British schools are removing analog clocks from classrooms because kids can't read them

Leaning cursive writing and alphabet letter formation at least helps penmanship. Using an analog clock instead of a digital one does nothing but provide aesthetics. This coming from a person who won't buy a digital watch, except for use while swimming.

Looking at the face of an analog timepiece, one can get the big picture right away.

Time, not so much. I really don't see an advantage one way or the other. I can get a general sense of the time of day from observing the position of the sun, in most situations that is adequate. Analog clocks and watches are certainly more elegant than the dreadful digital stuff, but are of no more practical importance.

It's the same as using a paper calendar that shows an expanse of time with "now" always in some context. Thank you for identifying why I still want these tools. I can't help but think this relates to attention. Hello, let me introduce myself, I am old.

The brain can look at an analog clock and instantly decipher mot only the absolute time, but graphically estimate the difference between the current time and some future or past benchmark. No math required.

Look at the instruments in an airplane's cockpit. The critical tools for navigation are usually analog.

makes it quickly obvious. As you point out this is why even in the modern "glass" digital airplane cockpits many parameters
are still displayed in analog fashion rather than just as a single number.

what happens when they read, do a math problem, etc. -- those things are much harder to learn.

The analog clockfaces are confusing because in the main they’ve literally never encountered one. They’ve spent their entire lives telling time via digital readouts on phones, televisions, computers, tablets, ovens, microwaves, car dashboards, and sometimes even watches.

Could they learn? Sure, I made sure my kids learned. Do they need to? Not really. Honestly, outside my house my kids don’t use analog clocks.

My generation never learned to use a slide rule, but I still learned math to a fairly advanced level using a scientific calculator with a graphing function. If the kids know what time it is, who cares which style of clockface they used to determine that information?

Took about 10 seconds to go digital.
I thought the purpose of education is to learn how to figure things out.

I bought a burger & fries for $6.64 recently. In my pocket I had four pennies; I took a five-dollar bill and two ones, and I added the four pennies. You would've thought I had asked that girl at the register to solve Fermat's last theorem! For the life of her, she couldn't figure out that I had given her $7.04, and should get back 40 cents in change!

More than that, I am simply astounded at the inability of many younger folks to do rough mental arithmetic. They just can't do it! They have to pull out a cell phone, open the calculator app, and punch it in (and they still can't get correct answers because they lack the concept of order of operations).

is that the cashier is on the other side of the transaction, and can't process it very fast.

I know. I've been a cashier and a customer. When I'm a customer and give the cashier the change, I've already figured it out in my head. But when I'm working the cash register, being given the change amount confuses me very time.

easily enough, and the oldest knows her PEMDAS. The younger one may not be at that point, but he’s very comfortable with math and I’m certain it won’t be an issue.

This may be a regional phenomenon; our local elementary school seems more rigorous than others.

My first grader has learned to read an analog clock, and I'm happy about it. Her school also teaches cursive writing in 2nd and 3rd grade.

I know a lot of people think they're pointless now, but they're both skills that her school takes time to teach. I'm thrilled with it.

... Although I recall strongly resenting the imposition of what used to be called (good) "education", one did come to learn, eventually, to appreciate it.

I was reading the post and looking for someone to say something about "Big Ben."

Damn, you're good!

the "concept" that impressed me - and loved the idea.

I taught first grade until a few years ago and I taught my students both ways. If they ever try to get rid of cursive I would still teach that too. It is time for educators and parents to wake up. If a little kid can learn how to use a tablet by the time they are 5, then thet are perfectly capable of learning how to read an analog clock. It seems to me that the adults are being losers and lazy.

There are youtube videos even.

I could teach 6 year olds and as their "final exam" I put my analog watch which has no numbers even (just dots at the 3, 6 , 9 and 12) on the overhead projector and they could tell the time correctly. I wonder what kids are learning in home schools.

so forgot it. I had her learn it, but I have to wonder if it matters. Why teach things that don't are no longer relevant...times change...same is true of script...no one writes anymore...

