7 ms·

I think this title/article is a bit misleading. 1/ The company was hemorrhaging money and wanted resignations (if I'm understanding "INR CR" correctly, they lo

I think this title/article is a bit misleading. 1/ The company was hemorrhaging money and wanted resignations (if I'm understanding "INR CR" correctly, they lost $218,102,508 USD last year??) 2/ This was India, so the stock image feels a bit misleading 3/ It happened two months ago, not recently 4/ It wasn't just coming back to the office; it was relocating people to offices who hadn't worked there before 5/ They even forced people who worked near an office go to OTHER offices in other cities Here's the original source, which is much better (and includes details on revenue and expenses): https://inc42.com/buzz/exclusive-over-800-whitehat-jr-employees-resign-as-edtech-giant-asks-to-report-to-office/ https://inc42.com/buzz/exclusive-over-800-whitehat-jr-employ... This isn't a case of workers preferring WFH over the office; it's a sneaky layoff.

searchableguy 4y ago
> The company was hemorrhaging money and wanted resignations Unrelated, it's amazing how edtech startups have been beaten by traditional coaching institutions. Not only those institutions are profitable but they are beating growth numbers consistently.
- prewett 4y ago
  I've never understood why tech people think computers are going to improve education. Education is a human activity, you cannot replace a human with a computer. At best a computer is going to be like a book v2, plus multiple choice problem sets / test. Learning from a book is hardly going to be more effective than a teacher who can adjust on the fly to the students.
  - __B_B__ 4y ago
    It's the logical conclusion derived from the conceptualization of humans as programmable machines and education as their programming. After one accepts that belief, the issue merely becomes one of economy. Managing costs.
  - Tepix 4y ago
    Apps have greatly improved my language learning, spaced repetition has been a key for learning vocabulary and it's something that computers are very good at. Also apps like tandem have made it free, quick and easy to find someone online to practice with.
  - toshk 4y ago
    From personal experience teaching a small kid that does really well one on one learning. But with paper absolutely nothing. One of the big benefits is of computers vs books: being able to directly give automated feedback. Pronounce or type a word wrong, the computer instantly gives you specific feedback. If you do assignments on paper teachers checks it much further away from the point the cognitive effort has been applied. There is a much less direct feedback loop. Especially for learning how to read a computer can give feedback whereas kids can go through texts not fully understanding, or misreading words without any correction. Of course one on one is in some ways much more effective. But there are time constraints. To automate certain things computer programs are most time effective. Just have to check in to make sure they are taking their work seriously. It's also harder to pretend to be studying with a computer
    - nradov 4y ago
      With computerized education courses, kids tend to just click through the answers as quickly as possible without really engaging with the material. Only a human teacher can tell whether the student is really engaged and learning. Computerized training only really works for older students who are already highly motivated to learn a particular skill.
      - emteycz 4y ago
        Absolutely disagree. Kids do that when they're forced to it. Anybody would do that. Kids who are interested in what they're learning about won't do that. Perhaps we shouldn't expect people (kids or not) to do so much irrelevant stuff.
      - toshk 4y ago
        Same with on paper. And true I don't like multiple choice for that reason. However in my experience it's much easier to check from a distance if they are messing around or not with a computer. And computer won't easily allow them to continue with wrong answers. (Certain programs are better then others) One on one is always better, but there is not room for a lot of one one time in most schools
    - 4y ago
  - indigochill 4y ago
