Google Wants Google Doodles Taught In Public School, Warns Kids They Best Behave 146
theodp writes: Well, this year's Hour of Code is almost upon us, and if Google has its way, K-12 schoolchildren across the nation will be learning computer science by creating Google Doodles with Scratch (lesson plan). Curiously, the introductory video for the Create Your Own Google Logo Hour of Code activity from the Google Computer Science Education Department sternly warns kids, "While it is okay to use the Google logo for your personal Doodle, it is not okay [emphasis Google's] to use it anyplace else or outside this activity." In addition to respecting its intellectual property, Google instructs kids that they are to follow the Scratch Community Guidelines when they create Google logos: "Please stay positive, friendly, and supportive towards others in the Scratch Community. Help us keep Scratch a place where people of different backgrounds and interests feel welcome to hang out and create together."
I can't wait for google to transform education (Score:1)
Then decide it's not profitable and shut it down in 2 years. No more book reports bitches!
Needs to Stop (Score:5, Insightful)
This whole trend of Big Business dreaming up some curriculum and then trying to push it on public schools has got to stop.
Not only because it's an obvious shill for their particular technology, but it is often poorly thought out and in some instances politically charged.
Re:Needs to Stop (Score:4, Insightful)
... it is often poorly thought out and in some instances politically charged.
Well then it sounds like a proper fit for Common Core schools.
Re: (Score:1)
LOL..
Pretty much.
Re:Needs to Stop (Score:4, Interesting)
as a parent of a kid dealing with CommonClusterfuck I can say that this has *nothing* on just how political and railroaded CC is.
[rant]
Us parents were billed as "it's an additional method to help us teach, not all kids understand the math lessons we grew up with"...
BUT!
My kid is hyper analytical (and an aspie, so...) he thrives on a sheet of graph paper and columns for long division, not this brainfuck of repeated additions and subtractions to find the right answer.
He was reduced to sobbing trying to figure out how to do his homework, which might as well been written in greek, considering the teachers can't even properly explain it.
I read it, extracted the actual division problems and taught him how to use graph paper to keep his columns straight for classic long division with remainders. He did the entire worksheet with the right answers. and got an F.
[/rant]
Re: (Score:2)
Time for Dad to visit the School Board.
Re: (Score:2)
Time for Dad to visit the School Board.
That's how you commit suicide by common core. Quiz custodiet ipsos custodet.
Re: (Score:1)
God that shit is horrible. My best friend pulled his kid out of public school and mom and grandma home school he in the more "traditional" way. not only has he caught up to where he is "supposed" to be at but has exceeded it by a fair margin. of course mom having masters in speech therapy/teaching and grandma having BEEN a HS teacher for 35 years helps, but that's not really the point.
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously, when I tried to read through the no child left behind documents, I was lulled to a deep sleep and was left miles behind!!
Re: (Score:2)
I read it, extracted the actual division problems and taught him how to use graph paper to keep his columns straight for classic long division with remainders. He did the entire worksheet with the right answers. and got an F.
[/rant]
Same here. It's insanity.
I'm assuming it was all about someone (or a lot of someones) getting their PhD, not about educating children. After all, it's hard to claim "original research" with tried and true methods.
Re: (Score:3)
He deserves an F ... for being able to correctly complete division problems. Got it.
Not every kid can understand long division ... so the kids who can, get punished by effectively getting kicked out of the school curriculum with failing grades. Got it.
I used to think home-schooling people were all libertarian nutjobs or whacked-out Christians. Now I'm not so sure.
Re:Needs to Stop (Score:5, Interesting)
What you and the GGP are missing is what the actual lesson is: You assume it's to learn how to do long division, because that's what it looks like to you. That's what you learned, and how you learned it. Newsflash: This is a different standard, in a different time. It's not the same lesson you learned.
This lesson is to learn that method of long division. Not the underlying math, but the method.
That's why his kiddo got an F. Not because he can't do long division, because he can't demonstrate that he understands that method. That's the standard he was being assessed on. Dad's mistake was assuming that long division was the end goal, when it's actually an indirect goal. While the GP here was a bit harsh, he was spot on.
The reason that the focus is on this method is that it's a building block for higher order math skills. Column division with remainders isn't. The idea is that if students learn enough of these methods, they can apply them to algebra and calculus in the future. That wasn't a lesson on long division. It was foundational work to support mathematics growth far in the future.