From the airport, to the bank, to the store. It is necessary to know both. Cursive is still around and is needed to officially sign your name in many public and govt places, as well as reading old letters from people, watching and reading it in films, greeting cards, menus, older documents and records from the past, etc.

old fashioned Chemistry teacher...no one uses a slide rule today. Digital clocks or more accurate as well. I think these things will pass into the dustbin of history.

It's amazing what pre-schoolers can learn and remember. My grandson is now eleven, but he could do a United States map puzzle when he was 3 years old. He knew the names of all the states and where each state goes on the puzzle. Then he learned all the name of the state capitols, and he could tell us something about each state. "Michigan is where they build cars." "Minnesota is the Land of Lakes." etc. By the time he was 5 he could name many of the Presidents and what order they served in office. "Abraham Lincoln was the 16th President."

What it takes is adults (parents or older siblings) who are interested in teaching and relating to their children, and keeping them engaged. There are endless possiblities for spelling games, number games, simple fractions, easy addition and subtraction. Last year I taught my grandson how to spell Punxsutawney, which to me is a very hard name to learn and spell. He learned it and he still knows it, so he'll probably never forget it. I gave him a $5 reward for that.

As for reading the analog clock, it's an important skill for estimating arcs such as quarter-circle or half-circle. If they never learn the clock positions, how can anyone follow directions like "Make a two o'clock right turn"? There are still situations where the knowledge of dials and dial-reading is required even when it's not a clock. Science is not all digital and the younger generation needs this skill.

themselves at home but there is no excuse for schools.

in SCHOOL!!!

it's not that hard and would certainly be worth it. I find it very sad this has happened.

My youngest step-son has never seen a record player.

They can't tell time, make phone calls, read real books, or write clearly.

what happens when the digital is not available for some reason?

What really bothers me no end is and has been the number of kids who have no idea where carrots come from, no idea what a home-cooked waffle is.
I have known 10-11 year olds like that. They have smart phones, tho.

We missed one by a day or two in 2012.

If we have one similar to 1859, the human race is toast.

Just imagine nuclear plants not being able to get their reactors into a safe mode...all over the world.

Most of them will have no way to do it, as the electronics will have been fried.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/nuclear-power-plants-the-very-real-possibility-of-a-global-nuclear-catastrophe/29951

Losing electricity to the house for a few days or weeks would be an inconvenience.

A few weeks is all we would have.

Fukushima Daiichi is a textbook example now.

Kids are still being taught to read, I assure you. Real books even; my daughter is reading 1984 right now.

And I can recall that even in the long-ago era when I was in school there were plenty of illiterate-ass motherfuckers, even without X-Boxes.

That can't possibly be true. I mean, that's how I remember it, too, but we must be wrong, because only the young people of today could be so stupid.

in a store in which the clerk has to return change to you. If it ain't exact, or on a debit or credit card, they get that panicked "stunned deer caught in headlights" look.

Likewise few people can double clutch cars, or ride a horse, or darn socks, or cut a quill pen, or.....

never learned a single new thing since they left high school. Why else would they think it's such an impossible thing to do?

You would think that they're upset because kids are not being taught the skills to drive a horse and buggy.

Are they upset that kids don't know how to use a rotary phone? (I'm 38 and have seen one but never used one. I haven't picked up a landline phone, even at work, in almost a decade).

LIke it or not, we live in the digital age now. Kids in school today grew up around electronics. My 3 yo niece knows how to shoot video from an iPhone. Her older sister knew how to take selfies at 2.

some of us older folks remember that there were/are plenty of ignorant-ass people in our generations. Believe me, I know what I'm talking about - I went to high school in Alabama!

If these self-righteous superior-feeling oldsters need any reminding that there are plenty of dumbasses in our generations, just ask them which age group votes Republican most reliably. Hint: It ain't the young people.

on a manual, limited synchromesh, gearbox... Such a pleasure to have once learned... and to continue to be able to do so, when necessary, to this day, 45 years later

in the 60s, first car was a 1930 Model A Ford. Had to double clutch shifting up and shifting down, no syncromesh at all. Still own an A ford, still have to double clutch. The good old days.

as usual. Par for the course, almost a professional requirement, apparently.

that my old prof once joked he was going to take my quiz sheet to CVS and see if a Pharmacist would fill it!

