Well, there are two different things here. Some knowledge is well established and doesn't change, or changes very slowly. Reading, writing and mathematics, for example. And later on the core sciences. None of this is affected by changes in technology.

How they interact with the world is changing rapidly, and I'm not entirely convinced our schooling system has this correct. I'm not sure what should change, but I feel like the school is simultaneously lagging behind and forging ahead of societal changes wrought by technology.

[–] Dave@lemmy.nz 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

While reading, writing, maths doesn't change, their need in an ever changing world does change.

As an example, people lament the inability of younger generations to read cursive. But in a world where almost everything was printed by (or viewed on) a computer, the ability to read cursive just isn't that important.

I think currently basic facts are still important. But if the world doesn't reenforce this (by requiring them to actually use them), then the knowledge won't stay long term.

Perhaps the lagging skills of younger generations represent a world that no longer asks for them. But the younger generations are sure to have better skills in other ways, ways that this new world demands of them.

[–] Rangelus@lemmy.nz 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

So perhaps the problem is the things we are valuing in our assessments not matching real life? Which may have been your point originally. 😂

[–] Dave@lemmy.nz 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Exactly! I don't know if it's right or not, but things are complex and what previous generations (us? 😱) value can be different to younger generations, and we shouldn't assume our way is right.

[–] Rangelus@lemmy.nz 2 points 11 months ago

Here here!