    > At best a computer is going to be like a book v2 Yes, I agree, but I think you underestimate just how much power v2 can bring to books. Computers make interactive media relatively easy to create. Interactivity provides a literal new dimension to the information you can convey that makes some things easier and faster to understand than if you were to read them from a book. As a student, you can be handed a live simulation and experiment with it to "grow" an intuition for the subject matter. Nicky Case's explainers are a prime example of this in action.
    - eldaisfish 4y ago
      it would appear that you've forgotten the key power of a human in education - adaptability. A teacher is able to see where a student is making a mistake, why that mistake is happening and what else might be going wrong. A computer is a supplement to that. It will never be a replacement.
      - emteycz 4y ago
        Where have you seen a teacher adapt to a student? I have seen them screaming when kids don't do what the teacher expects (but doesn't properly explain). A computer would never do that.
        eldaisfish 4y ago
        why are you assuming that all teachers are terrible? In over 15 years of receiving an education, i met several great teachers and a few excellent ones.
        emteycz 4y ago
        Because I've never seen a good one, and even if they exist, there's no guarantee that a particular child will have a good teacher. Half of them are below average, and we both know how incredibly bad is the average.
  - jfengel 4y ago
    When you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail. If you ask techies to describe education, it consists of memorizing trivia. And that fits perfectly well into computerized education. It doesn't help that so many school systems do in fact look at it that way. That's why we've gotten more and more standardized testing. They want to know they're getting value for money, so they define value in ways they can measure cheaply.
  - pseudostem 4y ago
    As someone who is approaching mid 40s and has gone back to college, I would say I disagree with you. Ed tech is a problem yes, because you get only 1 kind of content on a single platform. But in general, computers have given me access to so much more than a singular human interaction could. I'll use an example (real one). "Linear Algebra" search right here on HN yields a few results and I especially liked the animated web book. Gilbert Strang's videos are well... Gilbert Strang's videos. 3blue1brown throws a fantastic perspective. Pavel Grinfeld is brilliant too. I have so many options now, which didn't exist in 1995. And each of them is so different and great in its own way.
  - kcartlidge 4y ago
    > I've never understood why tech people think computers are going to improve education. For many (not necessarily all) ed-tech startups, they don't. They aren't looking to improve education, they are looking to leverage and scale a business. And for that, 'computers' is ideal.
dv_dt 4y ago
If a company is hemorrhaging money, why not eliminate some office leases and keep more people remote? Maybe that comes later after the self-layoff selection?
- searchableguy 4y ago
  Remote work at scale doesn't work well in India due to general distrust.
  - sokoloff 4y ago
    Is America known for our deep and abiding inherent trust of our fellow countrymen? (I don’t believe we’re known for that, yet remote working works here, at least to a very large degree.)
    - frostburg 4y ago
      I'm always suspicious of post-hoc cultural explanations, but I think that the argument would be that you don't trust other americans to not shoot you, but you generally trust them to work.
      - pyinstallwoes 4y ago
        This is a terrible analogy.
        frostburg 4y ago
        Yes, hence me stating that I don't actually believe in that line of explanation.
      - aksss 4y ago
        Wow, I would say the reverse insomuch as I don’t trust the majority of my fellow random Americans, without adequate oversight, to work a) hard and b) with detailed compliance to process and procedure. I absolutely trust the majority of my fellow random Americans to not shoot me, and I live in a state with constitutional concealed carry and a city where it’s not abnormal to see open carry.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