All 3 of my adult step-children's print penmanship is like the scriblings of a 1st or 2nd grader. One of them, as I said, is in med school, another is a medical lab assistant supervisor and the 3rd is a welder/fabricator in a shop.

Technology moves on

"... The use of the bells to mark the time stems from the period when seamen (1) could not afford a personal time piece (i.e. - a watch) and (2) even if they could, they had no idea on how to tell time with such an instrument. The bells mark the hours of the watch in half-hour increments. The seamen would know if it were morning, noon, or night. Each watch* is four hours long and the bells are struck thus:
Mid Morning Forenoon Afternoon Dogs* First
0030 - 1 bell 0430 - 1 bell 0830 - 1 bell 1230 - 1 bell 1630 - 1 bell 2030 - 1 bell
0100 - 2 bells 0500 - 2 bells 0900 - 2 bells 1300 - 2 bells 1700 - 2 bells 2100 - 2 bells
0130 - 3 bells 0530 - 3 bells 0930 - 3 bells 1330 - 3 bells 1730 - 3 bells 2130 - 3 bells
0200 - 4 bells 0600 - 4 bells 1000 - 4 bells 1400 - 4 bells 1800 - 4 bells 2200 - 4 bells
0230 - 5 bells 0630 - 5 bells 1030 - 5 bells 1430 - 5 bells 1830 - 5 bells 2230 - 5 bells
0300 - 6 bells 0700 - 6 bells 1100 - 6 bells 1500 - 6 bells 1900 - 6 bells 2300 - 6 bells
0330 - 7 bells 0730 - 7 bells 1130 - 7 bells 1530 - 7 bells 1930 - 7 bells 2330 - 7 bells
0400 - 8 bells** 0800 - 8 bells 1200 - 8 bells 1600 - 8 bells 2000 - 8 bells 2400 - 8 bells
Notes: * - The period from 1600 to 2000 is split into two dog watches. These watches run from 1600 to 1800 and from 1800 to 2000. This alternates the daily watch routine so Sailors on the mid-watch would not have it the second night, and, the split also gives each watchstander the opportunity to eat the evening meal.
** - The end of the watch is considered at 8 bells, hence the saying "Eight Bells and All Is Well."

http://www.navy.mil/navydata/questions/bells.html

... Also, maybe kids' intellectual curiosity could be stimulated through teaching this kind of history:

"... Before the middle of the twentieth century, most people did not have watches, and prior to the 18th century even home clocks were rare. The first clocks didn't have faces, but were solely striking clocks, which sounded bells to call the surrounding community to work or to prayer. They were therefore placed in towers so the bells would be audible for a long distance. Clock towers were placed near the centres of towns and were often the tallest structures there. As clock towers became more common, the designers realized that a dial on the outside of the tower would allow the townspeople to read the time whenever they wanted.


The Tower of the Winds in Athens, dates back to around 50 BC.
The use of clock towers dates back to the antiquity. The earliest clock tower was the Tower of the Winds in Athens which featured eight sundials. In its interior, there was also a water clock (or clepsydra), driven by water coming down from the Acropolis.[1] In Song China, an astronomical clock tower was designed by Su Song and erected at Kaifeng in 1088, featuring a liquid escapement mechanism. In England, a clock was put up in a clock tower, the medieval precursor to Big Ben, at Westminster, in 1288;[2][3] and in 1292 a clock was put up in Canterbury Cathedral.[2] The oldest surviving turret clock formerly part of a clock tower in Europe is the Salisbury cathedral clock, completed in 1306; and another clock put up at St. Albans, in 1326, 'showed various astronomical phenomena'.[2]

