Parents ought to be ashamed of themselves

[torch]

There are no kids that become fluent in 5 different computer languages because of the public schools or colleges.

I personally know such kids, from my experience working with them as a mentor. Java is often one of the languages they know, not because it is current, but because it is necessary to keep legacy systems alive. So they learn Java and they learn (or develop) modern languages too. Those teams of people of which you speak: Who do you think the people are?

Not all worthwhile endeavours are in the field of computer science, but perhaps you would care to define "notable computer advancements"? Your smartphone was science fiction 30 years ago; today it verges on obsolescent as wearable devices become reality. Mobile cloud computing relies on 5G technology, which is not just about bandwidth but also about complicated mathematical algorythms. Do you think it is only 60 year old engineers developing these technologies? Yes, today's technology leverages on that which came before. The same is true of every field of every human endeavour in history. 30 year old computers leveraged advancements made 60 years ago.

When I was a kid, we were taught how to use slide-rules. I can't remember the last time I used one. Today's kids have no idea what a slide-rule is. Is it a failing of the educational system to de-emphasize old tech that is no longer relevant?

I make no apologies. I don't think everything is perfect. I do work within the system to help students develop their skills and encourage their interests where I can. Does every student become a model citizen in society? Nope, but then, that was true 100 years ago too. What I don't do is sit here and slag all parents and all teachers and all students.

 

[PHPaul]

@torch - If this was a PUBLIC school system, I'm both surprised and encouraged.

Trust me, there are NO such public school programs here. I worked in the local K-12 schools as an IT guy, and I was mostly disgusted. A few bright kids with involved parents were wresting an education from the system, the rest were just passively being indoctrinated and passed along, assuming they showed up at all.

 

[jimh406]

I personally know such kids

What you are calling “fluent” means some knowledge. In any case, if a kid is working really hard to learn in the spare time, it’s not the school doing it.

A smartphone is a computer with the basics that were literally put in place decades ago. No, not by 60 year olds, but by 20, 30, and 40 year olds 30 years ago. Maybe you forget the PC launched in 82 and the MAC launched in 84. Yes, that long ago. The internet literally became popular 30 years ago. The fundamentals including java script were developed shortly thereafter.

Oracle is literally over 40 years old with several other Relational Databases coming shortly after. Wordstar, Lotus, WordPerfect, Excel, Word were from the 80s. The rest of Microsoft office was created in the early 90s.

Internet messaging and search … 90s again.

The programmers of today in comparison to years ago are not making fundamental strides. It’s not all their fault. Maybe they could have created notable technologies if they were born earlier … but they weren’t.

 

[ctfjr]

Did you listen to the question and answer given? You don't want the 'darker side' of our history taught?

 

[torch]

@torch Trust me, there are NO such public school programs here.

Really? I am surprised. Our high school robotics team is competing against teams from all over the world, including what I thought was pretty much all of the US. At last count, there were 3,166 US high school teams.

See https://info.firstinspires.org/firstforward for some examples.

As for programming languages, the kids use any of 9 different languages, depending on the platform of the day (We don't just compete in First). Plus whatever scripting is required for the website. We use previous competition robots as training aids in the off-season and our team helps mentor younger teams so most of our programmers are quite proficient in multiple languages. This is not unusual for a First team, it is quite common I assure you.

Does today's computer technology build on earlier computer technology? Absolutely. That is true of every field of human endeavour. The computers of 30 years ago built on the foundations of vacuum tube technology. Charles Babbage invented the programmable electronic computer in the 19th century. Juan Caramuel de Lobkowitz invented binary in the 17th. To say that there has been no innovation in computer technology since some arbitrary date is akin to saying that there has been no innovation in automobiles since Karl Benz. Yes, Java and the various flavours of C have been around for a while, evolving with the hardware advances. But they are not the latest programming languages. One up-and-comer is Rust, an open source project. Another is Dart.

We stand on the cusp of AI. We can already interface with our computers by talking to them or even just pointing and Google's computers take a fair stab at predicting our desires. Over the last 25 years, the human race has populated another planet with robots, now including a flying one. A surgeon can sit in his office and perform surgery on a patient in a remote community. A child can sit in her father's truck and attend class while driving down the highway. All are reliant on networking. None were possible with the internet of 30 years ago.

 

[Lil Foot]

Did you listen to the question and answer given? You don't want the 'darker side' of our history taught?

Yes, but not to the exclusion of everything else.

 

[motionclone]

Did you listen to the question and answer given? You don't want the 'darker side' of our history taught?

