I really enjoyed the talks (and empanadas!) at the Key Challenges in Ed-Tech Roundtable tonight for @sfdesignweek. Here are some of the things people said that stuck with me:
#SFDesignWeek
#SFDesignWeek
First up was Taica Hsu, a math teacher at Mission High in SF. He talked about how to frame math problems to be accessible for everyone. For instance asking what 2x+2 is has one right answer, and a couple ways of solving it. There’s not that much room for discussion.
But giving students something like this diagram (hand drawn by me, I didn’t get a picture of the slide 😬) creates a space for open ended discussion around the same concept. There’s no one answer - people can talk about what x is in the photo, what factoring looks like, etc
Next was @jenny_wales, designer at @Desmos, which builds tools to help kids learn and love math, including an online graphing calculator. Apparently people now google “desmos” more than “graphing calculator,” which is so cool.
She spoke about how a good user experience is often not the same thing as a good learning experience. For instance, @Desmos has a puzzle that’s literally unsolvable -> terrible UX. But students keep trying until they can prove why it’s impossible, which is good learning
After that was @farrarscott, who talked about how teaching differed from his expectations. In particular, he mentioned how the racial makeup of his honors classes and remedial classes differed drastically.
One of his students in the remedial class asked how they were supposed to catch up by learning things slower. Obvious when you say it like that, but I actually hadn’t realized how crazy the contradiction is.
Then came Nivi Ramesh, designer at Chan Zuckerberg Initiative education (we’re on the same team!) who spoke about the conflict between designing for reality now and imagining what could be in the future.
For instance, should we spend our time figuring out how to make giving feedback faster in the platform, or try to find a whole new way to give feedback?
She also discussed the balance between immediate goals and upholding pedagogical theories. Ex: students might complete more work if there were deadlines + and we told them what to work on next. But Summit is about self directed learning, so we let students go at their own pace.
Next was @CubanLarry, professor of education at Stanford. He first started teaching in 1955!! He’s been in education for over half a century, and is still optimistic.
He explained how the one room schoolhouse became the age-graded school system to funnel masses of kids through public school. Now, the vast majority of kids start kindergarten at 5, learn about mummies in 6th grade, and graduate at 18, even at new ‘innovative’ charter schools
Finally @mayli, vp of design at @khanacademy shared 7 lessons about designing for education. Three in particular stuck out to me:
First, you are not the audience. Education is weird because everyone’s been through school and thinks they know how people learn. But to actually see the different environments and understand how to design for them, you have to go talk to actual teachers and students.
Next, technology is the tool, not the solution (which is actually a CZI motto too!).
Finally, education has a lot of bigger challenges. There are MUCH bigger problems than education technology. Schools face issues like the school to prison pipeline, lack of POC teachers, and more, and its important to keep in mind that edtech is not the savior.