Al-Jazari Castle clock Edit
Al-Jazari constructed an elaborate clock and described it in his Book of Knowledge of Ingenious Mechanical Devices in 1206. It was about 3.3 metres (11 feet) high, and had multiple functions alongside timekeeping. It included a display of the zodiac and the solar and lunar paths, and a pointer in the shape of the crescent moon which travelled across the top of a gateway, moved by a hidden cart and causing automatic doors to open, each revealing a mannequin, every hour.[4][5] It was possible to re-program the length of day and night daily in order to account for the changing lengths of day and night throughout the year, and it also featured five robotic musicians who automatically play music when moved by levers operated by a hidden camshaft attached to a water wheel. Other components of the castle clock included a main reservoir with a float, a float chamber and flow regulator, plate and valve trough, two pulleys, crescent disc displaying the zodiac, and two falcon automata dropping balls into vases.[6] ..."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clock_tower

(Please forgive my perhaps a little dry (Brit) sense of humour )

I'm all for kids or adults learning the history of time keeping for their own intellectual curiosity. I think it's a great idea.

That said kids today tell the time using digital technology. I have no problem with that. I haven't owned a pen with a nib that I fill with ink in decades.

everything digital, outside the most hardened military systems, will cease to function. Then what?

I think the second most important subject kids should be taught to be intellectually stimulated (and well-informed) by is History. The first most important subject, of course, is how to just be here now.

will teach the rest of them History is way more important than folks realize.

Let's look on the bright side

so they'll learn how to tell time from them. Learning should be about learning things you don't know not just giving up on those things! I learned at home from my parents how to tell time before I even started school.

or properly crack a buggy whip either. This is really not a big deal; they’re using the tools of their era, which are digital in nature.

Seems like a teachable moment.

Clock faces were an artifact of clock technology, not because it's the best way to tell time. That technology is now obsolete.

This is like the cursive writing pearl clutching.

I made sure my kids learned analog clock faces as a personal preference, but unless they’re in our living room it’s something they just don’t have to do.

And they’ve both learned cursive, though my oldest has drifted back to a very neat printing and my youngest has the penmanship of a drunken monkey no matter what writing style he uses.

We spent a third of every class day on penmanship, 40% on arithmetic and the rest on reading. If we faltered on penmanship, an entire class was dedicated to that. She would stand over us as we wrote and correct us on the spot if needed.

promptly refused to continue using it. I like to print; it’s neater and I print very quickly. My daughter did the same.

Cursive was faster for me, but my colleagues had no clue on how to read my notes. Fortunately I had block lettering drilled into me years earlier, so I switched rather seamlessly. Now I use block letter writing and typing on a keyboard. But I still love me some analog watches, will only use digital ones in a very limited capacity. That said about watched, I really see no issue with kids not being able to read analog. I think that it was you that asked what would happen in a complete power out situation. Well, there are batteries and if things get much worse than that, telling time would be among the least of our worries, plus, there is always old reliable King Sol, I can generally tell time within 15 minutes from the position of the sun in the sky - in a situation where that would be urgently needed, my argument is that being generally right is good enough, because I would be facing larger problems.

http://time.com/2820780/five-reasons-kids-should-still-learn-cursive-writing/

Research suggests that printing letters and writing in cursive activate different parts of the brain. Learning cursive is good for children’s fine motor skills, and writing in longhand generally helps students retain more information and generate more ideas. Studies have also shown that kids who learn cursive rather than simply manuscript writing score better on reading and spelling tests, perhaps because the linked-up cursive forces writers to think of words as wholes instead of parts.

association does not equal causation.

And we can develop fine motor skills with art and music.

As an engineer, I had no problem composing writings on a computer. When I tried the same with novel writing, I could not do one paragraph, I realized that I could think more freely and create fictional situations faster if I wrote in longhand, that is how I write the first draft of everything now.

Learned to use keyboards as a programmer, but for creative writing cursive, very slanted, handwriting works for me.

Finding that out was a revelation for me since my whole professional life has been in the digital composition era. Maybe older engineers who actually hand wrote presentations or reports and either typed them or gave them to an office manager to manage the typing process aren't surprised by what I found out.

Bur a lot folks don’t think that way. And you don’t need to use cursive to write manually.

I found that making liner notes and writing near the bottom of the page is easier when I use cursive, otherwise I block letter write.

