Schools to wage war on putrid fake news

[noblegiraffe]

"Children will be taught how to spot extremist content and fake news online in a revamp of the curriculum following last week’s riots.
Schools will use lessons such as English, ICT (information and communication technology) and maths to “arm” pupils against “putrid conspiracy theories”, the Education Secretary has said."

Fine, not sure how that's going to fit into maths lessons, and ICT was binned a decade ago, but anyway.

"The planned changes will help children identify all extremist content, including far-Left conspiracy theories and religion-based propaganda.
One example could involve using English classes to dissect newspaper reports, examining their style and use of language compared to fake news.
That would teach children to differentiate between independent journalism and propaganda by looking out for bias and hyperbole in the latter."

This is printed, unironically, in the Telegraph. I'm not sure I could teach children to spot the bias and hyperbole in propaganda by comparing it to newspaper output. How could they tell the difference?

And it will surely conflict with our duty to remain politically impartial if we are supposed to teach kids the dangers of extremist content while it is being spread about liberally by elected representatives?

Schools are going to have a hell of a time dealing with the fall-out from these riots in September and obviously we already teach lessons about staying safe online and not being racist. But I'm not convinced that a curriculum review that teaches about 'photoshopped images' in an era of AI, deepfakes and TikTok is really understanding the scale of the problem.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/08/10/schools-wage-war-on-putrid-fake-news-in-wake-of-riots/

I reckon the FT would write a series for teens on this if we asked them. They do absolutely amazing articles about the dangers of social media. They're all behind a paywall, which might be tricky.

This article was fantastically helpful for us.

"The teen mental health crisis: a
reckoning for Big Tech"

In the 70's and 80's, there were public information adverts shown in schools and on TV. Absolutely terrifying. Stranger danger, flying kites near power lines, playing on railway tracks etc.
We need new and updated commercials for radio and TV covering today's modern dangers that are informative and accessible for all.

Whatever the source, it's about teaching children to think critically. Or at least teaching them why and when they need to be sceptical.

In maths, it's about teaching how to make sense of statistics and recognising when they're being mis-used.

In science, it's about explaining the scientific method - how volume of evidence and peer review is used to nudge theories towards or away from accepted fact.

Unfortunately, my kids were actively encouraged by their English teachers to make up random 'facts' and statistics to embellish their persuasive writing ... that's one thing that could easily be addressed. I'm not suggesting that English teachers should check facts, but I am suggesting they should explain to students why its important to use real facts/statistics from trustworthy sources. It's part of understanding the difference between creative writing and persuasive writing.

Unfortunately, my kids were actively encouraged by their English teachers to make up random 'facts' and statistics to embellish their persuasive writing ... that's one thing that could easily be addressed. I'm not suggesting that English teachers should check facts, but I am suggesting they should explain to students why its important to use real facts/statistics from trustworthy sources. It's part of understanding the difference between creative writing and persuasive writing.

It's important to use real facts in conditions where you can. In an exam, where you're under pressure to write about a probably unfamiliar topic, they can't be expected to have real facts to hand.

Definitely knowing how to see through the stats would help a lot. I don't know many adults who can do that.

So much of communication is just body language and tone of voice though. Seeing through that and arguing back articulately is a real skill.

I'm pretty confident this is already taught in schools! My 9-year-old can talk reasonably confidently about different sources, reliable sources and bias etc

I think this is a great initiative and sorely needed. In my life I’ve definitely noticed a trend that friends who went to uni and studied humanities or law (subjects where you were required to write essays with citations) are much less likely to fall into the fake news trap compared to those who studied engineering or computer science. That says to me that the there is something valuable learnt in having to understand what makes a credible source - so even a bit of an attempt at this in the earlier years would be massively helpful. With updates for tik tok of course!

Honestly, at this point the quickest thing to do would be to teach kids that they can’t believe anything unless they’ve seen it happen with their own eyes in real time. And then they can’t extrapolate any of that to happening anywhere else. And all media online or print should be forced to stamp “possibly fiction” on every single damn page.

Re Twitter, I have been on Twitter for years, for art and music but don’t use it much
now. Used to be fun.

I did not realise what a cesspit it had become until this week. Looked up some commentators I find interesting - and some work related acquaintances following me - and found their statements to be very “I’m not a racist but….” this last week. And the replies and the general political comments….It’s been truly shocking. I think the algorithm is feeding outrage from all sides by design.

