Yesterday said:
AgGrad99 said:
Yesterday said:
Stive said:
Waffledynamics said:
We need less tech dependency in schools. Get rid of it and this won't be a problem.
You might as well tell everyone they should start riding horses again.
I disagree completely. At least at the earlier grade levels. iPads shouldn't be introduced until the 6th grade. As it is, our kids reading and writing are awful. They need to learn basic arithmetic and writing before they're introduced to screens.
Junior high and high school absolutely they need tech!
I'm not even sure the older ones need the tech. Kids know how to use tech, without the schools teaching/using it.
It's just become a crutch for teachers/admin. It's also hindering what kids learn, even in college. They take so many tests online...unproctored and open-note. All because it's easier for profs to let them take the tests on their own, instead of doing it in class, and spending time grading it. They aren't studying/learning the material.
And, practically...every job I had out of school required me to learn new tech/software, etc...that I never saw in school. And I've had to continue to learn new tech throughout my career. But the material I studied in school has stuck with me, and has been applied continually along the way.
I won't disagree. It's definitely a crutch for teachers. I'm
Not even sure we need them to be honest. All the work is ready in canvas and we the parents/kids have to monitor to make sure projects are due, quizzes are done etc. teachers don't even have to grade most things done online. It's wild.
On what are you basing the claim that "teachers don't even have to grade most things done online"?
Essays still have to be read and graded individually, usually using a rubric the same as with old school printed essays, but come with the added benefit of having a plagiarism checker like TurnItIn. Video presentations still have to be viewed and assessed, same as an in-class presentation. Multiple choice, I'll grant, can be auto graded, but it's fundamentally no different than using scantrons in the age before Canvas/Blackboard/etc. Gradescope helps, to a degree, with equations, but is not "set and forget." In short, the main advantage these systems provide is easier communication, a (usually) 24/7 repository for course content, flexibility for students submitting assignments, and consolidation of work into a digital database so instructors aren't managing paper. The cost is vulnerability to exploits like this that can have a huge impact vs the limited impact of a single instructor accidentally leaving a stack of essays on the bus.
As to the other poster's claim about exams administered online, how is that any different than an instructor allowing open note in-class or take-home exams? Often this is a result of having so much mandated to cover in a set amount of time that faculty can't afford to lose valuable classroom time to in-class exams. Two in-class exams, for example, effectively eat a week of lecture time in a Tuesday/Thursday class, unless classroom time can be set separate from lecture for an in-person proctored exam, which is hard to manage except in the really big classes where the departments can force the issue and secure the classroom space.
Bottom line: LMSes make it possible to do more with less, but don't necessarily make instructors' lives any easier compared to old school days when a syllabus didn't have to look like a contract, instruction was handled by chalk, a blackboard, and an overhead projector, and all assignments were submitted by hand.
As for impact on student learning, there I would agree that the old methods were more effective at students retaining information, but our society's reliance on Google and instant digital access to information in general is also part of the problem. We have become accustomed to offloading the work of retention to computers, and find ourselves up the creek when that access is lost.