I kind of just free write... non-fiction or fiction, and then it's easy to augment, or move stuff as I work on it. I tend to revise constantly.

Not that it prevents me from making mistakes because I have made plenty. Free hand writing, besides the other things that I pointed out, allow me to be loose with sentence and paragraph structure and just focus on the concepts that I am dealing with.

Different people have different styles, I accept that you doing first drafts as I now do them would create roadblocks for you and actually stymie your creativity. That is what makes the human species (hey, species word Doctor, you knocked some sense into my head ), soooo interesting.

hand written assignments . For many thier ages might as well be hieroglyphs.

people who are comfortable with analog clocks have a more accurate sense of the passing of time. IIRC, they told the participants to indicate when they thought a certain amount of time had passed. They started with short intervals of time (3 minutes, 5 minutes, 10 minutes) & increased it up to an hour. The longer the time frame, the more inaccurate the digital clock readers were on how much time had passed. Okay, so not a valuable skill, but still interesting.

is to draw a clock - an analog clock. It's designed to test for early signs of dementia. Psychologists will have to find an alternative, it appears.

Instead of going bong bong bong it will go beep beep beep.

It’s useless in a digital world.

What I find striking here isn’t a debate as to whether or not that way of telling time is obsolete, but rather just what in the hell is so hard about learning it in the first place? Not exactly an advanced concept, telling time. It’s right up there with learning to write your name or tie your shoes. And people find this difficult? Is it possible we’re getting dumber as a species?

Children should know MORE not less. The dumbing down of America hasn’t gotten us to a very intelligent place so far.
History, math, how to write your signature in cursive and reading the face of an analog clock.
Teach it. Learn it.

not the US.

That being said, I'd rather spend the time having them learn coding than analog time keeping.

Power. Dumbing down has been disastrous for the U.S.
You want the U.K. to be like America in that regard?

And besides, telling time on an analog clock isn't hard.

The little dustbin lids can't read their kettles?

work fine when the batteries drain dry

If it's a clock (and so can't be self-winding, like a watch that moves around), then it uses mains electricity, batteries, or someone winds it up regularly.

I knew that there were sixty minutes in an hour (from asking my mom) and just counted the little dashes in between numbers and realized that there were five dashes in between each number for twelve numbers, and it wasn't hard to figure out the rest. They could literally solve this issue with maybe a few hours of instruction. It's not hard.

although it took me several more years to master tying my shoes.

Imagine if they took calculators out of even grade schools. I wonder how many kids these days could do even simple math problems using just their brains, paper and pencil?
I took a statistics class at a tech college when I was in my early 40s and hadn't had any kind of math class that used algebra in over 25 years. Imagine my surprise when I was told I could use a calculator. A calculator! There were kids in the class who had just graduated high school in the year or 2 before and they were in a total panic.
In the end the 'old' man was one of the only 2 people in the class to get an A. The other person was another 'nontraditional' student also about my age.

that what couldn't figure out on my own I asked my parents. What happened to kids being curious and wanting to learn what they don't know.

My son's 6 and 7 yr old friends had no idea how to read these clocks.

Confession. I visualize an analog clock to 'feel' how much time I have to the appointment, pizza delivery, etc

Learning to read an analog clock should take a matter of minutes unless there's some disfunction taking place, lack of spacial recognition, lack of basic mechanical skill, I don't know. It's not an unrealistic expectation to read a clock with minimal effort unless something is missing.

It reminds me of Roman numerals. At one time they were common in American life, but in the 1970s and 80s, not so much. I learned them as a kid and could convert any of them in my head, but as an adult I have to think them through.

and if they never put the skill into practical use, some can forget it. From the original TES article:

Isn't this a skill they utilize every school day of those 10 years?

They didn't in my time, and that was in the 70s and 80s. Sure, nearly all clocks then were analogue, but that doesn't mean there was one in each classroom. There are fewer and fewer analogue clocks around places, since digital ones are cheap, and often a general computerised information screen can be more useful, that incorporates a digital clock with all kinds of other things. And that is what the mobile phone has become.

