tdekken
Joined 5 years ago
Joined 5 years ago
> I think you have an up hill battle with getting traction with DI, but if you succeed that would be a great benefit to many people. (my perception)
I completely agree and it really isn't too surprising that DI never took off in schools. FWIW, I am looking to revive the underlying pedagogy (e.g., teaching sequences for non-comparatives, joining forms, etc.) rather than DI proper.
> What is the protocol on this site for starting conversations "offline"?
Interesting question that I never stopped to consider :). I have met dozens of people through HN, and it seems congruent with the hacker ethic ("throughout writings about hackers and their work processes, a common value of community and collaboration is present"), but ::shrugs::.
Thanks again for sharing your DI story.
Feel free to reach out if you want to discuss further.
> Framing education as lessons presumes that lessons are how people learn
To clarify, are you thinking of a lecture instead of a lesson? A lecture is "a speech read or delivered before an audience or class, especially for instruction or to set forth some subject" whereas a lesson is "a section into which a course of study is divided".
A lesson is a generic term agnostic to instructional style (e.g., explicit, discovery, project-based, etc.) Similar to how everything in software engineering is a "task" :).
If you want to go further, you can read Moat's Speech to Print, Seidenberg's Language at the Speed of Sight, and many others. If you want to go even deeper, then welcome to the firehose that is educational research :D.
Yes and no. It is, of course, not strictly a technological one, but the argument that it is a socio-economic one is, at best, an oversimplification. If you are interested in a more complete understanding, I highly recommend checking out APM's documentaries on this issue (https://features.apmreports.org/reading/).
From my research, the underlying causes of the literacy crisis are:
1. The mistaken belief that reading, like speaking, is biologically natural. This belief manifests as guidance to surround your child with books and read to them. Unfortunately, this isn't sufficient for the majority of children.
2. The majority of teachers lack the content knowledge to teach children to read. For example, imagine helping a child to sound out the word "father". What is the sound of the second letter? It isn't a short 'a' nor a long 'a'.
3. Many popular programs used in schools are completely debunked by science (e.g., cueing theory), but as a teacher it is difficult to identify that your approach is faulty. (If ~30% of children learn regardless of method, it is too easy to offer excuses for why the other children don't learn).
4. Helping a struggling child is "rich man's game". If you are high SES and your child is struggling, you will pay a tutor to rectify the problem. That isn't an option for the vast majority of families.
In other words, this is a highly complex puzzle and it is completely understandable why society is seemingly no closer to solving it :). Consequently, the majority of our effort is directed at understanding these root causes and identifying how to overcome them (FWIW, we have made significant progress here). The cognitive modeling portion is a small but plausibly important part of the larger landscape.
So far, I am a week into learning ML :). I have spent ~30 hours watching various ML courses and am in the process of testing the hypothesis that teaching reading with a shallower orthography (e.g., differentiating between the short and long 'e' sounds by introducing an 'ē' grapheme) leads to improved recognition of sublexical patterns. The step I am working on is building an embedding layer to ensure that these new graphemes (i.e., 'ē', 'ā', etc.) are near their parent grapheme (i.e., 'e', 'a') in the embedding space. (Although the model seems straightforward, I could also be completely misguided in how I am tackling this problem :) ).
FYI, this orthographic approach (i.e., how words are spelled using an alphabet) is used in a few highly researched literacy programs, but AFAICT there isn't direct research on the approach itself. The motivation is to initially make English a consistent language (i.e., the letters you see have a one-to-one correspondence with a particular sound). This should greatly simplify the initial roadblock in learning to read English (as seen by studies of countries with "shallow" orthographic languages) and then learners would transfer this knowledge to the normal (inconsistent) English orthography.
My main goal is to use cognitive modeling to evaluate the efficacy of interventions and inform the personalized "minimum effective dose" for a particular learner. Academically, this is well-trodden territory [0-2] but these results haven't found there way into practice. This is critically important because we know that ~30% of children will learn to read regardless of method, ~50% require explicit, systematic instruction, ~15% require prolonged explicit and systematic instruction, and up to 6% have severe cognitive impairments that make acquiring reading skills extremely difficult [3]. Yet, how much is enough?
To make this more concrete, imagine you are learning a foreign language with Duolingo. How much effort per day is necessary to achieve that? Many people have long streaks and are no closer to fluency (I learned nearly nothing despite a 400 day streak). Similarly, many reading interventions are once-a-week and, predictably, don't meaningfully affect the learning outcomes for those students.
BTW, this ML portion is part of a much larger effort (e.g., our team is a Phase II finalist in the Learning Engineering Tools Competition). If anyone is interested in collaborating, please feel free to reach out to me.
[0] Phonology, reading acquisition, and dyslexia: insights from connectionist models (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10467896/)
[1] Modeling the successes and failures of interventions for disabled readers. (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/243777699_Modeling_...)
[2] Learning to Read through Machine Teaching (https://arxiv.org/abs/2006.16470)
[3] Education Advisory Board. (2019). Narrowing the Third-grade Reading Gap: Embracing the Science of Reading, District Leadership Forum: Research briefing
I seem to be in a similar situation as an experienced software engineer who has jumped into the deep end of ML. It seems most resources either abstract away too much detail or too little. For example, building a toy example that just calls gensim.word2vec doesn't help me transfer that knowledge to other use cases. Yet on the other extreme, most research papers are impenetrable walls of math that obscure the forest for the trees.
Thus far, I would also recommend Andrej Karpathy's Zero to Hero course (https://karpathy.ai/zero-to-hero.html). He assumes a high level of programming knowledge but demystifies the ML side.
--
P.S. If anyone is, by chance, interested in helping chip away at the literacy crisis (e.g., 40% of US 4th graders can't read even at a basic level), I would love to find a collaborator for evaluating the practical application of results from the ML fields of cognitive modeling and machine teaching. These seemingly simple ML models offer powerful insight into the neural basis for learning but are explained in the most obtuse ways.
* I would love to know more about your phonics instruction. From what I can see, Ello embeds the instruction into the "help the child sound out the words" component. Is that correct or is more systematic instruction provided?
* How do you help children overcome the seemingly maddening inconsistency of the English language? For example, the long a sound can correspond to the a, ai, eigh, aigh, ay, er (RP), et, ei, au, a_e, ea, and ey graphemes.
* Does your speech recognition system understand at the phoneme level?
BTW, I would love to connect. I am an independent educational researcher and early literacy edtech founder. My background is big tech (principal engineer at a FAANG company) and am now navigating the treacherous waters of building an audience, securing funding, bringing in experts, etc.
Best of luck!
If anyone is interested in collaborating, please reach out. I am especially looking for experts in sales and marketing.
--
[1] National Assessment of Educational Progress. (2022). 2022 NAEP reading assessment. The Nation's Report Card. Retrieved November 15, 2022, from https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/highlights/reading/2022/
[2] Education Advisory Board. (2019). Narrowing the Third-grade Reading Gap: Embracing the Science of Reading, District Leadership Forum: Research briefing
[3] Although the estimates of reading capability are for children to reach NAEP’s Basic level, the mission of this project is for every child to reach NAEP’s Proficient, which requires more than just the skills of reading.