Good on dad up there for caring and teaching his kiddo a new skill, but bad on him for misunderstanding the lesson and subverting his kid's learning. If you really care and want to help, you're going to need to learn what's being taught and why, and not just inject your vastly out-of-date knowledge into kids' brains. That's going to make things worse rather than better.
Re: (Score:3)
This lesson is to learn that method of long division. Not the underlying math, but the method.
So, what you're saying is, in Common Core following the method that an authority figure demands you follow, regardless of how harmful it may be to your individual learning process, is more important than figuring out the correct answer.
2+2=4.
So does 3+1.
To fail a student because they got to 4 by a different method than the "approved" version is counter-productive, assuming the concept is to produce a generation of intelligent people capable of critical thinking.
Then again, perhaps I am conceptually mistaken
Re: (Score:2)
What you're arguing is that it's better to learn many unrelated short-term skills than it is to learn a number of skills that in aggregate provide better access to more complicated material in the future. It's pretty classic short-term thinking.
I get that you're angry because you don't understand it. I'm a little unclear why you want to hate Common Core so badly that you're unwilling to even try to understand it.
See this part that you wrote:
more important than figuring out the correct answer.
That's wrong. That's you making up in your head what the lesson is, because you don't understand the real lesson. You don't understand the goal.
The goal was never to get the correct answer. The goal was to teach the student a fundational skill they will build on in later grades.
You're making up a problem that doesn't exist by creating this scenario in your head where a boogieman is forcing kids to "use approved versions" to solve trivial tasks. That's not what's happening. That's you trying to wedge your experience in math into what the common core is doing. If you take some time to try to actually understand it. you'll likely be surprised to find that it's nothing like you imagine it to be.
Yes, things that you don't understand are scary. The solution isn't to bitch and moan on the internet about them. The solution is to learn about them, so they are less scary.
This is just you dismissing any disagreement as being ignorant, "scared", etc. No, it's that someone disagrees with you. Deal with it.
Maybe what you are saying is how it is supposed to work, but it doesn't, for far too many kids.
You have to get the basics down before you can "build" on anything. And kids aren't even learning how to divide, thanks to this crap.
Re: (Score:3)
The difference is that in math, you actually are trying to get the right answer. Knowing how to wax a car won't do shit if you can't do basic division. The only way to know that you're "doing math right" is to arrive at the correct answer. And if you can do that, reliably, then you don't need any "muscle memory." This ain't gym class.
Re: (Score:2)
The difference is that in math, you actually are trying to get the right answer.
Put that on a plaque on the wall!
Re: (Score:2)
And kids aren't even learning how to divide, thanks to this crap.
Do you have data to support that? Or just an anecdote or two?
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe you're just scared of understanding :P
Re: (Score:2)
That's why his kiddo got an F. Not because he can't do long division, because he can't demonstrate that he understands that method.
Why does the algorithm used to achieve a correct result matter? If there's more than one algorithm, and each will produce the correct result each and every time, both are correct.
If you told me that the "correct" way to achieve 2+2 = 4 is to "reduce" it to (1+1) + (1+1) = 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 = 4, I would laugh at you. I don't care what textbook you learned it from.
Re: (Score:2)
The AC replying to you nailed it. I'm not sure if it will help, but you could try reading what I wrote another time or two. I'll try to explain again, because being angry at strawmen is apparently the theme of this thread.
Nobody is telling you that the correct way to achieve 2+2 is to reduce it to 1+1+1+1. That's a scenario you've made up. That's your personal strawman, and it's not what happens in common core math.
I'll try with a computer example. You need to write a snippit of code to solve the trivial ca
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I know you're trolling but there is actually a decent point here.
There are people who just can't get classic long division, does that make them bad?
Or is it rather that instead of chucking out the entire system they should maybe consider that there are many diverse and distinct learning styles and use the one(s) suited to the students?
Also, the IEP counselor would disagree with you as she's just as baffled by the new crap (as was the teacher teaching it in the first place, who was openly hostile to it).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes it is mechanical.
For a highly analytical person it is easily graspable, because that mechanical-ness *is* analytical.