I just served on a (real-life) jury in the UK, and when a jury goes to deliberate, they have to hand over all their phones. Having done this, we realised after, perhaps, a couple of hours that only about a third of us had watches, and there was no clock in the room. And that was adults, all, I think, over 30. I was also told by a teenager recently that they disliked the way older people use "twenty to nine" as a way of expressing the time, because they always think of that as 8:40.

While I can read an analog clock fine, I can't remember when the last time I looked at one was. I don't own one (and don't wear a watch). I think I learned how to read one in K or 1st grade.

What does confuse me is when people say things like 'it is quarter to three.' I have to think for a minute what they actually mean. If someone told me it was 2:45 I process that immediately. In the digital age, rounding of time is unnecessary (and can possibly make someone late).

60/4=15*3=45.

However, in the context that most (older) people are saying it, they're still rounding. When they say 'half past 3' it could be 3:37. If it is 3:37 just tell me that. What I was trying to say is 'quarter' and 'half" take me longer to process than just saying 3:37 would.

It was even more confusing when I took Spanish because telling time in Spanish is always the 'quarter to' type and not the exact time. I have a hard enough processing 'quarter to' in my own language, let alone another.

Ever since middle school, nothing ever started at typical times. From (then) my class schedule (first bell was 7:42) to public transportation to flights, we don't operate by rounding to the nearest 5/10 minutes. Showing up to class at 7:45 instead of 7:42 would have landed me in detention. Showing up a minute late for a train/bus means that you'll probably miss it.

me to keep practicing so I get better I will try to not be so sloppy.
No No I am sure it is nice writing I just am not used to it when reading papers .
With that response he told us she gave, we suspect she may be very young and not good in reading / writing cursive herself
She came in mid year to the school for one of his classes and that's fine he will not use cursive in her class we told him just remember to print for that class.
We both think you can get your thoughts on paper faster from your brain with cursive but this is one of the few classes anyway where they are not putting it in thier laptops anyway and typing will be the most important skill for getting out you thoughts for his gen imo

It doesn't take long. I started with the hour O'clocks and added to it little by little. A few minutes a week was all it took. Geeze.

It's actually 11:58:00!

looks like an analog clock, but measures time in days, so only one big hand moves slowly in the spaces marked Monday, Tuesday, etc.
runs on batteries, like the several analog clocks ion the house.

Right now it says it is almost the end of Sunday.

I had to be taught how to read a clock. I guess that's no longer possible...

"A quarter to three, and no one in the place..."

Ten to five won't mean anything either. This will change how we perceive time.

Or a slide rule.

No, wait. It's not shocking, at all. And neither is the fading away of analog clocks.

important to the plot, they wouldn't get it because looking at a round thing with a big hand and a little hand and 12 numbers on it is too difficult to figure out? My brains refuse to accept this.

if they know anyone at their school who can't read an analog clock. They said they don't know anyone who can't read one. Their schools are full of them.

Just sayin'

I see them sometimes in gardens and feel a lack because I can't figure them out. I wouldn't mind learning how to use them.

https://www.justenergysolar.com/blog/how-to-read-a-sundial/

Picked it up in about five minutes, and you can too. (Depending on the sundial, you may have to do a bit of quick math, but nothing more than basic subtraction.)

I, being somewhat of a traditionalist fuddy, duddy was assuming we would buy a sextant to navigate in the gulf just like my great, great, grandfather did. Imagine my chagrin when the wife insisted we get a new-fangled GPS instead. And we tell the depth with a fancy sonar rather than simply throwing a line. Don’t know what we are coming to.

in your head.

STOP THE DEVOLUTION NOW.

I'm young enough to have been school-aged when both digital and analog clocks were truly ubiquitous, a genuine mix.

I still remember, albeit vaguely, doing classroom exercises and worksheets with clock faces and various times, when I was 5 or 6, maybe even 7 years old. Within the past decade I have babysat my youngest cousins whilst they were doing their homework with the same.

Maybe if your adolescents/teens don't know how to read analog clocks it is because you didn't bothered to teach them? THAT'S YOUR DECISION, NOT A QUALITY/CHARACTERISTIC OF THEM.

