this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2026
309 points (99.0% liked)
Technology
86075 readers
2971 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This is a fluff article but about a well signposted issue in education: tech in schools may be pushing education backwards.
Many countries have embraced tech in schools - such as laptops for students - and big tech companies in the US have been enthusiastic about getting their tech in front of young people as they will be the consumers of the future. But despite the billions spent it seems to actually be damaging education.
There are educationalists pushing for tech to be taken out of schools and go back to methods that actually do produce consistently good results.
It's because the boomers running shit thinks kids have as much difficulty with tech that they do.
Kids will just pick that shit up, thats the entire point of why we stay kids so long.
But if you don't teach them critical thinking at that age, they're fucked for life.
Even if they learn current tech, it'll be different by the time they get jobs.
But critical thinking never changes
Yup. Give 'em laptops or tablets if you like. Maybe you break their distance vision in exchange for saving their backs from the half a dozen hardback tomes and trapper-keeper we used to lug around. Textbooks can be updated quicker, incorporate video, and if there are public domain texts, they can be provided for free. Completing worksheets with a keyboard and trackpad also doesn't worry me, and I actually wish we had class discussion boards when I was in school.
Leveraging tech because it provides some practical benefit is just common sense, but thinking the tech is the benefit is stupid, so of course that's where we are, driven by the olds you mention, as well as a healthy ecosystem of ed-tech grifters.
Eink tablets I think would be an amazing middle ground.
They can pick it up after, it's just much harder
They really can't...
They can learn some critical thinking later, but it'll never be the same as if they learned it as children.
Like if you found out you were in the Olympics for the 100m sprint next year. You could improve your performance in a year, but you'll never match someone whose trained their whole life at it.
For all intents and purposes every improvement between now and next year aren't gonna matter, last place is last place, regardless of your time.
That's what it would be like to not learn critical thinking until an adult.
Yeah you're right. Makes me even more grateful for my education.
American education system really peaked with "The Oregon Trail Generation" before No Child Left Behind...
And that's a thought that's kept me awake more than a few nights, because we still didn't get a good education.
Ever since the focus has been short term cramming for tests. All the shit that got tossed out was about critical thinking and empathy, and somehow people are still shocked later generations are lacking both at concerning levels.
For many years I have thought that elementary schools should be free of any modern electronic tech. In middle school it should be introduced but not connected to internet (word processors, interactive encyclopedias or coding like we used to learn it in the '80s or '90s, BASIC, Logo, that kind of stuff).
Finally, introduce internet in high school, in a controlled way, focusing primarily on knowledge and research sites. No LLMs included.
Of course you can't control what happens in the students' homes, but that should not affect what happens at school, specially if you replace homework with schoolwork, which I also think it's better in the long run.
If i had a kid, it would be a Linux desktop or laptop at like 8 years old, no internet or limited internet when supervised. Zero iPads. Zero YouTube slop.
Would be a guaranteed autistic furry on the future fediverse 🤣 I kidddddd
I do have kids and this is really the only way, the path of least access needed. The parental controls built into most of the services are limited and/or ineffective. Its most of the reason I have my own media server. The kids have Linux computers with no browsers installed.
The trickiest thing is that most other parents dont seem to do much of this, so the kids think we are a bit strange compared to everyone else.
Youre the person every parent should be. The other people are the idiots for not properly teaching their children, IMO! But those parents probably aren't tech literate themselves.so its a downward spiral.
Sounds like an article written by a boomer:"back in my day we learned with BOOKS!". Now I like printed dead trees too, but the same shit you learn on a textbook you can learn on well made digital platform, even better. Now I emphasized 'well made' cause I'm under the impression that till now 'tech in schools' was intended more like "let's sell them a lot of PCs, and a lots of windows licenses, and a lot of edumacashional software". Apart from writing by hand, I don't know what could be better Removing tech from school.
You are an entire system. Your hands, your eyes, your brain, it's all connected.
When you write something by hand, your brain is more engaged than it is typing. The physical act of forming letters matters. You are far more likely to recall the information hand-written versus typed.
https://studyfinds.com/handwriting-typing-which-is-better-for-brain/
It should be obvious that this difference becomes staggering when you consider that with AI you aren't writing it, you aren't even typing the material. You're barely proof-reading it.
Your second paragraph hasn't much to do with the first, and both haven't with my post.