My issue isn't even with alternate teaching guides, it's that the implementation is *shit* and that's not helped when there is no context for the problems your kid brings home as homework.
https://mommybunch.com/wp-cont... [mommybunch.com]
I don't even know where to start with that problem. There is no framework to understand it with.
This is the best I've been able to find:
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/b9/6... [pinimg.com]
Re: (Score:2)
forgot to add, this is not common core, this is considered classic:
https://www.splashmath.com/mat... [splashmath.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well then stop putting in politicians that keep on cutting taxes and the budgets of education, and other services, to fund those tax cuts. If the school system was properly funded with good teachers who had time to prepare their lessons then there wouldn't be an opening, or at least an easy one, for companies to market their products under the guise of education.
Re: (Score:3)
We put people on the moon with men who grew up going to one room schools, using pencils and slide rules.
Those schools were funded by local property taxes and controlled by local school boards. There wasn't even an "Ejucation Departmemt".
The Austin ISD just received approval for a one BILLION dollar bond. They are going to spend 40 million dollars on an elementary school.
I'm sorry, there is NO lack of funding in education.
Re: (Score:2)
Ummm no. Most of them were solidly middle class and went to suburban schools. There was the occasional exception but most of them were born during or shortly before WWII, average age in the mid 20's. The pilots went to Academy's the engineers and managers went to 4 year schools.
Re: (Score:3)
Pencils and slide rules.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Not only because it's an obvious shill for their particular technology
Like Google providing materials and lesson plans based on Scratch, "a project of the Lifelong Kindergarten group at the MIT Media Lab. It is available for free at http://scratch.mit.edu/ [mit.edu]"? Those monsters!
in some instances politically charged
Yeah, the example they give of changing the color of a letter in the logo. Obviously racist, right?
Damn big businesses, offering free educational resources to teachers and schools. What kind of world are we creating when we expose kids to STEM concepts at a young age? Oh, the humanities!
Re: (Score:2)
Been going on for decades (Score:4, Interesting)
When our kids were in school, decades ago, our battles along these lines were many. There was McDonald's handing out arithmetic worksheets asking the students to add up the costs of Big Macs and fries, decorated with the company's cartoon characters. There were even charities that lobbied for sales or other fund raising activities, for themselves, during school instruction hours. So it's not simply big business (unless one also puts some charities in that same bucket). All of these activities had the strong support of the school district's leadership and it took a lot of effort to get these stopped or limited. Eventually, the primary supporter was voted out of office. Some district leaders continue to think of these programs as "free" instructional material or other supposed benefits. But it's all really designed to sell product or reduce instruction time, and should continue to be fought.
At the same time, we supported other fund raising activities, for the school itself, when they were held outside of instruction hours. That might be the annual Walk-A-Thon type event held on a weekend or a bake sale after school. And we involved our kids in our own charitable giving. But absolutely none of this on school time.
In the case of Google's offer, this might be a fine example to use to explain the concepts of copyright, fair use, and even open source to the targets of this unacceptable activity.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Here at the"U" (Score:2)
on the Engineering Quadrangle, Google had students queued up to get a donut along with a chance to win a Google Donut or whatever they call their clone of the Amazon Echo. They were totally slow because you had to give over your personal information to even get the kind of donut you could eat, and they had this Disney-ride line-control labyrinth filled with students by 8:30 AM. Sure wish I had my camera to photograph Google treating a large mob of Engineering students like cattle in a feedlot.
What did
Public schools: the junior prisons of the west (Score:1)
Public schools are a prison system.
Students are forced to attend and labor under duress. There is no indictment or jury. If they fail to attend, they or their parents can be penalized or even arrested.
Taxation is theft
War is murder
The draft is slavery
Public schools are prisons
Pepsi presents Addition and Subtraction (Score:2)
Troy: (on TV) Now turn to the next problem. If you have three Pepsis and drink one, how much more refreshed are you? You, the redhead in the Chicago school system?
Girl: Pepsi?
Troy: Partial credit!
https://www.simpsonsarchive.co... [simpsonsarchive.com]
Re: (Score:2)
It has to be the lack of computers, teachers, books, calculators, robot kits, ebooks, laptops, desktop computers, new funding, nutrition.
Add more computers, quality teachers and a find funds to design new buildings.
Just keep on over funding the parts of the nation that cant educate their students and in a few decades the students test as well as the
Re: (Score:1)
Like "free speech" today (Score:5, Insightful)
You are welcome to speak your mind in America*.
