Brains, Calculators, and the Purpose of School

In the 1970s, when personal calculators first started showing up in homes, schools almost universally banned them. Parents could use calculators for taxes or balancing the checkbook, but students couldn’t bring them to math class. The reasoning was simple and understandable: if kids had calculators, they’d skip the hard work of problem-solving. They’d miss out on learning how to think.

A professor named Dr. Robert McKinney summed it up well back then in the New York Times saying: “I have yet to be convinced that handing them a machine and teaching them how to push the buttons is the right approach to teaching math. What will they do when the battery runs out?” At the time, it was a fair concern. But batteries gave way to solar panels, then calculators showed up on cell phones, and now artificial intelligence that can solve nearly any problem instantly. The “battery dying” is no longer a good enough reason.

Still, the bigger question remains: what happens to learning when tools do the work for us?

Why We Banned Calculators (and Why That Still Matters)

The logic of banning calculators wasn’t about punishing kids. It was about making sure students learned the process of thinking. Anyone who has watched a child wrestle with long division or fractions knows it isn’t easy. But that struggle creates growth.

I was reminded of this with my son Jack. One night, he was working on finding common denominators and hit the familiar wall of frustration: “Dad, why do I even have to do this? Can’t I just use a calculator?”

The easy answer would’ve been yes. But the truth is, the point isn’t the denominators, but what’s happening in his brain. Neuroscience calls it neuroplasticity, the brain forming new pathways when it’s challenged. That kind of growth doesn’t come from shortcuts. Repetition builds automaticity, making problem-solving faster and more intuitive.

So, yes, I told him, you’ve got to push through the hard work.

No calculator.

Not because you’ll spend your adult life finding common denominators, but because doing hard things makes your brain stronger for everything else. And math is often hard.

Innovation That is Helpful

Here’s the thing though, I haven't had to find a common denominator is 30 years. I can't be a lot of help to him with his homework just by using my own knowledge (please don't tell my 6th grade math teacher this). So 30 years ago I would just have to tell him to try his best and see if his teacher can help him in class the next day (his teacher who has 119 other students).

But it's not 30 years ago. When I help Jack with his math homework, I pull out my phone, open ChatGPT, and ask it to explain fractions “like I’m a sixth grader.” And it walks us, step-by-step, how to find a common denominator in language he understands. 

Suddenly, I’m equipped to help him with math, and he learns better.

That’s innovation at work. It doesn’t replace teaching or brain-building; it adds value to it. Just like calculators eventually became standard on AP exams and in classrooms across the world, new technology like AI is here to stay. Schools can’t just resist; we have to figure out how to use it well.

True innovation, in my mind, isn’t throwing out tradition whenever something shiny comes along. It’s adding value to what already works.

Tradition, Innovation, and the Arts

I was reminded of this balance when I spent time with a group of art and music teachers this summer. Their classes aren’t just about painting or playing an instrument. Neuroscientists will tell you that when students engage in the arts, they’re activating the left and right sides of the brain at the same time. They’re connecting the analytical left side of the brain with the abstract, creative right side. They’re also practicing collaboration, empathy, self-expression, and confidence.

These are transferable skills. They’re life skills. Art and music remind us that not everything in school is about efficiency or immediate utility. Some practices have deep, enduring value that shapes who students become. They should not be discarded just because the world is more technological.

And that’s the point: we need both. The timeless practices that grow brains and hearts, and the innovative tools that make learning richer and more accessible.

The Litmus Test for Innovation in School

So how do we decide what to keep and what to change? For me, it comes down to a simple litmus test:

Does this practice or innovation help students develop into their full potential?

If banning calculators helps build brain power, great. Sometimes we need to restrict technology. If using AI as a tutor helps a student catch up, also great. If art and music grow creativity, empathy, and collaboration, they’re essential. The goal isn’t tradition for tradition’s sake, or innovation just because it’s new. The goal is to help students become the graduates, the people, we know they can be: creative, resilient, collaborative, empathetic, and prepared to thrive.

School needs to evolve with the times, but not at the expense of what makes it meaningful. It should hold onto what’s timeless and embrace what’s new, as long as both help students grow into their full potential.

That’s the purpose of school.