Hi everyone, it's Brian Kilmead here. Are you tired of those uncomfortable dress shirts, especially when they bunch up under a sweater? If so, then you must check out Collars Co., makers of the dress collar polo. Listen up. These shirts are four-way stretch, buttery soft polos with firm dress collars on them, so they give you the dress shirt look, but extremely comfortable polo feel.
You can wear them with anything under a sweater, with a blazer, or by themselves as an elevated polo. They work for any occasion. These polos are perfect, whether it's in the office, on a golf course, or a night out. Collars Co. is exploding and have gone viral on social media thanks to the 1 million investment they received on Shark Tank from Mark Cuban and Peter Jones.
You don't have to worry about collars that flop down and spread out. They stay firm and sharp all day. It's an amazing array of sweaters, quarter zips, pants, and outerwear. If you're looking for the performance dress shirt or polo that looks great all day, check out collarsandco.com. Use promo code Brian for 15% off.
of any purchase of $100 or more. That's promo code BRIAN. Queen Carvania stood haloed by the morning sun. An army hung on her every word. My champions, I have sold my chariot on Carvana.
T'was a lovely SUV, an inexplicably queenly offer. They're even coming to the castle to collect it. Tonight, we feast. An offer you can feast on. Sell your car today on Carvana.
Pick up these mayopy. You might have seen him testify in front of Congress, and you might have heard him on a podcast or seen him on television, but he's with us right now. And we're lucky to have Jared Forvath with us. He's neuroscientist and educator and author of a brand new book out this week, right? Yeah, it just came out Tuesday.
The Digital Delusion. You have to, if anybody who is, whether you're a grandparent, parent, or whether you're a kid wondering why certain teachers at work, certain schools you're doing well, some people doing better than you. This might be a great way to unlock the secrets to success when it comes to education. Jared, first off, great to see you. When did you realize you wanted just, instead of just being an educator, you wanted to figure things out about education?
That was so probably about 12 years ago was, it was the decade of the brain.
So I was teaching when the brain was just everywhere. Where were you teaching? I was out in California.
So there was a little French international school.
So they basically, all the French speakers were doing one thing and all the English speakers were hanging out with me.
So I got to teach math. I got to teach science. I got to teach English. Whatever they needed. And that was when I realized: well, I thought if I knew more about the brain, that will make me a better teacher.
Makes sense.
So go back, learn all that stuff. I thought that'd be a year or two of my life, but academia, it's just a black hole. Once you're there, there's always one more project, always one more thing.
So I kind of got stuck in academia. And the tech stuff really didn't come up till I think COVID was kind of the breaking point.
Well, we'd always knew tech and learning weren't best friends, but it was really COVID. Everyone brings tech in to make sure we make it through the lockdowns, fair enough. Lockdowns ended, and everyone's stuck with tech. Rather than ripping that bandaid off and going back to what we know works. They're like, cool, keep the computers in front of the kids.
So that's when I said, all right, let's figure out what's going on here and whether or not this is a smart move. And nobody, everybody you talk to is concerned about our numbers on standardized tests going down. How many people are reading on grade level? How much have math on grade level? And the answer is everything's going the wrong direction.
And it's not like kids are necessarily lazier or school's getting easier. And the days are getting shorter, it seems like the homework is increasing, right? The days are just as there. It's not that we're ignoring it.
So what's going on? It's just not clicking. This is where you say exactly kids are in school more than we were. Kids have more homework than we did. Yet somehow their scores are now, for fourth graders, lower than it's been all century.
For eighth graders, they're like one point off the lowest it's been all century.
So we've got a problem. And so it couldn't have been the schools. It's not the timing. It can't really be the teachers. As much as people like to blame teacher training, that really hasn't changed all that much.
It appears to be the tools we're using to teach within schools. When you look at, and it's not just the U.S., when you look internationally across any country, as soon as tech goes from peripheral to central in an education system, that education system starts to drop. And that's, I think, my favorite. Can you define that further? Yeah.
