←back to thread

346 points obscurette | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
basilgohar ◴[] No.42116662[source]
As someone who's worked in EdTech for around two decades, I know why people think this. It's what a lot people here have already said. Education is what is failing, EdTech didn't magically solve this. Just like money, you can't just throw tech at education and expect it to solve anything.

There are too many profitable incentives to poor education that are conspiring to perpetuate it. An ill-educated populace is easier to manipulate, gravitate towards consumerism, and won't hold their leaders as accountable. Power generally resides with those who benefit from an ill-educated populace, so anything that would actually help educate children and people at large is discouraged.

I'll repeat what others have said here. Giving teachers the means with which to properly work with their students, and investing in students at a more individual level, is what's needed. Sadly, my refrain with regards to public education is that is has become little more than glorified babysitting. Those that succeed do so in spite of the system, and not because of it. Meanwhile, students that suffer from one or more disadvantagements (poverty, disability, social issues, mental or physical health issues, and so much more) tend to just...suffer more. And then they fall into cycles where preventable issues repeat or enhance into the next generation. They'll still spend all of their little income excessively, so profit is still to be had, or they'll end-up in prison, which, again, thanks to privatization, is also immensely profitable, so no problem there, right?

The system is setup to fail because that's what's profitable in the long run for those seeking such profits. And because they can lobby, and use their wealth to influence politics, it won't change. Something else needs to happen first.

replies(8): >>42116816 #>>42116833 #>>42116938 #>>42117033 #>>42117054 #>>42117300 #>>42117727 #>>42117746 #
mbesto ◴[] No.42116938[source]
> It's what a lot people here have already said. Education is what is failing, EdTech didn't magically solve this.

To expand this more globally - anything that requires human interaction fails at scale. Healthcare, trade skills, education, housing, etc. is all "failing" to some degree no matter how much technology we throw at it. The costs continually go up and the value isn't paired to it.

replies(5): >>42117062 #>>42117997 #>>42118544 #>>42118857 #>>42121131 #
jppope ◴[] No.42117062[source]
Seems like you're listing highly regulated industries not human interaction.
replies(3): >>42117341 #>>42118991 #>>42119147 #
consteval ◴[] No.42117341[source]
These industries, more or less, need to be highly regulated because we've faced the alternative and it's worse. The quality of education went up SIGNFICANTLY when the state took more control over it.
replies(2): >>42118016 #>>42140354 #
1. seabass-labrax ◴[] No.42118016{4}[source]
Part of that is questionable, because the state gets to set the means by which the quality of education is measured. However, a more objective measure is the extent of education; certainly, the introduction of national education has always produced a much greater literacy rate.
replies(1): >>42119320 #
2. consteval ◴[] No.42119320[source]
The thing is extent and execution are intrinsically linked. Meaning, unregulated markets mean the extent will be limited because people will just choose not to get educated. Which makes sense, if they themselves are uneducated they don't have perfect reasoning skills or future outlook.

A market relies on the participants having visibility and ability. They need to see the alternatives, understand them deeply, and have access to them. Turns out you can't do that in a bunch of markets, education being one of them. So, it can never be a true free market.