The real reason Apple and Google want you to use your phone less

                                         NIR EYAL MAY 19, 2019

If tech is “hijacking your brain” with their “irresistible” products, as some tech critics claim, why are these companies now acting against their own interests?

      This week Apple follows Google by announcing features to help people cut back on their tech use. Why would the companies that make your phone want you to use it less? If tech is “hijacking your brain” with their “irresistible” products, as some tech critics claim, why are these companies now acting against their own interests? Perhaps the tech giants have had a change of heart or have been persuaded by public pressure to change their ways? Hardly. I studied the sophisticated psychology these companies deploy to keep people hooked and wrote a book about how they do it. At first glance, it appears their business model would benefit from addiction. The more you use your phone, the more money they make through the apps you buy and the ads you view.

      However, the addiction story falls short when considering the long-term interests of these companies. Apple and Google are making it easier for consumers to cut back on phone use because it is in their interest to do so. In this case, what’s good for the user is also good for these companies’ bottom lines. Apple and Google don’t want you to get addicted. Addiction is a compulsive harmful behavior. Rather, they’d prefer you form healthy habits with your digital devices.

      Consider why you wear a seatbelt. In 1968, the Federal Government mandated that seat belts come equipped in all cars. However, nineteen years before any such regulation, American car makers started offering seat belts as a feature. The laws came well after car makers started offering seatbelts because that’s what consumers wanted. Car makers who sold safer cars sold more.

      Similarly, thousands of third-party apps have given smartphone owners ways to moderate tech use with tools to help them monitor how much time they spend online, turn off access to certain sites, and reduce digital distraction — tools very similar to what Apple and Google recently announced. I started writing about this burgeoning trend, in what I called “attention retention” devices, back in early 2015 and today there are more digital wellness products than ever.

       As they often do with successful apps built on their platforms, Apple and Google took note of what consumers wanted and decided to incorporate these features as standard — just as car makers did with seat belts in the 1950s. They also went beyond what app makers can do by adding features only the operating system makers can offer, like batch notifications to reduce the frequency of intraday interruptions and the ability to put the phone in “shush” mode by flipping it over.

      The history of innovation is littered with examples of new technologies causing unintended harm. As cultural theorist Paul Virilio said, “When you invent the ship, you also invent the shipwreck.” Although the devices these modern shipbuilders make certainly have potential negative consequences, like overuse, it’s also in their interests to make their products less harmful.

      With few exceptions, when a product harms people, consumers tend to use it less often or find better alternatives. The feature fight between these two tech rivals benefits everyone. The move to help users create healthy habits with their devices is an example of competition making products better.

       Although they are certainly designed to be persuasive and user-friendly, we aren’t slaves to our technologies and it behooves us to stop thinking we’re powerless. The tech companies are taking steps to help users rein in device overuse. Now it’s our turn to put these features to use, buckle down, and buckle up

(Available in: https://www.theladders.com/career-advice/the-reason-apple-and-google-want-you-to-use-your-phone-less. Accessed on May 19th, 2019. Adapted.)

The real reason Apple and Google want you to use your phone less

                                         NIR EYAL MAY 19, 2019

If tech is “hijacking your brain” with their “irresistible” products, as some tech critics claim, why are these companies now acting against their own interests?

      This week Apple follows Google by announcing features to help people cut back on their tech use. Why would the companies that make your phone want you to use it less? If tech is “hijacking your brain” with their “irresistible” products, as some tech critics claim, why are these companies now acting against their own interests? Perhaps the tech giants have had a change of heart or have been persuaded by public pressure to change their ways? Hardly. I studied the sophisticated psychology these companies deploy to keep people hooked and wrote a book about how they do it. At first glance, it appears their business model would benefit from addiction. The more you use your phone, the more money they make through the apps you buy and the ads you view.

      However, the addiction story falls short when considering the long-term interests of these companies. Apple and Google are making it easier for consumers to cut back on phone use because it is in their interest to do so. In this case, what’s good for the user is also good for these companies’ bottom lines. Apple and Google don’t want you to get addicted. Addiction is a compulsive harmful behavior. Rather, they’d prefer you form healthy habits with your digital devices.