So if we, so there are international tests, things like PISA, things like TIMS, things like ISILs, which test literacy, numeracy, science skills, in a standardized way across countries so that we can check kind of Of what educational systems are thriving, which aren't. And for the longest time, all the thriving educational systems were East Asian countries, Singapore, Japan, China. And everyone knew, oh, it's because they were hyper-rigorous. But everyone assumed they were also hyper-tech because their economies are so tech-based. Turns out, until COVID, they were the least tech-using countries in the world when it came to education.
Singapore never let kids touch tech in schools. It's like they knew these are tools for adults, not for kids learning. China, same thing. They were third least tech-using country in the world. If you had China, Shanghai, Hong Kong was like sixth least using.
It was just all these countries that we assumed their education was so much better because they were just drilling kids, which we didn't want to do here. One of the big reasons they were so much better was the way they were doing it. It just was no tech, which could allow us to keep our ideology here for how we want to run schools, just do it better.
So you want to see our education go back to writing on paper. With a pen in your hand, put away. Uh the Chromebooks, the iPads. Obviously, the iPhones.
So I understand the distraction.
So, Jared, if you're talking to me and I have my phone right here, I'm going, obviously, that's what we're seeing now: rudeness. But this has nothing to do with it. That that the phone's away. We woke up to that. But you also want the iPad and the MacBook.
And the Chromebook away. Why?
So that is one. Distraction is definitely a thing. Because just because the screen goes from pocket size to desk size doesn't mean it's not the same exact. But you're my teacher. You're in front.
You're telling me about history. You're telling me about, and I'm taking notes.
Okay. When did Washington, when was he president? When did he win the war? When did the Constitution go?
So I'm typing it. You say that's the problem. I need to be writing it. I need to be listening and writing it with a pen. Why?
What's the difference?
So when we compared, that's a perfect example: note-taking, typing versus handwriting. What happens is a lot of kids can type about as fast as a teacher speaks.
So when kids are typing up notes, what we see are just blocks of verbatim notes, dictation. It's a courtroom stenographer. I get it all in. But if you ever meet a courtroom stenographer who just wrote everything down, ask him, hey, what was that court case about? They'll say, murder.
Like, I wasn't paying attention. The only thing of importance when you're typing is the sound and the order of the words. Did I hear it? Did I write it? When you're writing by hand, no kid can keep up with the speed of your speech.
So now they have to parse meaning. Already they have to think deeply about what matters, what doesn't, how do things fit together. And they have to make decisions about what to write down. In that instance, the note-taking becomes the learning. It's no longer just dictation.
It is an organization of your thoughts and thinking, which is why handwritten notes are so gross. You've got lines and arrows. But that's why we always say, look, if you did nothing different in your class but handwritten notes versus typed notes, you will see better learning, deeper comprehension amongst your students. And you saw, you know, you thought to make things better and easier, don't take, don't, those kids don't have to carry around six textbooks. We'll put them online.
Yeah.
Right?
So I'll read online.
So I'll open up, open up your page in your textbook. You don't have to do that anymore. Open up in your textbook on your Chromebook.
So you take that textbook, you open it up on your Chromebook. What's wrong with reading it on my Chromebook?
So one of the big things the brain Loves is three-dimensional locations. We are a three-dimensional being in a three-dimensional world.
So, where in space things occur become a massive part of the memory we form and ultimately determine how we can access those memories.
So, this is why I always say: if you ever go back to like your childhood home or town, memories will start to pop up that you haven't had in decades. Just by being back in the space, your brain's like, I remember this. Do you remember that? Handwritten notes, notebooks, books, textbooks have three-dimensional locations. That's one of the things that makes text tech.
Till that book burns into dust, the same words will be in the same position with relation to each other forever. That becomes part of your memory and what you form. If you go back and look at your handwritten notebooks from school, you'll start to pull up memories. Just to be like, I know what's on the next page. That's all in there.