If you decide that it is a skill kids don't/won't need, then just own that decision. Embrace your judgment. Declare that you have staked out this as your position. If you think it is important, then TEACH THEM THAT. Don't pretend you are a leaf floating on the breeze that is the kids you're supposed to be teaching.

Reminded me to go down the street and purchase an analogue alarm clock, the kind with bells. The digital beeps don't do it for me.

their history. Good to know. Think of how proud they'll be when they master the art of telling time on an analog clock.

That is the 600 year old clock in Prague. What time is it?

No way our kids could have missed out reading them.

But maybe they're not so quick to use rough measures of time like "half past" or a "quarter 'til."

We had to learn those in school, too.

which would have been in 1958, I could not tell time. Neither could about half of the kids in my class. My wonderful fourth grade teacher already knew that a lot of kids hadn't learned that skill yet, and spent the first week of school teaching us. It really can take longer than five minutes.

Oh, and for those of us who still like analog clocks and own analog watches, do you ever even say, "It's quarter to five" or "Half past eleven" when someone asks you for the time. If anyone ever even does these days. In reality, those usages have long since fallen away because so many clocks are digital these days.

It takes my brain at least twice as much time to process it. I'd rather just hear the exact time.

at half past eight {adv} um halb neun
at half past five {adv} um halb sechs
at half past four {adv} um halb fünf
at half past nine {adv} um halb zehn
at half past one {adv} um halb zwei
at half past seven {adv} um halb acht
at half past ten {adv} um halb elf
at half past three {adv} um halb vier
at half past two {adv} um halb drei
at half-past eleven {adv} um halb zwölf
at half-past nine {adv} um halb zehn
at half-past twelve {adv} um halb eins

https://www.dict.cc/?s=half+past+six

My 3 adult step-children cannot write in cursive and their print penmanship looks like something a 1st grader would produce. I can see that all three have a very good command of the English language when I read their e-mails and texts but reading anything handwritten by them can be a challenge.

Oh the humanity.

Since it would clear up a lot of responses.

The original report was in the Times Educational Supplement, which said "Schools say they have had to install digital clocks in their exam halls". The point being about the public exams that students sit from about age 16 onwards (which are timed, and I presume no phones are allowed in). That was picked up by the British Daily Telegraph and the BBC, which were also clear that this was about the clocks placed in the exam halls.

But the AJC, perhaps not used to the typical way public exams are taken in the UK (at desks set out in the school hall or similar large area, normally) has changed that to "in the classroom", though when they say what was tweeted, it does say "exam hall". The point is that analogue clocks have already disappeared from so many places that, when it's time to give the students a clock for their exams (and many will not have a watch these days, and you're not allowing them their phones), the analogue clock may be something they haven't actually used in 10 years, and then only in a maths class when they were 6.

I've got a lot of UK friends so I've been familiar enough with it (and watch way too much TV from there) so I figured out the basics of it all and I could understand it since it tracks similar to my own kids here in the US

Both are in high school - one graduating in a few weeks - and they did all the clock stuff when they were in the first three grades or so. But other than seeing the clocks in school, there wasn't anyplace else that they saw them. And most of their days are by the bell, not the clock itself. Once they got to middle school, which was built new, it was all digital in there. exposure dropped to zero. It wasn't a huge skill they had but it became a lost one. And one that even if they pick it up again they won't use all that often. I can't remember the last time as an adult I saw an analog clock.

When they go out in the world it's unlikely every clock they see will be digital.

It makes me feel old. That's enough, isn't it?

We've all learned stuff in school that we have forgotten, like foreign languages, or that Pluto is a planet. I also learned a lot of historical "facts" that turned out to be completely false.

how this happened...but I am working with her.

Although we had analog clocks in the house the main one in the family room was a flip clock that used numbers for the display. I had to learn to read an analog clock face when I got to school.

I still mentally convert analog clocks to a digital number though as my vision gets worse it is easier to read an analog face than a digital display.

The schools should jut teach the kids how to read analog clocks. It is not that hard to learn how to read an analog clock.