      Consider why you wear a seatbelt. In 1968, the Federal Government mandated that seat belts come equipped in all cars. However, nineteen years before any such regulation, American car makers started offering seat belts as a feature. The laws came well after car makers started offering seatbelts because that’s what consumers wanted. Car makers who sold safer cars sold more.

      Similarly, thousands of third-party apps have given smartphone owners ways to moderate tech use with tools to help them monitor how much time they spend online, turn off access to certain sites, and reduce digital distraction — tools very similar to what Apple and Google recently announced. I started writing about this burgeoning trend, in what I called “attention retention” devices, back in early 2015 and today there are more digital wellness products than ever.

       As they often do with successful apps built on their platforms, Apple and Google took note of what consumers wanted and decided to incorporate these features as standard — just as car makers did with seat belts in the 1950s. They also went beyond what app makers can do by adding features only the operating system makers can offer, like batch notifications to reduce the frequency of intraday interruptions and the ability to put the phone in “shush” mode by flipping it over.

      The history of innovation is littered with examples of new technologies causing unintended harm. As cultural theorist Paul Virilio said, “When you invent the ship, you also invent the shipwreck.” Although the devices these modern shipbuilders make certainly have potential negative consequences, like overuse, it’s also in their interests to make their products less harmful.

      With few exceptions, when a product harms people, consumers tend to use it less often or find better alternatives. The feature fight between these two tech rivals benefits everyone. The move to help users create healthy habits with their devices is an example of competition making products better.

       Although they are certainly designed to be persuasive and user-friendly, we aren’t slaves to our technologies and it behooves us to stop thinking we’re powerless. The tech companies are taking steps to help users rein in device overuse. Now it’s our turn to put these features to use, buckle down, and buckle up

(Available in: https://www.theladders.com/career-advice/the-reason-apple-and-google-want-you-to-use-your-phone-less. Accessed on May 19th, 2019. Adapted.)

            Technology in schools: Future changes in classrooms

      Technology has the power to transform how people learn - but walk into some classrooms and you could be forgiven for thinking you were entering a time warp. There will probably be a whiteboard instead of the traditional blackboard, and the children may be using laptops or tablets, but plenty of textbooks, pens and photocopied sheets are still likely.

      The curriculum and theory have changed little since Victorian times, according to the educationalist and author Marc Prensky. "The world needs a new curriculum," he said at the recent Bett show, a conference dedicated to technology in education. Most of the education products on the market are just aids to teach the existing curriculum, he says, based on the false assumption "we need to teach better what we teach today". He feels a whole new core of subjects is needed, focusing on the skills that will equip today's learners for tomorrow's world of work. These include problem-solving, creative thinking and collaboration.

'Flipped' classrooms

      One of the biggest problems with radically changing centuries-old pedagogical methods is that no generation of parents wants their children to be the guinea pigs. Mr Prensky he thinks we have little choice, however: "We are living in an age of accelerating change. We have to experiment and figure out what works."

      "We are at the ground floor of a new world full of imagination, creativity, innovation and digital wisdom. We are going to have to create the education of the future because it doesn't exist anywhere today." He might be wrong there. Change is already afoot to disrupt the traditional classroom. The "flipped" classroom - the idea of inverting traditional teaching methods by delivering instructions online outside of the classroom and using the time in school as the place to do homework - has gained in popularity in US schools. The teacher's role becomes one of a guide, while students watch lectures at home at their own pace, communicating with classmates and teachers online.

(Available in:https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-30814302. Accessed on May 18st, 2019. Adapted. Author: Jane Wakefield.) 

            Technology in schools: Future changes in classrooms

      Technology has the power to transform how people learn - but walk into some classrooms and you could be forgiven for thinking you were entering a time warp. There will probably be a whiteboard instead of the traditional blackboard, and the children may be using laptops or tablets, but plenty of textbooks, pens and photocopied sheets are still likely.

