Kids these days do absolutely still know how to read analog clocks.
Besides, they probably shouldn’t put effort into that. Those things are close to useless nowadays. It’s mostly a case of schools being conservative… but then, it’s not that much of an effort, so there are more important things to care about.
Actually, a lot don’t. I mean, like, at least fifty percent. You would be surprised. I don’t think it’s schools being conservative so much as it didn’t occur to teachers and staff that analogue clocks are frankly obsolete (I still like them). I didn’t read this article, but it sounds like that’s being corrected.
Anyways, I really respect your attitude that it’s not worth getting bent out of shape or spending a lot of time on, I think you’re right. A lot of people get precious about it or, worse, make fun of kids like they’re stupid because they haven’t wasted their time learning to read, essentially, a sundial.
Not sure about that. For high school math it is still quite important that students are familiar with circles and angles on circles. Analogue clocks are a gentle introduction to this.
I do know how to read an analog clock, but I dont read it subconciously, because my brain works on digital time, so I will have to look at it and then figure out what that time is if it were on a digital clock.
So if I see an analog clock I would rather look at my phone because that is just quicker than doing the conversion.
If you want to know more, look at the video Technology Connections (2?) did about it.
If we only taught things that were “useful” then we’d be discarding half the curriculum. Stuff like history, art, and how a fucking analog clock works, is worth teaching, even if it’s not something everyone uses every day.
Stuff like history, art, and how a fucking analog clock works
Well, I don’t exactly disagree… but one of those things is completely different from the others.
I would agree more if we were talking literally about “how an analog clock works” instead of the convention to reading them. But it would still be a niche knowledge that you can take from Wikipedia if it ever becomes relevant to you.
Real talk, is there some benefit to an analog clock that would prevent them from all being replaced by digital ones? Being able to know exactly the time in a moment’s glance seems better to me.
They’re certainly not better looking than a digital one, considering most of the ones used in schools are just the cheapest and most basic version they can get.
It proves to be somewhat useful as an example when trying to teach fractions and decimals, something we are absolutely terrible at teaching. Incomprehension of fraction to decimal conversion is why 90% of people who say they are bad at math, say they are bad at math.
Clockwise, counter clockwise. Classic time shorthand (IE, half past ten, quarter to eleven). Time estimations (easy to see a half minute on a analog clock, digital just goes from 2:00 to 2:01)
I think analog clock displays are more elegant, and are overall nicer than digital. Personal preference though.
I’m not saying nobody should learn it, I’m saying it’s not a great use of school resources. If you appreciate the aesthetic or functionality, then by all means go out and learn it. I personally like them, but I think that it should remain out of the curriculum for purely practical reasons.
I still don’t really see any useful skills that learning an analog clock teaches you, besides how to read an analog clock, which isn’t useful because analog clocks are so rare IRL.
The handful of useful skills they assist teaching isn’t worth it because there are better ways to teach those things. The clock isn’t so good at teaching all those things that it’s worth using the clock instead.
Incomprehension of fraction to decimal conversion is why 90% of people who say they are bad at math, say they are bad at math
I feel called out. I was in high-school Calculus (11th grade) before I “truly” understood fractions. Like, I honestly somehow managed to make it to Calculus without knowing how to add and subtract fractions without a calculator. Thought I was dumb in math until 9th grade algebra, and didn’t start becoming a bit of a math nerd until Calculus
Sounds like you just didn’t understand. Each hour of the 12 on the clock takes up 30° of the circle, and we measure time in cycles of hours, minutes, seconds that all match up well with the 360° of a circle.
Cutting pizza would also teach kids a geometrical understanding of how circles work, I don’t see how that translates at all to being innate to reading a clock. I know tons of people who can read a clock who suck at math. It seems like an incredibly weak assertion.
I prefer analogue clocks because I tend to have time blindness with ADHD, and it’s easier to see at a glance how much time is visually left in an hour or how much time is passing with an analogue clock. Just knowing that “15 min left” isn’t really as effective as being able to see a visual representation of “15 min left”, for example.
Yeah, but you have to imagine it, and some people have Aphantasia. Have a watch ready for when you suddenly can’t form mental images any more and also get lost somewhere.
Being able to know exactly the time in a moment’s glance seems better to me.
That seems more like a pro for analogue to me. It’s much easier with an analogue clock since you get a visual presentation of time. Whenever someone tells me a time, I have to first imagine an analogue clock to understand what that time means.
Genuine question, how precise do you need the time to be? Maybe you actually need precise readings for something. I figured that “on the 5 min marker”, “slightly before/behind the 5 min marker” and “in the middle of two 5 min markers” is precise enough for me. And I see a hand at these positions faster than reading numbers.
I think for precise readings (eg. entering the time I start working), the speed is the same for me, but obviously I didn’t test this.
I also think looking at the time but still not knowing what time it is a few seconds later happens less on an analog clock.
I don’t know how much personal preference influences this though.
They convey time instantly, without reading. You don’t even need the numbers for them to work. It’s like showing a progress bar versus just giving the percentage as a number.
An analog clock is just three sets of loading bars with their ends glued together. You can tell geometrically what proportion of each division of time (day, hour, and minute) are spent and what proportion remains. You don’t even need the numbers.
If you need stopwatch-level precision, sure, a digital display is superior. But how often do you need that? Most of what I need clocks for is, “Oh, it’s about a quarter to noon, I have a lunch appointment to get to”.
It is my personal preference to visually intuit that the clock hands are roughly separating the hour into 3/4 spent and 1/4 remaining and use that to know how much time I have left to the hour, rather than read the symbols “42” on the display and manually do the mental gymnastics of “well that’s basically 45, which is three quarters of the way to 60 minutes”.
From a practicality standpoint, a round clockface is easier to create a mechanical drive system for.
You can create a digital mechanical face (see: Flipboard style numerical displays) but they usually require more gears and are more susceptible to wear and tear than the gears of a round clock face.
The simplest designs for mechanical digital displays actually just take 24 hour and 60 minute/second circular displays and hide the other numerals as the clock face spins around. Technically this I suppose counts as both analog and digital?
As for electronic displays? Nah not much of a reason to use a round display unless again, you have an electric-mechanical drive and want to save on gears and parts.
Analog clocks are like cursive, there isn’t any real world benefit so it seems like we should spend that effort on one of the many other things that schools could teach.
They look nice. Some of them anyway, not specifically school clocks which I mentally associate with “when is this day going to fucking end?” But reading a clock is not a difficult skill that takes a long time to teach.
It’s somewhat easy to teach, but also it’s not a useful skill. If someone likes how analog clocks work, then they can learn it on their own time, since it’s easy.
I feel like there’s a bit of a difficulty difference. One requires basic spacial understanding. The other requires hundreds of hours of practice to become good. Nevertheless, learning both is a good idea for different reasons. Activating your brains via fine hand coordination is a great activity for children.
As a comparison, think about how much writing chinese children have to learn in school. They don’t come out as exactly poorly educated, rather vice versa. Then again, the competetiveness in chinese schools is pretty brutal, at least if I can trust what my chinese colleagues have told me.
I shouldn’t say there is no value in learning cursive or analog clocks, I just want to say that analog/cursive is being taught in place of more valuable lessons.
it’s now 18:53, and while I respect that it seems nonsensical when parsed as a number, I find 1853 more convenient to write on mobile (and it does save two keystrokes on keyboard too).
It was the only way I could tell how much time is left, I didn’t have a phone till highschool. In school counting down the second till school was over was so crucial.