
The trouble with Khan Academy (2012) - ColinWright
http://chronicle.com/blognetwork/castingoutnines/2012/07/03/the-trouble-with-khan-academy/
======
tokenadult
Why post (repost?) an article from July 3, 2012? Khan Academy has changed a
lot since then. Khan Academy works well for my two younger children.

AFTER EDIT: I'll mention some of the changes that Colin kindly asked for news
about. As a lot of Hacker News regulars know, several of the Khan Academy
developers regularly visit Hacker News. Some of those developers have
interacted specifically with me both on-forum and by private email to ask
sincere, action-oriented questions about how Khan Academy mathematics lessons
can improve. One suggestion I made a couple years ago was for Khan Academy to
arrange its lessons in a "knowledge space" like the competing commerical
online program ALEKS,[1] which I like very well for my homeschooled children.
Another suggestion I made was to make sure that the online work was more of
the nature of "problems" rather than "exercises,"[2] and the Khan Academy
developers have come up with some very innovative online mathematics problems
to ensure that learners don't merely passively watch videos but actively learn
new mathematics.

Simply put, I think Khan Academy is iterating successfully. In many respects,
I am in direct competition with Khan Academy as a mathematics instructor who
teaches in-person lessons for which fees are billed, but I am happy to let my
clients know about the existence of Khan Academy, happy to see my own children
use it for a lot of their own mathematics learning, and happy to see schools
adopt Khan Academy as they "flip the classroom." I am very much a both-and
kind of guy when it comes to mathematics instruction--I like to mix and match
a lot of programs--but I think Khan Academy has a useful place in the mix.

[1] [http://www.aleks.com/](http://www.aleks.com/)

[2]
[http://www.epsiloncamp.org/ProblemsversusExercises.php](http://www.epsiloncamp.org/ProblemsversusExercises.php)

~~~
ColinWright
Hah. I followed the link from an article that I thought had a little insight,
but which might be regarded as blogspam. That was comparatively recent, but,
in accordance with the guidelines, I submitted the original.

<fx: shrug />

I still think it has value, and I hear very similar concerns expressed when
the subject in mentioned in my hearing when I'm out and about doing in my
school talks. Maybe it has changed, maybe it hasn't changed enough.

Maybe it has - perhaps you should document your experiences for us.

------
riggins
_Even if the student can solve optimization or related rates problems just
like the ones in the book and in the lecture — but doesn’t know how to start
if the optimization or related rates problem does not match their template —
then the student hasn’t really learned calculus. At that point, those
“applied” problems are just more mechanical processes. We may say the student
has learned about calculus, but when it comes to the uses of the subject that
really matter — applying calculus concepts to ambiguous and /or complex
problems, choosing the best of equivalent methods or results, creating models
to solve novel problems — this student’s calculus knowledge is not of much
use._

If this is the standard, then we can also say

The trouble with Ivy League Universities

~~~
j2kun
Why single out Ivy Leagues? Many calculus students leave calculus without
understanding it regardless of their institution.

~~~
jessaustin
The implication is that _most_ institutions suffer from this disadvantage, and
saying "Ivy League" is a shorthand for that proposition, since it is assumed
(correctly or not) that Ivy League universities are at least as good as most
other educational institutions.

------
socrates1998
I generally like what Khan Academy is doing, but it is definitely not a
complete replacement for the classroom.

What you are seeing is a blowback against the traditional classroom. Our
school systems are so poorly run, that a guy with no teaching experience can
create something insanely popular in the education industry.

Why didn't a classroom teacher do what he did? Because our system does not
reward teacher innovation and trying new things.

Our system rewards obedience and conservatism.

Our teachers (like our students) are taught to conform and do what the admins
want. Those that don't are punished, sometimes directly, but most often
indirectly.

Poor salaries and bad working conditions mean the best and brightest do not
become classroom teachers. Or, talented people who are classroom teachers bolt
as soon as something better comes along.

There are some high quality people who teach, but they are browbeaten so often
that it turns the young, dynamic person into a cynical and slightly depressed
professional.

I don't have all the answers, but I do know it isn't more of the traditional
classroom.

~~~
yaketysax
"Why didn't a classroom teacher do what he did? Because our system does not
reward teacher innovation and trying new things."

Because most people don't give a shit? Why doesn't every STEM graduate have
the same ambitions as Elon Musk? The reality is that most people are too
chicken shit to have their own interests and to pursue them in a serious way.
You think throwing money at things solves problems?

~~~
Excavator
socrates1998 didn't say anything about money.

A reward could just as well be encouragement rather than being looked down on
or be perceived as arrogant.

~~~
yaketysax
How do you get people to encourage each other if they don't care to begin
with?

------
VLM
To give the article itself the same MST3K treatment they gave the Kahn videos,
a much better demonstration of the difference between mechanical skills and
"judging between two equivalent concepts" would focus around shell vs disk
integral calculus methods. Trivial to teach the mechanics of either, and the
names are very intuitive of what they do, but it takes some experience and
discussion to internalize when to use which strategy.