And you're telling me if I went to. If I got notes and opened up an article and I cut and paste that from a year ago, And when I look at that, when I open up that page from a year ago, I'm not going to have the same memories as if I wrote it down. No, because a screen only has two dimensions at most. If you have a scrolling screen, that's even worse. There is no spatial dimension whatsoever.
Everything moves through a screen, left to right, top to bottom. You just figured out in your brain the brain wants this. Yes. You figured out.
So you want to say, why is that that I'm remembering more? You said, okay, let me find out what the brain thinks. Boom. Exactly. And that's where now, so we have all this research that shows read from a book versus read from a screen, you will learn more, comprehend better.
Now we have the mechanism to say it's that spatial aspect of it. The fact that a book literally never changes, whereas a screen is always changing, changes the kind of memories you make from it. Wow. And I did not know this. I always said with the iPhone, we have a court case going on right now to see if social media tried to lure kids into getting addicted to social media.
And we know about depression associated with that and the lack of social skills. But Was it done intentional? For example, I want you to, if I make a candy bar, I want you to want that every day, right? I want to be successful. Am I evil?
No. I want to sell that candy bar. Do I know candy's bad for you yet? Probably. But I'm just trying to sell.
I work for her. She's, I'm trying to get you to buy that candy bar.
Now, in social media, did they say, I just want people on Facebook because I'd love for people to use that as a vehicle to meet people in the marketplace? Or were they trying to addict us? And to a point where they knew it was warping the mind. Isn't that what the case is about? Yeah, and they're in there winning those cases because once the documents came out from these companies, it was pretty clear it had nothing to do with socialization, it had nothing to do with learning, it was all about just addictive marketing.
And this is where I get in a lot of trouble: I can't blame a company for trying to sell a product to people. I can blame a company for making it addictive and then giving it to kids, sure. But when it comes to taking tech into schools, They're a company. Like you said, they got to make money.
So I kind of, and I don't blame anyone, but I put a little bit more responsibility on schools for not stopping and saying, wait a second, where is the evidence that this is good for learning? Where is the evidence this is going to help my kids develop? We never asked for that. We just said, okay, looks good to us.
So when those Chromebooks came into junior high school in my town, you're saying they came in because? How cynical you want to get profit. That's it. The very first one-to-one computer program was Microsoft had built the Chromebook, a very small laptop that they thought businessmen would love because they thought, if you're traveling, take this, you're good. No one bought it.
It didn't sell at all.
So, in order to recoup costs, they said, what can we do with it? Why don't we give it to kids in schools at a lower price?
So, from the very beginning, there was no consideration of learning or development. It was just what's another customer base? Where can we make some money? But again, I like, what else do we expect? It's a tech company.
Of course, they're going to try and make money. Why didn't we stop and say, Okay. What benefit does this show? Where's your research showing this is going to be useful? Jared Horvath is with us now.
His book is out called The Digital Delusion. I'll tell you exactly why.
So I don't think they knew. I'm just gonna I'm gonna I'll I'll be naive.
So if I'm an educator or principal or superintendent, Microsoft comes up to me with a representative and said, I can get you kids Chromebooks. I'm going to get you a good discount. I don't, like, almost when I first saw you testify, I didn't know anything that you were saying. I didn't challenge it either, but everything, almost everything you said caught me by surprise. Yeah, yeah.
So, do you think they did not know that they were retarding education? That is the best case scenario. And I think, yes. For the most part, I give. Teachers, I give administrators the complete benefit of the doubt.
In 2002, that was the very first one-to-one program, so far as we know in the world, it was in Maine. It would have sounded incredible back then. This is the future. Tech is the future. I think the internet comes along, that must be a part of it.
AI comes along, that must be a part of it. But I think we're now at a stage where we have enough data where we can see that. You can't say the night played the naive card anymore. Bingo.
So now, when you know better, you got to do better.
