Birbla

Join the discussion

Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.

Sign in
  • Hacker News
  • > The declines cut across attention, memory, literacy, numeracy, executive function, and general IQ.

    Problem can be with the tests. Are they testing the correct thing? Are there any increases with other tests? Are there any functions they haven't tested?

    Maybe they're faster, quick-thinking multitaskers. Their brains are augmented with always-online smart devices. They have constant access to knowledge and have better educational materials. They must be smart in a new way.

    by ozgung
  • This isn’t directly related to the article but if Jared Cooney Horvath argues that learning “depends on sustained attention and interaction with other people”, where would that place some of the newer schools that rely a lot on AI to teach and hire human guides or coaches instead of teachers?
    by layman51
  • There are many things to point at and blame without evidence. Is it increased class sizes, or teachers having to move from teaching to managing classrooms, or lack of arithmetic skills built on rote learning of multiplication tables replaced with “methods”, or maybe, just maybe, it’s all the Teletubbies fault.
    by xgkickt
  • I suspect the distribution is more lumpy, best case. Worst case, the progeny of the affluent are eating up those sweet gains.
    by vxxzy
  • What if, after few generations we realise that the test system we are using all along to test the intelligence were too technical and didn't consider the actual human intelligence?

    P.S. Every generation thinks that next generation is dumber than the previous generation in some area and still we are making progress with every generation.

    by hemc4
  • Every generation says this. Example (Sep 4, 1977) https://time.com/archive/6849143/education-why-those-falling...
    by variety8675
  • This article is a rehash of a New York Post article that quotes Dr. Jared Horvarth who testified before Congress. His testimony [1] references PISA, PIRLS and TIMSS scores.

    Edit: His testimony concludes:

    > This is not a debate about rejecting technology. It is a question of aligning educational tools with how human learning actually works.

    > Evidence indicates that indiscriminate digital expansion has weakened learning environments rather than strengthened them.

    > Federal policy can restore balance by demanding evidence, protecting children’s developmental needs, and ensuring that innovation serves learning rather than attention capture.

    > Our responsibility is not to maximize screen exposure, but to maximize the cognitive capacity and long-term flourishing of the next generation.

    [1] Written Testimony, Dr. Jared Cooney Horvath, PhD, MEd, Neuroscientist and Educator Before the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation https://www.commerce.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/media/doc...

    by jt2190
  • None of the comments so far are engaging with the OP, whose written testimony was included in the article:

    https://www.commerce.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/media/doc...

    It points to poorly designed and unproven "educational technology," or EdTech as the potential culprit. Rather than suggesting a luddite regression, it merely calls for proving the efficacy of EdTech prior to large rollouts.

    Given the "reading wars" dragged on for over a century, I'm not optimistic this will be resolved anytime soon.

    https://www.lexialearning.com/blog/the-science-of-reading-vs...

    by swed420

Explore Birbla archives