How come they dont want to teach the darker side of socialism, communism, marxism etc?

 

[NHSleddog]

How come they dont want to teach the darker side of socialism, communism, marxism etc?

All you will get from the cheerleaders is straw man and red herrings.

Any feedback on the new math from the cheerleaders? You think this is going in the right direction?

 

[jimh406]

To say that there has been no innovation in computer technology since some arbitrary date is akin to saying that there has been no innovation in automobiles since Karl Benz.

Of course, I didn’t say that. You are the one exaggerating to say how great the kids are you mentor. I’m sure they try hard, and they might be pretty smart, and you are probably a great mentor. I was pointing out the facts as someone who was there when it happened, and as someone who knows about the subject.

You don’t seem to have deep knowledge of the subject matter. Btw, you think AI is new. Nope, https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2017/history-artificial-intelligence/

I’ll stop with the teaching now.

 

[jimh406]

Any feedback on the new math from the cheerleaders? You think this is going in the right direction?

I don’t think you are going to get any logical arguments for this teaching style, but maybe you will.

 

[torch]

[/QUOTE]Btw, you think AI is new. Nope, https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2017/history-artificial-intelligence/[/QUOTE]

AI is another example of evolutionary development. While there are many computers playing specific games or passing a Turing test in very controlled circumstances we have not quite yet created computers with overall intelligence comparable to a human's. That's why I think we are "on the cusp" -- that is, I offer it as an example of progress in the field that will be revolutionary. For good or for ill remains to be seen.

 

[NHSleddog]

AI is another example of evolutionary development. While there are many computers playing specific games or passing a Turing test in very controlled circumstances we have not quite yet created computers with overall intelligence comparable to a human's. That's why I think we are "on the cusp" -- that is, I offer it as an example of progress in the field that will be revolutionary. For good or for ill remains to be seen.

Most code is actually written by AI today. Modern compilers are not what they used to be.

It is good that Dean Kamen (from Bedford, NH) started the FIRST program and it is good you are involved. My 3 sons all competed all through high school.

There is under 100,000 students involved nationwide out of 56,000,000 (0.18%). You are seeing the current system through a peep hole. You are also seeing some of the most motivated out of the whole bunch.

 

[sheepfarmer]

I don’t think you are going to get any logical arguments for this teaching style, but maybe you will.

I find that matrix method posted above in no way an improvement over the old fashioned method of multiplying, but I know someone involved in teacher education so I'll ask her what the rationale is. It may be a local phenomenon, I asked a 12 year old how they did arithmetic and it was same as I do. But she said their book was old....maybe a blessing in disguise.

 

[NHSleddog]

I find that matrix method posted above in no way an improvement over the old fashioned method of multiplying, but I know someone involved in teacher education so I'll ask her what the rationale is. It may be a local phenomenon, I asked a 12 year old how they did arithmetic and it was same as I do. But she said their book was old....maybe a blessing in disguise.

There is nothing local about the "everyday math" being taught. It comes from the NATIONAL education association.

Most kids end up having to learn both after learning how slow and stupid the matrix method is.

Why teach the stupid method to begin with?

 

[sheepfarmer]

My friend who is involved in teacher ed, but not math teacher ed, sent me some links. She commented that there was often a gap between the standards, see below, and what is actually taught in different school districts. This set of standards, is under revision. There is also a delay between the standards set and development of curricula and textbooks.

I read through most of this, and it sounded quite reasonable. It includes expections for many of the things people were appalled at when kids/adults couldn’t do them, including being able to read both digital and analog clocks in I think it was the second grade. How to measure with rulers in inches and centimeters even. There was no mention of a required algorithm for multiplying large numbers, like the everyday math example.

So the Everyday Math curriculum, if it is used in Michigan, may be creeping in at the school district level, where parents have some hope of influencing choices of books. Beyond that one example sled dog posted, I have no familiarity with it. Seems cumbersome offhand, but maybe there are some good points.


https://www.michigan.gov/documents/mde/K-12_MI_Math_Standards_REV_470033_7_550413_7.pdf

 

[NHSleddog]

It should only take someone that is proficient at lattice multiplication 3-4 times longer to get to the same answer as someone using normal math.

With normal math, they know how they got to the answer. With this lattice (GUI) math, they never will.

They did this so they don't have to teach the multiplication tables anymore.

This is just one example/area of the dumbing down in education. Fortunately, as hard as they try to remove grammar and reading, the internet it teaching the kids despite the attempted dumbimg down.