So, any school that sticks with it has a lot to it.
So, isn't it interesting that way everything's improving and AI is improving? But you're telling everyone that your studies show that. By going back to writing things out, and dare I say, using an opaque projector or the chalkboard, showing people when it comes to the classroom, I'm not looking to mod. You're telling me, Jared, don't modernize. Am I right?
To an extent, yes, you've got to learn the skills. The biggest mistake we made is we confused the tool for the skill. The tool is not the skill. The skill is the skill. Tools are only there to demonstrate the skill you have.
And when it comes to kids and learning, they've got to lock the skills down first. Understand math before you bring in a calculator. Know how to draft an essay before we start considering word processing. We brought the tool in way too early, and now they've never got the skill. And now the scariest thing is AI.
Oh, yeah.
So. What are we doing now?
Now, can it help you? They're talking about robots teaching your kids, right?
So if the robot can learn and looks like a human being, they find a way to make it look like a human being is walking around the classroom and is teaching. Are you okay with that? I think this is where big tech shot themselves in the foot. I think AI was the straw that broke everyone's back and opened their eyes and said, what are we doing here? All the research coming back on AI shows it's bad for learning.
It's just not a learning tool.
Now popular. Because it knows everything. Because there's a, what is it called? The law of least effort. Universal law.
If I have two paths to get to one spot, I'm always going to take the path that requires least energy. You as charred or you as a human. You as the universe.
Okay. As stars moving around the galaxy. Whatever requires least energy is where the world goes. Learning requires a lot of energy.
Now, AI comes along and says, You could use me in a way that's going to force you to use a lot of energy, or I could just give you the answer. What do you think 95% of kids do? Give me the answer. That's good.
Now pop that in a humanoid robot and everyone thinks, well, it looks human. One of the biggest drivers of learning we have is what's called an empathetic connection.
So human beings resonate. Our biology can connect. And in those moments, we start thinking like each other. That's when learning gets really good.
Now, if you've ever been at a dinner table and everything's cruising and then somebody pulls out a phone and you almost feel that break where it's like something changed in the room, that's it. You break synchrony.
So if you put AI in a humanoid robot, A, there's no biology to sync with, and B, anytime you recognize it's a robot, that's going to cut any chance of synchrony the kids have. It's just, it's never going to work. It's cute, but it ain't going to happen. Because people want that human connection. I want to win over that teacher.
I want to see if the teacher is frustrated. I want to see if they're enthused that I'm getting it so that you're never going to get that from a robot. It's the same thing. You can't do it. You'll get a lot of, what is it called?
Kowtowing. It'll tell you you're a great human being, but you're never going to get that connection. All right. I wouldn't mind. I would not know that.
Difference. If a robot told me that, I'd accept it either. Either way, Jared Horvath, don't move. We've got a few more minutes on the other side, but go out and pick up his book. I can't imagine any age not wanting this book.
Even if you're not in school, someone you know is. It's called The Digital Delusion. Back in a moment. Real talk, real guests, real insight. Where curiosity meets conversation.
It's the Brian Killmeat Show. Hi, everyone. It's Brian Kilmead here. Are you tired of those uncomfortable dress shirts, especially when they bunch up under a sweater? If so, then you must check out Collars Co., makers of the dress collar polo.
Listen up. These shirts are four-way stretch, buttery soft polos with firm dress collars on them, so they give you the dress shirt look, but extremely comfortable polo feel. You can wear them with anything under a sweater, with a blazer, or by themselves as an elevated polo. They work for any occasion. These polos are perfect, whether it's in the office, on a golf course, or a night out.
Collars Co. is exploding and have gone viral on social media thanks to the 1 million investment they received on Shark Tank from Mark Cuban and Peter Jones. You don't have to worry about collars that flop down and spread out. They stay firm and sharp all day. It's an amazing array of sweaters, quarter zips, pants, and outerwear.