      The curriculum and theory have changed little since Victorian times, according to the educationalist and author Marc Prensky. "The world needs a new curriculum," he said at the recent Bett show, a conference dedicated to technology in education. Most of the education products on the market are just aids to teach the existing curriculum, he says, based on the false assumption "we need to teach better what we teach today". He feels a whole new core of subjects is needed, focusing on the skills that will equip today's learners for tomorrow's world of work. These include problem-solving, creative thinking and collaboration.

'Flipped' classrooms

      One of the biggest problems with radically changing centuries-old pedagogical methods is that no generation of parents wants their children to be the guinea pigs. Mr Prensky he thinks we have little choice, however: "We are living in an age of accelerating change. We have to experiment and figure out what works."

      "We are at the ground floor of a new world full of imagination, creativity, innovation and digital wisdom. We are going to have to create the education of the future because it doesn't exist anywhere today." He might be wrong there. Change is already afoot to disrupt the traditional classroom. The "flipped" classroom - the idea of inverting traditional teaching methods by delivering instructions online outside of the classroom and using the time in school as the place to do homework - has gained in popularity in US schools. The teacher's role becomes one of a guide, while students watch lectures at home at their own pace, communicating with classmates and teachers online.

(Available in:https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-30814302. Accessed on May 18st, 2019. Adapted. Author: Jane Wakefield.) 

                  The “Social Practice” of Teaching

      Examining teaching from the context of a ‘social practice’ may provide us with fresh insights that will challenge the accepted ways of seeing the world of teaching with important implications for faculty development. First, we will look at what we mean by a social practice and then see how teaching falls into that category. A social practice needs to be understood in terms of purpose, context, and a complex array of norms. A social practice is, first, a form of activity that has grown out of common needs in a community to accomplish certain purposes.

      A system of etiquette and a means for communication serve to make human society more civil. Second, a social practice involves shared and mutually understood ways of behaving or acting. Third, the patterns of action are guided by a complex array or norms that we might call rules, standards, principles, precepts, and unwritten policies. These norms have authority (people comply willingly), and they are created and recreated in and through the interactions of those involved in the practice (Case, 1990; Selman, 1989; MacIntyre, 1984; Taylor, 1983). The norms provide reasons for the actions or behaviors of individuals. As in etiquette using particular forms of address, handshaking, and removing or wearing particular headwear are the behaviors that constitute the practice.

      The behaviors have meaning only in terms of the context of that particular community and purpose and can only be explained in relation to the guiding norms. The feature of a social practice (they develop out of the common needs of the community) is clearly consistent with what has already been said about the purposive nature of teaching. Teaching is an activity that has grown out of the need in a community to pass on its knowledge, mores, and behaviors and in medical schools these are formulated as mission statements which include educational aims. To view teaching as a social practice is to acknowledge, first and foremost, the expectations society has for teaching, or in other words, the particular purposes of teaching.

(Available in: D’Eon, M., Overgaard, V., & Harding, S. R. (2000). Advances in Health Sciences Education, 5(2), 151–162. Accessed on May 18st, 2019. Adapted.)

                  The “Social Practice” of Teaching

      Examining teaching from the context of a ‘social practice’ may provide us with fresh insights that will challenge the accepted ways of seeing the world of teaching with important implications for faculty development. First, we will look at what we mean by a social practice and then see how teaching falls into that category. A social practice needs to be understood in terms of purpose, context, and a complex array of norms. A social practice is, first, a form of activity that has grown out of common needs in a community to accomplish certain purposes.

      A system of etiquette and a means for communication serve to make human society more civil. Second, a social practice involves shared and mutually understood ways of behaving or acting. Third, the patterns of action are guided by a complex array or norms that we might call rules, standards, principles, precepts, and unwritten policies. These norms have authority (people comply willingly), and they are created and recreated in and through the interactions of those involved in the practice (Case, 1990; Selman, 1989; MacIntyre, 1984; Taylor, 1983). The norms provide reasons for the actions or behaviors of individuals. As in etiquette using particular forms of address, handshaking, and removing or wearing particular headwear are the behaviors that constitute the practice.