searchableguy 4y ago

> The company was hemorrhaging money and wanted resignations Unrelated, it's amazing how edtech startups have been beaten by traditional coaching institutions. Not only those institutions are profitable but they are beating growth numbers consistently.

prewett 4y ago
I've never understood why tech people think computers are going to improve education. Education is a human activity, you cannot replace a human with a computer. At best a computer is going to be like a book v2, plus multiple choice problem sets / test. Learning from a book is hardly going to be more effective than a teacher who can adjust on the fly to the students.
- __B_B__ 4y ago
  It's the logical conclusion derived from the conceptualization of humans as programmable machines and education as their programming. After one accepts that belief, the issue merely becomes one of economy. Managing costs.
- Tepix 4y ago
  Apps have greatly improved my language learning, spaced repetition has been a key for learning vocabulary and it's something that computers are very good at. Also apps like tandem have made it free, quick and easy to find someone online to practice with.
- toshk 4y ago
  From personal experience teaching a small kid that does really well one on one learning. But with paper absolutely nothing. One of the big benefits is of computers vs books: being able to directly give automated feedback. Pronounce or type a word wrong, the computer instantly gives you specific feedback. If you do assignments on paper teachers checks it much further away from the point the cognitive effort has been applied. There is a much less direct feedback loop. Especially for learning how to read a computer can give feedback whereas kids can go through texts not fully understanding, or misreading words without any correction. Of course one on one is in some ways much more effective. But there are time constraints. To automate certain things computer programs are most time effective. Just have to check in to make sure they are taking their work seriously. It's also harder to pretend to be studying with a computer
  - nradov 4y ago
    With computerized education courses, kids tend to just click through the answers as quickly as possible without really engaging with the material. Only a human teacher can tell whether the student is really engaged and learning. Computerized training only really works for older students who are already highly motivated to learn a particular skill.
    - emteycz 4y ago
      Absolutely disagree. Kids do that when they're forced to it. Anybody would do that. Kids who are interested in what they're learning about won't do that. Perhaps we shouldn't expect people (kids or not) to do so much irrelevant stuff.
    - toshk 4y ago
      Same with on paper. And true I don't like multiple choice for that reason. However in my experience it's much easier to check from a distance if they are messing around or not with a computer. And computer won't easily allow them to continue with wrong answers. (Certain programs are better then others) One on one is always better, but there is not room for a lot of one one time in most schools
  - 4y ago
- indigochill 4y ago
  > At best a computer is going to be like a book v2 Yes, I agree, but I think you underestimate just how much power v2 can bring to books. Computers make interactive media relatively easy to create. Interactivity provides a literal new dimension to the information you can convey that makes some things easier and faster to understand than if you were to read them from a book. As a student, you can be handed a live simulation and experiment with it to "grow" an intuition for the subject matter. Nicky Case's explainers are a prime example of this in action.
  - eldaisfish 4y ago
    it would appear that you've forgotten the key power of a human in education - adaptability. A teacher is able to see where a student is making a mistake, why that mistake is happening and what else might be going wrong. A computer is a supplement to that. It will never be a replacement.
    - emteycz 4y ago
      Where have you seen a teacher adapt to a student? I have seen them screaming when kids don't do what the teacher expects (but doesn't properly explain). A computer would never do that.
      - eldaisfish 4y ago
        why are you assuming that all teachers are terrible? In over 15 years of receiving an education, i met several great teachers and a few excellent ones.
        emteycz 4y ago
        Because I've never seen a good one, and even if they exist, there's no guarantee that a particular child will have a good teacher. Half of them are below average, and we both know how incredibly bad is the average.
- jfengel 4y ago
  When you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail. If you ask techies to describe education, it consists of memorizing trivia. And that fits perfectly well into computerized education. It doesn't help that so many school systems do in fact look at it that way. That's why we've gotten more and more standardized testing. They want to know they're getting value for money, so they define value in ways they can measure cheaply.
- pseudostem 4y ago
  As someone who is approaching mid 40s and has gone back to college, I would say I disagree with you. Ed tech is a problem yes, because you get only 1 kind of content on a single platform. But in general, computers have given me access to so much more than a singular human interaction could. I'll use an example (real one). "Linear Algebra" search right here on HN yields a few results and I especially liked the animated web book. Gilbert Strang's videos are well... Gilbert Strang's videos. 3blue1brown throws a fantastic perspective. Pavel Grinfeld is brilliant too. I have so many options now, which didn't exist in 1995. And each of them is so different and great in its own way.
- kcartlidge 4y ago
  > I've never understood why tech people think computers are going to improve education. For many (not necessarily all) ed-tech startups, they don't. They aren't looking to improve education, they are looking to leverage and scale a business. And for that, 'computers' is ideal.

dv_dt 4y ago

If a company is hemorrhaging money, why not eliminate some office leases and keep more people remote? Maybe that comes later after the self-layoff selection?

searchableguy 4y ago
Remote work at scale doesn't work well in India due to general distrust.
- sokoloff 4y ago
  Is America known for our deep and abiding inherent trust of our fellow countrymen? (I don’t believe we’re known for that, yet remote working works here, at least to a very large degree.)
  - frostburg 4y ago
    I'm always suspicious of post-hoc cultural explanations, but I think that the argument would be that you don't trust other americans to not shoot you, but you generally trust them to work.
    - pyinstallwoes 4y ago
      This is a terrible analogy.
      - frostburg 4y ago
        Yes, hence me stating that I don't actually believe in that line of explanation.
    - aksss 4y ago
      Wow, I would say the reverse insomuch as I don’t trust the majority of my fellow random Americans, without adequate oversight, to work a) hard and b) with detailed compliance to process and procedure. I absolutely trust the majority of my fellow random Americans to not shoot me, and I live in a state with constitutional concealed carry and a city where it’s not abnormal to see open carry.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]