*Must comply with HR rules of your company, must not offend anyone, infringe on any business interests, or otherwise cause incitement of the public.
Re: (Score:2)
The Constitution only guarantees that the government cannot silence you.
It does not guarantee you an absolute right to say whatever you want, whenever you want, wherever you want.
So, if you're on my payroll and property, you follow my rules, or GTFO. When it's your payroll and property, you get to make the rules.
Now shut up and get off my lawn (but feel free to speak up again once you reach the public street).
Re: (Score:2)
+1. Basically the rich can afford to have free speech, often using their companies as megaphones for their political whims. The rest of us underlings have a lot less freedom to go to political rallies, or openly involve ourselves in politics in a public way. At-will employment makes it fine for your HR department to dismiss you if they disagree with your involvement in the countries political process. We have seen the result, most legislation tilts towards more rights and tax cuts for corporate interest
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Yes?
I mean the first amendment is solely to stop the government putting you in gaol for speaking. The purpose is so you can speak truth to power and power can't suppress you. The general motivation is that you should be able to speak to effect a change.
As with everything it's more complex, but that's the basics.
Now, by design and intention nothing in the concept of free speech protects you from the social consequences of your speech. The why is interesting. If you were protected and there were no consequenc
Re: (Score:1)
Re: Like "free speech" today (Score:2)
Fake-Progressive Capitalists sure do love imposing dictatorial codes of conduct on people without their consent.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Freedom from consequence is exactly what free speech is. What else could it possibly refer to? Nobody can stop me from saying anything I like, governments/business/whatever can just punish after the fact. The entire point of free speech is is to protect from consequences.
Re: (Score:2)
So, you admit you have no personal control over your own actions. Nicely done.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, words can "influence" others. That is part of communication. And I am aware of the whole "fighting words" concept.
However, I am one to believe that in spite of all that, we are responsible for the actions we choose ... including "fighting words". There are expectations that come along with influence. If you use words expecting someone to punch you(or someone else) in the face, then yes, you are responsible for that. But the courts have said that there is a very high burden of proof bar to make in
Re: (Score:2)
The first amendment protects you from government censorship where it's not illegal incitement. That's it. You live in a fantasy world with your head up your ass.
That's not America, you didn't build that.
Try READING the first amendment and the rest of the constitution.
It's set up that powers not granted to the federal government are reserved for the states and the people. Speech is expressly called out as a right that people have.
Re: (Score:2)
The first amendment protects you from government censorship where it's not illegal incitement.
The first amendment does not contain the phrase "illegal incitement" or any other qualification. What is says is "no law".
Also, the 1st Amendment only protects you from federal censorship. It is the due process clause in the 5th and 14th amendments that have been used by the courts to prohibit state and local governments from censoring.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Like "free speech" today (Score:5, Insightful)
The only way to actually speak your mind today is to be independently wealthy. Participating in the democratic process can easily make you lose your job, even if you violate no laws. Corporations have more free speech than the average citizen (and more ability to get away with breaking the law without consequence). We are way down the slippery slope on this one.
Re: (Score:2)
Corporations don't have more free speech. They have deeper pockets, and army of lawyers to draw up one sided contracts. Contracts, you don't need to sign, if you want to earn a living outside of Corporate America.
The problem as I see it, is people want the perks of working for BIGCORP (Large salary, cushy job) but complain about it being "not fair" and how evil BIGCORP is. If they sell their soul to the devil, and don't care about the details, the devil always wins.
The devil knows the details, and has a gre
Re: (Score:2)
"Freedom of speech means that someone cannot shut me up just because they don't like what I am saying."
"They do not have to give me a platform to say it"
Who is 'they' and what is a 'platform' ?
Should a high school student writing an essay not be given the widest latitude possible to write whatever they want to write? Always.
Is it reasonable for the maker of the pencil and paper to restrict the student only writing friendly, positive things, that won't be offensive, and that do not disparage the maker of the
Re:Like "free speech" today (Score:5, Informative)
Try flipping off the president, it could easily cost you your job.
Re:Like "free speech" today (Score:4, Interesting)
IMHO she has a case. She will win. And she'll have more money than she would if she worked there. Male executives already set precedent for that company (documented), doing far worse than flipping the President off.