I deleted my account just now.
When the owner enjoys causing trouble, contributing to the fear that’s kept me indoors most of the week - which I now think is disproportionate? I have ventured out twice this weekend - I don’t want any part of it.

But don’t kids know this stuff better than adults do?

This. I've definitely taught similar several years running in KS2 phse

It depends which spec etc whether it’s specifically on the syllabus but yes, Media Studies covers social media. The qualification I was previously teaching had an excellent unit about social media and globalisation which brought up some great debate stuff and opened eyes but we don’t do that any more. However even the basics of media will always cover looking at who made something, why it was made, who the intended audience is and different readings of that text, so should equip students to undertake critical readings of any media text.

Of course it’s just meeja though, innit. Micky mouse subject for the thickos. Nothing to do with real life…(sighs in Media teacher).

I think it would be interesting to study biases as well - people wanting to believe something, reading something and then retweeting it, putting it on social media etc.

I've done that myself on here - it was fake news but it was so so like someone would have said. Which is a worry in itself.

Could schools introduce critical thinking sessions - including discussions which help children learn to articulate their thoughts and understand others’ perspectives, encouraging questions to help them think more deeply and incorporating problem solving activities and training on gaining research skills? I know the curriculum is full on already, but could critical thinking be incorporated in to existing lessons, in a variety of different subjects, both at primary and secondary level?

My DS and I are reading MN together and we're learning such a lot. We're careful what we click on obviously, but there are so many lessons about perceptions and bias. DS says it's a microcosm of human life.

Could also learn about radicalising.

Just read stuff that is probably true but just confirms to your beliefs, don't hear the other side of the story, don't hear any context and only expose yourself to negative stories about a group - all of which serves to reinforce beliefs and views of people.

Rinse and repeat. Surround yourself with people with similar beliefs. Only hear negative stories about a group.

And that's how you radicalise people.

Easy to do

I think there are politically neutral points one can teach.

For example, you can show a typical example of a video of, say, a group of men attacking another man.

Then show two social media posts with the same video:
'Gang of Muslim migrants attack innocent British man in London'

'Gang of fascists attack innocent Iranian man in Copenhagen'

And ask them - is there actually anything in the video that tells you who the gang are and who their victim is and why they are attacking him? Or where it actually is?

So they learn to consider they shouldn't just accept what they're told about a picture or video, especially if it's not connected to any reputable source that will have checked its facts.

He's trying to get Trump elected.

He doesn't care about the UK government.

Its all about the upcoming US election and the electoral fracture points in the US.

Don't frame it as trying to bring down the British government. He'd have to care about the UK government enough to be trying to do that. He doesn't.

That's a great idea. I also like the video where people don't spot the gorilla.

@Echobelly but who are the reputable sources? That question has to be on the table. And sometimes the answer will be “none”.

I think it’s concerning if there’s not some of this already - I’m sure there must be, but then maybe my 8yr old gets more of her critical thinking skills at home than at school, I’m not sure. But totally agree that it should be woven in to all subjects, children always asked to consider why/how they know what they think is fact or truth.

I also think debate is a lost art and children should be taught more about how to respectfully disagree and make counter arguments, be able to summarise the opposing view and refute it etc. I guess these skills are age dependent to a large extent as well but like you say can be woven in in various ways.

I'm not sure how wittering on about Two Tier Keir is going to hit the average potential Trump voter. About as much as I care about JD Vance? I suspect he's pissed off about the free speech stuff though. He was obsessed with Venezuela a couple of weeks ago.

The thing that worries me a bit is that if we tell the kids to doubt everything they see then they'll end up totally neurotic. Surely we should just be telling them where the reliable sources are so they can double check things?

The problem is that most reliable sources are behind a paywall. Can the schools get access to decent paid sources that the kids could read in school?

The FT offers free subscription to 16-19 year olds, but not under 16s. It's a shame because my DS has been reading it since he was about 12 with no problem at all.

ftforschools-worldofwork.live.ft.com/#:~:text=The%20Financial%20Times%20offers%20free,further%20education%20in%20the%20UK.

I think gaining critical thinking skills must be integral to the existing curriculum already to a certain extent, but it would be good if this could be reviewed and extra content encouraging critical thinking added in where possible.

Well, these days the BBC print articles referring to male criminals as being women. So unfortunately, the BBC being an honest and reliable source of news is no longer the case. Will TWAW be counted in "putrid fake news", or will it just be the easy stuff?