      The behaviors have meaning only in terms of the context of that particular community and purpose and can only be explained in relation to the guiding norms. The feature of a social practice (they develop out of the common needs of the community) is clearly consistent with what has already been said about the purposive nature of teaching. Teaching is an activity that has grown out of the need in a community to pass on its knowledge, mores, and behaviors and in medical schools these are formulated as mission statements which include educational aims. To view teaching as a social practice is to acknowledge, first and foremost, the expectations society has for teaching, or in other words, the particular purposes of teaching.

(Available in: D’Eon, M., Overgaard, V., & Harding, S. R. (2000). Advances in Health Sciences Education, 5(2), 151–162. Accessed on May 18st, 2019. Adapted.)

                  The “Social Practice” of Teaching

      Examining teaching from the context of a ‘social practice’ may provide us with fresh insights that will challenge the accepted ways of seeing the world of teaching with important implications for faculty development. First, we will look at what we mean by a social practice and then see how teaching falls into that category. A social practice needs to be understood in terms of purpose, context, and a complex array of norms. A social practice is, first, a form of activity that has grown out of common needs in a community to accomplish certain purposes.

      A system of etiquette and a means for communication serve to make human society more civil. Second, a social practice involves shared and mutually understood ways of behaving or acting. Third, the patterns of action are guided by a complex array or norms that we might call rules, standards, principles, precepts, and unwritten policies. These norms have authority (people comply willingly), and they are created and recreated in and through the interactions of those involved in the practice (Case, 1990; Selman, 1989; MacIntyre, 1984; Taylor, 1983). The norms provide reasons for the actions or behaviors of individuals. As in etiquette using particular forms of address, handshaking, and removing or wearing particular headwear are the behaviors that constitute the practice.

      The behaviors have meaning only in terms of the context of that particular community and purpose and can only be explained in relation to the guiding norms. The feature of a social practice (they develop out of the common needs of the community) is clearly consistent with what has already been said about the purposive nature of teaching. Teaching is an activity that has grown out of the need in a community to pass on its knowledge, mores, and behaviors and in medical schools these are formulated as mission statements which include educational aims. To view teaching as a social practice is to acknowledge, first and foremost, the expectations society has for teaching, or in other words, the particular purposes of teaching.

(Available in: D’Eon, M., Overgaard, V., & Harding, S. R. (2000). Advances in Health Sciences Education, 5(2), 151–162. Accessed on May 18st, 2019. Adapted.)

The Regional English Training Centres (RETC) project – new approach to teaching English already shows results

                                                        September 30, 2018 08:00 By The nation

      British Council and the Thai Education Ministry have joined hands to modernise the teaching methods of 17,000 English-language teachers in the kingdom, moving from the “grammar-vocabulary” memorisation system to focus on communication.The UK cultural and education international body’s Regional English Training Centres (RETC) project aims to improve the skills of teachers at primary and secondary schools across Thailand.

      Some 75% of English teachers in Thailand are ranked at the A2 elementary level in the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR), representing an IELTS score of 3.5 to 4, according to the statement issued by British Council on Friday.The RETC Boot Camp project was first introduced in 2015 to improve overall English teaching proficiency. After two and a half years, 15,300 English teachers, or 90%, have improved their confidence in teaching English and using it in classrooms.

      As the next step, an assessment and evaluation system is to be considered to assist in the adaptation toward the communicative approach.

      Education Minister Teerakiat Jareonsettasin said the development of Thai students’ English skills is crucial and needs serious improvement. Each Thai student studies English for at least 12 years at primary and secondary school, however most are unable to communicate in English which is the main obstacle to global competition, he said. Two main challenges that need to be addressed are Thai teachers’ English skills and their teaching approach. “By focusing on language accuracy and the memorisation method rather than the communicative approach, most Thai students cannot communicate effectively in English,” he said.