"the study of how to ... pass mathematics exams."

Some .edu folks think its hilarious to use math as a gatekeeper although the
grads will never use it on the job... jokes on them if someone hacks that
system and bypasses their artificial little gatekeeper.

~~~
saraid216
> Some .edu folks think its hilarious to use math as a gatekeeper although the
> grads will never use it on the job... jokes on them if someone hacks that
> system and bypasses their artificial little gatekeeper.

Is it really that entertaining that everyone cavorts around such a useless
subject? There's a saying that in a war between kings, the battlefield is the
farmers' trampled corn.

------
jhallenworld
I'm in the middle of designing an online course and I've discovered that the
technique of live drawing while speaking used in Khan Academy is really quite
hard to do well. I certainly don't have the natural ability to do this
(perhaps I need a lot more practice) and it's given me a good appreciation for
the work that Khan must have put into it.

My technique is to prepare slides with a script and then record myself
presenting them. It's not nearly as nice, but at least I can do it.

~~~
BHSPitMonkey
The format used on Coursera[1] is pretty nice, in my opinion. It's a
combination of slides, video/voice, and drawing/annotation, which seems to
work to good effect.

[1]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvMgtcgq34k](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvMgtcgq34k)

------
bayesianhorse
I don't know any evidence, that teaching the "mechanistics" of math should
lower the chance of understanding it.