Re: (Score:2)
Try flipping off the president, it could easily cost you your job.
Posting your contempt on fb, twitter or any public venue, will get you fired and rightly so.
Re:Like "free speech" today (Score:4, Informative)
Try flipping off the president, it could easily cost you your job.
Posting your contempt on fb, twitter or any public venue, will get you fired and rightly so.
According to this article [nypost.com] (and others), Juli Briskman wasn't identifiable in the photo (and was off-work and displayed no company affiliations in the photo), but after it went viral she voluntarily told her company that it was her and they fired her for violating their social media policy by posting something ‘lewd’ or ‘obscene’.
It's worth noting that the company only reprimanded a male executive who called someone “f—ing Libtard a–hole” on his Facebook account that displayed the company logo and info and then allowed the guy to clean up his posts.
Teach Kids Life Skills (Score:1)
"While it is okay to use the Google logo for your personal Doodle, it is not okay [emphasis Google's] to use it anyplace else or outside this activity."
What we should be teaching children is the appropriate response to this:
"You want a logo design? Pay me."
Re: (Score:1)
Please respect your Google Overlord, You are only a cog in the new plutocracy. You need re-education. Please use the search term "I am fucked, I am fucked. Heal me. Heal me." and your sins will be absolved, citizen.
Use our logo BUT Dont' use our logo (Score:1)
Fuck you Google.
If you want to make people revolve around your every move then they get to do shit with your stuff you don't get to control.
If you don't like them using your logo for other things ... DON'T FUCKING MAKE IT THE CENTER OF AN EXPERIMENT ABOUT MODIFYING IMAGES WITH SOFTWARE YOU SELFISH FUCKS.
Use a logo developed to be public domain specifically for this purpose.
Anything else just shows your selfishness. My children will literally NEVER be allowed to participate in ANY Google summer of code bull
Re: (Score:2)
From Corporate Agenda from conflict of interest (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
It's still up to the teachers or schools to implement the lesson or not, Google isn't forcing anybody to do this it's just providing resources for those that choose to use them.
And this isn't new at all, for example look up Pepsi's use of the US's attempt at adopting the metric system to push using 2 liter bottles of soda as teaching aids ("follow the liter" campaign)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like a contract (Score:3)
Ultimately, this appears to be a contract. Children cannot agree to contracts, and the school can't enter them into a contract without parental consent. So, kids, do whatever you want with your Google doodles, they are yours.
If nothing else, copyright applies.
Re: (Score:3)
Ultimately, this appears to be a contract. Children cannot agree to contracts, and the school can't enter them into a contract without parental consent. So, kids, do whatever you want with your Google doodles, they are yours.
If nothing else, copyright applies.
IANAL, but I don't let that stop me.
I don't think this is a contract. Google isn't giving them something (permission to use the activity?) in exchange for agreement not to violate Google's trademarks. Google is giving them permission to use Google's trademark in a limited way. There's no exchange of value here, just a unidirectional, limited grant. Kids who, say, make an incredibly-attractive and artistic doodle and then sell thousands of copies of it haven't violated any agreement with Google, they've vi
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"There's no exchange of value here"
You underestimate the lawyers' ancient and finely crafted skill of rhetoric.
No, I don't. Remember that there would be lawyers on both sides, and the argument that this was a limited, one-way grant, not a contract, looks like a very powerful one. There's also no need for a contract in this case, nor any language that implies one.
Re: (Score:1)
They are partnering with MIT's Scratch on this. Anything published on Scratch is copyleft: "By publishing your project on the Scratch website, you agree to license it under a Creative Commons Share Alike license. If you don’t want others to view and remix your creations, don’t share them on the Scratch website."
Re: (Score:2)
"This Is Google Home Assist" (Score:4, Funny)
"I notice that you have a printout of your child's Google Doodle (tm) on your refrigerator.
Please be aware that you are in violation of the Universal EULA. As such, until such time as you remove the offending item, all Google Services, including but not limited to gmail, your autonomous vehicle permissions, electricity, and access to Amazon will be revoked.
Please also be aware that until such time as you complete the mandatory three day course "Google Loves Me: Why I should Love Google", you will be ineligible to receive your daily Google Credits.
Remember, we at Google want what is best for you and for the children you entrust to us."
Get kids interested in programming... (Score:3)