      Many Thai students also have a poor attitude towards English classes. Andrew Glass, director of British Council Thailand, said since the start of the project, 15 RETCs have been established and that 17,000 out of 40,000 of Thailand’s English teachers have been trained and mentored in the communicative approach. Additionally, more than 30 teachers have been intensively trained to become TMTs. They work with British Council trainers to mentor and transfer knowledge to teachers and school directors, creating academic networking opportunities with regional supervisors to improve their follow-up sessions.

      After completing the project, the research clearly indicates that 90% or 15,300 English teachers have more confidence in teaching English in the communicative approach and more confidence in using English in their classrooms. Besides, 72 of English teachers improved their lesson planning and were able to give clearer instructions, while 94% improved their lesson management. In addition, 93% of English teachers have improved their English subject knowledge. Sutthiwat Sutthiprapa, one of the Thai master trainers and a full-time English teacher at Khor Wittayakom in Nakhon Phanom Province, said all the knowledge he gained from the RETC project can be applied in his English classes. “It significantly changes the atmosphere of the classroom and the students’ attitude towards English. "Students are eager to attend the class and make every effort to participate in class activities. I believe that if every English teacher in Thailand exploits the RETC concept, Thai students’ English ability will increase considerably," he said.

(Available in: https://www.bangkokpost.com/news/general/1548446/british-council-helps-train-thai-english-language-teachers.Accessed on May 18th, 2019. Adapted.)

The Regional English Training Centres (RETC) project – new approach to teaching English already shows results

                                                        September 30, 2018 08:00 By The nation

      British Council and the Thai Education Ministry have joined hands to modernise the teaching methods of 17,000 English-language teachers in the kingdom, moving from the “grammar-vocabulary” memorisation system to focus on communication.The UK cultural and education international body’s Regional English Training Centres (RETC) project aims to improve the skills of teachers at primary and secondary schools across Thailand.

      Some 75% of English teachers in Thailand are ranked at the A2 elementary level in the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR), representing an IELTS score of 3.5 to 4, according to the statement issued by British Council on Friday.The RETC Boot Camp project was first introduced in 2015 to improve overall English teaching proficiency. After two and a half years, 15,300 English teachers, or 90%, have improved their confidence in teaching English and using it in classrooms.

      As the next step, an assessment and evaluation system is to be considered to assist in the adaptation toward the communicative approach.

      Education Minister Teerakiat Jareonsettasin said the development of Thai students’ English skills is crucial and needs serious improvement. Each Thai student studies English for at least 12 years at primary and secondary school, however most are unable to communicate in English which is the main obstacle to global competition, he said. Two main challenges that need to be addressed are Thai teachers’ English skills and their teaching approach. “By focusing on language accuracy and the memorisation method rather than the communicative approach, most Thai students cannot communicate effectively in English,” he said.

      Many Thai students also have a poor attitude towards English classes. Andrew Glass, director of British Council Thailand, said since the start of the project, 15 RETCs have been established and that 17,000 out of 40,000 of Thailand’s English teachers have been trained and mentored in the communicative approach. Additionally, more than 30 teachers have been intensively trained to become TMTs. They work with British Council trainers to mentor and transfer knowledge to teachers and school directors, creating academic networking opportunities with regional supervisors to improve their follow-up sessions.

      After completing the project, the research clearly indicates that 90% or 15,300 English teachers have more confidence in teaching English in the communicative approach and more confidence in using English in their classrooms. Besides, 72 of English teachers improved their lesson planning and were able to give clearer instructions, while 94% improved their lesson management. In addition, 93% of English teachers have improved their English subject knowledge. Sutthiwat Sutthiprapa, one of the Thai master trainers and a full-time English teacher at Khor Wittayakom in Nakhon Phanom Province, said all the knowledge he gained from the RETC project can be applied in his English classes. “It significantly changes the atmosphere of the classroom and the students’ attitude towards English. "Students are eager to attend the class and make every effort to participate in class activities. I believe that if every English teacher in Thailand exploits the RETC concept, Thai students’ English ability will increase considerably," he said.

(Available in: https://www.bangkokpost.com/news/general/1548446/british-council-helps-train-thai-english-language-teachers.Accessed on May 18th, 2019. Adapted.)