teach them to play the piano, or we expect our football teams that are losing to fire the coach and replace him with the best coaches. We absolutely understand the value of teacher quality except when it comes to raising our taxes to teach someone else's kid.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

I don't think the educators want anyone to know that. Teaching is special and none of the rules of the real world can apply (and you can't possibly understand unless you are a teacher)

And let's be honest, a very significant portion of "current" educational spending is actually being used to fund pensions (that were not properly funded then). So to your point, two things need to happen with respect to educational funding:

1. There should be a metric based approach, where spending is allocated based on maximizing outcomes per dollar spent. Hard data should be demanded to demonstrate how changes in spending improved (or didn't) educational outcomes.

2. There needs to be honesty about how much funding is actually being spent on educating students. It's a little unfair to say we spent $1 billion on education, when $200-$300 million is going towards pensions for teachers who are currently retired (which do not directly benefit current students). They really need to separate out the costs for the legacy pensions and not count it as "educational spending" and make sure pensions are properly funded as they go (pension costs for current teachers are part of teacher compensation and should be counted as costs directly incurred to educate students), so future generations do not get shortchanged on educational funding.

It the evolution of education. Technology skills today are important. My grandchildren have/had computer classes at age 3 in daycare.

Having a hard time figuring out your point. Are you saying that parent behavior can't be changed?

---

Books @ Amazon
"If only he had used his genius for niceness, instead of Evil." M. Smart

For background. My father is retired school teacher, my mother-in-law is retired school teacher, and I wanted to be a teacher.

In your bolded part you are talking about kids who are motivated and want to excel. For them, having the best teacher makes a difference. If you hired those teachers/instructors to work with someone who had no interest in learning - there would be little difference between the best piano teacher and a mediocre one.

You could populate some schools with the top instructors in their fields and the overall student scores wouldn't vary because many of them don't want to learn because they place no value on those things.

I do think we could make a difference if we had different types of schools. Academic focus, skill/craft/trade focus etc. Why force someone to learn XYZ when their interest is in becoming a mechanic, carpenter or electrician. Teach them advanced skills in something that they are interested in and they will excel. Force them to take classes that they have no interest in and they will become bored.

Likewise, some students have no interest in academics or trades. Forcing them into a math class only causes a disruption that affects the education of the other students. Let's find something that interests them if for no other reason than to keep them from disrupting a class of kids who do want to learn.

I hear you, but the problem here is that our modern culture often has a hard time blaming certain groups. And if you can't talk honestly about the cause, one ends up pouring in all sorts of energy and $$ into fixes that don't fix.

The primary problem is screwed up parents. If your scenario was accurate, there would be broad agreement that the problem is screwed up parents, and a teeth-grinding recognition that screwed up parents are hard to fix. But there isn't much of a discussion about that. Instead, we talk about money. We deliberately avoid blaming parents. I don't have a great answer as to "why." Being unwilling to accurately ID the cause of the problem is too far outside of my worldview that it's hard for me to put myself in the other's shoes.

Look how fast we are to blame poverty on behavior problems. As if being poor makes you a thief or a slug. When in fact, it's being a slug that tends to make one poor.

Look how fast we are to screech racism when someone points out how much trouble black kids, especially the boys, have in school. There's even crazy black male cultures where doing well in school is actively derided. Wtf kind of recipe for success is that?

Imo, discussing the most significant causes of kids doing poorly in school will get you labeled as some Neanderthal skin-head maga type.

So we wring our hands, throw money at the schools, and nothing ever changes.

---

Books @ Amazon
"If only he had used his genius for niceness, instead of Evil." M. Smart

Agree on the primacy of the parent/home side of the ledger, but as far as spending on skool, one of the big areas I see as a parent of 1 kid still in public skool and 1 recent graduate would be to increase spending on more of the things we can to at least help offset some of the care/support that might be lacking at home... Stuff like more counselors or support staff (one of the first places that get cut when personnel costs need to be trimmed; they always say things about "keeping the cuts out of the classroom" or some similar buzz phrase); more/better food choices, facility improvements to accommodate more before/after-school programs (sports, music, art, computers, animals, urban farming, whatever) for kids who'd be better off spending more time in that kind of supported structure and less time back in their dysfunctional household.

Those are all things that 1) cost money, but also 2) help to address the needs of the kids' physical/emotional well-being *outside* of the classroom (yet still within the outer sphere of the schools' influence) so that the kids are as well equipped as possible and ready to learn when they do step into the classroom. Essentially trying to help plug in the socioeconomic-family gaps that everyone agrees are the real impediments.

But, it's still a variation of "throwing money at the problem" for those who are inclined to dismiss it all as just more tax-&-spend liberalism ~ however at least it addresses some of the criticisms focused on teacher compensation and why we'd want to keep pouring more $$ down that well instead.

I currently teach 2nd grade in a small rural public school. I have been experimenting with adding more technology to my lessons as the district continues to add more Chromebooks. We are not currently one to one but that is a goal for our school so I am trying to find creative ways we can use them in 2nd grade. Recently I have taken our "math meeting" daily review into an interactive slideshow. Typically these lessons are presented on the Smartboard and students answer on a piece of paper. For the interactive slideshows students log on to their own Chromebook and answer questions by drawing directly on the slide. I have 100% student engagement with the slideshows. The material is the same, the presentation is the only thing that has changed. Students will answer the questions then write on the slides "I love this" with hearts and smiley faces. Before students skipped the same questions every day or some were completely distracted and had to sit with me guiding them through every step.

Just my observations as it seems to relate to the discussion.