 

[Bmyers]

It should only take someone that is proficient at lattice multiplication 3-4 times longer to get to the same answer as someone using normal math.

They did this so they don't have to teach the multiplication tables anymore.


View attachment 62988

Wow, thanks for explaining that. I tried and tried and couldn't figure out where they were coming up with the first number.

 

[Henro]

It should only take someone that is proficient at lattice multiplication 3-4 times longer to get to the same answer as someone using normal math.

With normal math, they know how they got to the answer. With this lattice (GUI) math, they never will.

They did this so they don't have to teach the multiplication tables anymore.


View attachment 62988

This is just one example/area of the dumbing down in education. Fortunately, as hard as they try to remove grammar and reading, the internet it teaching the kids despite the attempted dumbimg down.

I have been reading this thread on and off.

At the end of the day, who cares? Everybody is going to use a calculator anyway. When is the last time any of us pulled out a pencil and did long division or multiplication?

At over 70 I am part of the old crowd. Even have a slide rule laying around somewhere.

However they teach basic math, it likely makes little difference in today's world, other than as mentioned, making change at the cash register. But then, who uses cash money these days anyway?

 

[sheepfarmer]

It should only take someone that is proficient at lattice multiplication 3-4 times longer to get to the same answer as someone using normal math.

With normal math, they know how they got to the answer. With this lattice (GUI) math, they never will.

They did this so they don't have to teach the multiplication tables anymore.


View attachment 62988

This is just one example/area of the dumbing down in education. Fortunately, as hard as they try to remove grammar and reading, the internet it teaching the kids despite the attempted dumbimg down.

Huh? You have to know the times tables to fill out the matrix, you know 2 X 5 = 10, 5 X 5 = 25. The standards I posted above for MI include learning the times tables. The matrix substitutes the slanting lines for what we did, which was shift the second and third rows to the left. I still don’t see that the matrix is all that helpful, but mayb e i’m missing something.

 

[bird dogger]

It should only take someone that is proficient at lattice multiplication 3-4 times longer to get to the same answer as someone using normal math.

With normal math, they know how they got to the answer. With this lattice (GUI) math, they never will.

They did this so they don't have to teach the multiplication tables anymore.


View attachment 62988

This is just one example/area of the dumbing down in education. Fortunately, as hard as they try to remove grammar and reading, the internet it teaching the kids despite the attempted dumbimg down.

I too have been trying to figure out that crazy method for the last three days! LOL! I realized how they filled in the numbers within the squares but could no way figure out how the answer was arrived at along the border. Once you finally get it.....it is pretty neat. However, if you don't know your basic math (add, subtract, multiply, divide) tables how would you know what numbers to place and where. Without those basic skills, this method is useless.

I'd also wager that without the penmanship and neatness skills being taught today, that the average person couldn't draw that grid neat enough to fill in the blanks and have everything lined up to be able to come to the right solution. It would just be simpler and quicker to do it the "tried & true" ol' fashioned way, wouldn't it?

I have been reading this thread on and off.

At the end of the day, who cares? Everybody is going to use a calculator anyway. When is the last time any of us pulled out a pencil and did long division or multiplication?

At over 70 I am part of the old crowd. Even have a slide rule laying around somewhere.

However they teach basic math, it likely makes little difference in today's world, other than as mentioned, making change at the cash register. But then, who uses cash money these days anyway?

I use pencil/paper for math all the time. Especially when it's quicker than going to find a calculator. It's also nice to have a "paper trail of your calculations" to remember how you arrived at your final answer when you might not come back to that problem for some time. Example: I use a paper trail of the calculations for some of the different herbicides I spray which is especially handy when the same herbicide is used for different applications with different ratios, etc. If a variable has changed it's much easier to see where to make that change in all the calculations while using a calculator. The same applies to all kinds of other uses where math is involved as well.

I think there's a lot of us that still use cash daily. Very few businesses teach their cashiers how to properly count out change......and it's so easy. If a purchase total amounts to $6.79 and the cashier is handed a $20 bill. The $20 bill is laid on the till. The cashier tells the customer the purchase amount ($6.79) then while giving back the change while counting it out: $6.80 (one penny), $6.90, $7.00 (two dimes), $8, $9, $10 (three ones), and $20 (ten $ bill). The cashier does need to know how to count correctly though. And I always watch to see where the cashier puts my payment before he/she enters the sale and starts getting the change. Once in a while they'll make a mistake.