Quite often "root learning versus understanding" is the difference between
being able to show and demonstrate you know your stuff ("root learning") and
not being able to show or demonstrate it, but you think you kinda know it
("understanding").

~~~
tokenadult
You and onlookers may enjoy reading the article, "Basic Skills versus
Conceptual Understanding: A Bogus Dichotomy in Mathematics Education"[1]
(1999) by Hung-hsi Wu, for a discussion of what leads to deep understanding of
mathematics. Another classic article on the topic is Richard Askey's review[2]
of Liping Ma's book _Knowing and Teaching Elementary Mathematics,_ a very good
read indeed.

[1]
[http://math.berkeley.edu/~wu/wu1999.pdf](http://math.berkeley.edu/~wu/wu1999.pdf)

[2]
[http://www.aft.org/pdfs/americaneducator/fall1999/amed1.pdf](http://www.aft.org/pdfs/americaneducator/fall1999/amed1.pdf)

------
barrkel
The general criticism focused on here is "mechanical processes". At first I
misread this as a focus on literally mechanical machines that did something.
But now I understand it as demonstration of performing an algorithm used to
solve a particular pattern of problem. And the core of the criticism is that
knowing the algorithm doesn't mean you understand the algorithm, and could
modify it to solve related problems.

However, that criticism doesn't have much power for me, based on how I
understand I learn. I like to learn from two ends; one, from above, with an
overview of the space, so I know where the next bit fits in. And from below,
with concrete examples - yes, mechanical examples - of the individual steps. I
infer the deeper structure of what's being taught as more and more variants of
the mechanical process are shown.

------
capex
The OP has posted this article before, and Sal & others from Khan Academy
replied here on HN, but I am not able to find that previous post on search.

------
jmzbond
I agree that KA is not a perfect substitute, but one thing I will say is that
there is a huge difference in the intrinsic motivation behind someone that
wants to watch a series of KA videos vs. someone that is told they must take a
class.

As we know, classrooms are not perfect either. But if we could get classroom
education and KA education to both be better (after all, some university
courses are shown on vidcast and sections are replaced by digital discussion
forums), then I do think KA could be a very viable alternative for the
traditional classroom. Instead of telling a student s/he needs to learn
calculus, you wait until they recognize the need for it in their daily lives
and take the class.

Honestly if you don't need it, it really might not be helpful. I can't say
I've used any skills from many classes (calculus, accounting, earth science,
etc.) other than being able to recount obscure but interesting facts. For
those that say well my inherent problem-solving skills have been influenced by
the logic of these classes, well they really haven't (and I had great
teachers). Everything I learned about framing and solving a problem I learned
from real world work experience as a consultant (why schools didn't find a way
to teach this to me is a different argument). And in case it sounds like it,
yes I do believe I'm more in the "unschooling" movement.

------
SworDsy
what I've seen of khan academy is pretty cursory as far as the math goes
(about enough to get through an introductory course, usually), and that seems
intentional. There are definitely a few gaping holes in the curriculum, such
as no wronskian in diff eqs. And nobody really learns a mathematical concept
until they've been confronted with something significant they couldn't do with
it immediately, yet conquered it.

Teaching advanced math, on the other hand, is really hard to do when you're
interacting with a person because there are so many pitfalls and if you hit
even a single one you can't usually continue until you've tracked it down.
Khan Academy has material on all sorts of non-math stuff, like economics and
other sciences, and they seem to be gearing the math stuff more towards a
younger audience, not an older one, which is probably more important anyways
to be honest. smart move, mr.Khan, smart move.

------
EGreg
If the public school system wasn't a daycare center for parents who need to
work but actually focused on educating our kids better, it would have the
following structure:

1) Give every family a parental-control iPad if they don't have a computer at
home.

2) Deliver the lecture part of each class via an engaging multimedia
presentation bought from a marketplace of these things. Instead of a boring
teacher or one teacher teaching 20 students, a great presentation would be
repeatable by thousands and millions of students, and every year can be
improved. It could also be critiqued and fact-checked by reviewers in the
market. The market would update them like textbooks.

3) The next day, the school day would start later, so kids could get a good
sleep (health and cognitive reasons) and a good breakfast (nutrition reasons),
the latter can be delivered in school, for kids to come on time and socialize.

4) After breakfast and homeroom, the Tests would begin. Every day, the tests
would be testing for real knolwedge that would be obtained from the previous
day's presentations. They would test two levels: minimum adequate
comprehension, and solid comprehension. This would replace homework and the
method of solution could also be analyzed.

5) Students who did not score high enough to demonstrate minimum comprehension
for that day would be quickly identified by their test scores. They would be
scheduled for smaller REMEDIAL classes later that day for that subject. That
means the main time they spend with a teacher would be more individualized and
tailored to where they are struggling as actually determined by their attempts
on the tests.

6) For a student who scores well on all or most tests, the day would be quite
pleasant and free of remedial classes. They could do any number of things -
and if they have to remain in the school, fine - there will be plenty of
entertainment and socializing there. That is their reward for learning and
comprehending the previous day, proportional to how many subjects they were
able to do.

7) Right after the Tests, all students would still have to take classes which
aren't only comprehension focused such as Gym and Debate etc. But there are
very few of those.

8) The students would themselves choose how to schedule their time to study
for the next day. It could be a study session with friends or a private study
session. No one would force them to sit through a lecture.

Benefits:

1) Insane amounts of homework from multiple classes are replaced by Tests
which are already scored in terms of difficulty, cognitive load, and how much
time they take. So the school is fully aware of how much load they are putting
on the students. Currently there is homework creep.

2) Instead of struggling privately and spending money on private tutors many
low-income families can't afford, the students would get individual attention
after their performance was analyzed in a Test setting. Home would be reserved
for a lot more passive learning, mimicking the real world.

3) The kids would have freedom and responsibility to set aside their own time
to learn, and incentive to learn that they do not have when told to sit down
and shut up for 5 hours a day. It would also lower incidents of diagnosis of
ADHD, especially in restless younger boys in grades where psychological
development and aptitude feedback is crucial to get right.

4) Lectures are boring and too variable in quality. An uncommonly great
teacher may only be able to reach 20 students while the rest get mediocre or
bad lectures. There is no reason to keep things this way when technology can
replace lectures with professionally produced multimedia at home. Animations
and stories teaching algebra and calculus for example.

5) If you go to the bathroom or zone out during a lecture, you are faced with
big dilemmas, having to copy notes from classmates. Here you just rewind. A
kid can even pause the lecture for 2 hours and go play basketball or watch
another one, finishing this one when they want. Truancy would be greatly
reduced.

6) Note taking would not be compulsory and you wouldn't be training kids to be
2nd century Roman scribes. Instead you'd be ingraining habits about learning
online which they will carry for the rest of their life. For 99% of us all the
material is already written clearly online. Note taking should be optional.

7) It would actually be cool among kids to be educated because these kids
would get access to programs the remedial kids didn't. So we would foster a
desire and self motivation in kids to learn. Both teachers and kids would be
motivated in their remedial classes to prepare kids for comprehending lectures
of the next day. Going to a remedial class means that the next day's tests are
likely to be guaranteed pass. If these remedial classes get the kid to
eventually start consistently scoring above Adequate, into Solid Mastery, both
the kid and the teacher are rewarded.

8) Which brings me to granularity, measurability and accountability. The
interaction of teachers and students would be in a smaller classroom setting,
and more effective. Struggling would be caught early. Each subject would be
broken down into very granular modules (one a day). A kid falling behind would
be seen a mile away.

This is an example of actually refactoring the system to take advantage of
existing technology and aligning the incentives and delivery mechanisms of the
system with what what technology has made possible. It has been possible for
15 years now via internt and 40 years via VHS. It's about time this has been
tried.

But the question is more about bureaucracy. Given the way public schools are
run today, would a principal and teachers ever be willing to try something
new? It may be impossible to reform the system so drastically. And what would
we do with all those kids and their free time? Wouldn't this lead to more
bullying and abuse as maturing 11 year old kids are stuck in a daycare center?

I believe the only avenue for trying this system are private and charter
schools. What do y'all think?

~~~
NoPiece
Have you read about the flipped classroom? It is along the line of what you
are suggesting, and has had some success so far.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flip_teaching](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flip_teaching)

~~~
EGreg
Yes I have - this is an attempt to fully flesh out that idea for public
schools

------
lispylol
I think they're doing a great job grouping and ordering their videos according
to common standards. I find myself jumping around trying to figure out what I
need to learn less often.