If you're looking for the performance dress shirt or polo that looks great all day, check out collarsandco.com. Use promo code Brian for 15% off. Of any purchase of $100 or more. That's promo code Brian. Hey, it's Ryan Reynolds here for Mint Mobile.
Now, I was looking for fun ways to tell you that Mint's offer of unlimited premium wireless for $15 a month is back.
So I thought it would be fun if we made $15 bills. But it turns out, That's very illegal. Uh, so there goes my big idea for the commercial. Give it a try at mintmobile.com/slash switch. Up front payment of $45 for three months, $90 for six months, or $180 for a 12-month plan required.
$15 per month equivalent to taxes and fees extra. Initial plan term only greater than 50 gigabytes means slow when network is busy. See terms. The talk show that's getting you talking. You're with Brian Kilmead.
Jared Horvath is here, neuroscientist and educator, author of the digital delusion. Jared, just a little bit more about the court case going on right now. It's the latest one. Netta's being sued for addicting kids, and parents are stepping forward and saying this. And you have whistleblowers who said that you want to keep Mark Zuckerberg away from your kids, that there seems to be a manipulation there.
How interested are you in this case? I'm hugely interested. It's tangential to the learning stuff. And I think there are people out there, like Nikki Riesberg is one of them, just really locked in to these cases, putting good information out. But because it's tangential to learning, I don't talk about it too often, but I got my finger on the pulse at all times to make sure they get what's coming.
All right. So do you also believe, is it true that most in Silicon Valley who are tech executives don't let their kids Use the phone, an iPad, all the things that we were doing because the phone's available. The fifth grader wants it. We get them the phone. But they knew in Silicon Valley how addicted it was.
Isn't that crazy? Good for your kids, not for mine. Yes. So there's a specific type of school called Waldorf Schools, which they're no-tech, basically, or very minimal tech up until higher years. It's one of the more prominent type of school systems in Silicon Valley.
So yeah, we have good data that that's exactly what they were doing.
So you also said something.
So everybody pretty much is on the same page. If you came here two years ago, maybe not. But lock that phone away. You're not going to touch it. You say, don't give the kids access to the phone at recess.
And even when they're done with school. Keep the phone away. Why?
It's so this was a few hours. As much as you can is so there's there's all this data coming out that if a school had a cell phone policy which said no cell phone during class, but you can bring it out during recess or lunch or whatever, you'd see no benefits to learning, no benefits to well-being. It just didn't work. It was only in schools where you had a hard bell-to-bell band, no one could touch it, no one could see it, that you already started to see things kind of start to shift. And so the reasoning for this is a lot of learning happens when you stop.
So once you go through a 50-minute class period that's cognitively engaging, now if you get five to 10 minutes of downtime where you just go kick a ball, push a friend into the locker, start talking about random stuff, that's cognitive downtime.
Now your brain gets to work doing what's called consolidation. Even though you're not thinking about the classroom. No, this is where we, a huge chunk of learning is subconscious. You have to stop thinking about the classroom. But if I held this, isn't that subconscious?
My phone?
So, the problem with phones is phones are highly cognitively engaging. That's how they kind of work, they're constantly keeping you there.
So, if you pick up a phone, you're gonna lose that downtime. I'll tell you what, so much to talk about. Pick up the digital delusion. Jared Worbat, thanks so much. Thank you.
Hi, Ryan Reynolds here for Mint Mobile. Are you looking for a beach read this summer? May I suggest your big wireless bill. It's got suspense, mystery, a slightly flat emotional arc, and a shocking twist where you realize you've been overpaying the entire time. Fortunately, though, Mint's story is better.
Every plan, $15 a month, even unlimited. That's it. Happy ending, zero tears. Give it a try at mintmobile.com/slash switch. Upfront payment of $45 for three months, $90 for six months, or $180 for a 12-month plan required.
$15 per month equivalent to taxes and fees extra. Initial plan term only greater than 50 gigabytes means slow when network is busy. See terms.
