Of course, just as Gutting asked 'who decides what is of real value?', I ask: Who decides what is to be taught? It's a difficult question. What do you guys think?From our infancy the market itself has worked to make us consumers, primed to buy whatever it is selling regardless of its relevance to human flourishing. True freedom requires that we take part in the market as fully formed agents, with life goals determined not by advertising campaigns but by our own experience of and reflection on the various possibilities of human fulfillment. Such freedom in turn requires a liberating education, one centered not on indoctrination, social conditioning or technical training but on developing persons capable of informed and intelligent commitments to the values that guide their lives.
This is why, especially in our capitalist society, education must not be primarily for training workers or consumers (both tools of capitalism, as Marxists might say). Rather, schools should aim to produce self-determining agents who can see through the blandishments of the market and insist that the market provide what they themselves have decided they need to lead fulfilling lives. Capitalism, with its devotion to profit, is not in itself evil. But it becomes evil when it controls our choices for the sake of profit.
Capitalism works for the good only when our independent choices determine what the market must produce to make a profit. These choices — of liberally educated free agents — will set the standards of capitalist production and lead to a world in which, as Aristotle said, work is for the sake of leisure. We are, unfortunately, far from this ideal, but it is one worth working toward.
Work: What is it good for?
- Zack Morris
- Posts: 2837
- Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2011 8:52 am
- Location: Bayside High School
Work: What is it good for?
An interesting article about the relative virtue of work and leisure from Notre Dame's philosophy faculty: What Work is Really For. Prof. Gutting does a good job grappling with the complexity and ambiguity of questioning the value of work and asking what the appropriate balance between work and leisure should be. He reaches an interesting conclusion and offers that education might resolve the problem:
Re: Work: What is it good for?
Excellent subject, Zack, thanks.
And an excellent book* on the subject is On the Unseriousness of Human Affairs: Teaching, Writing, Playing, Believing, Lecturing, Philosophizing, Singing, Dancing by Fr. James Schall:
And an excellent book* on the subject is On the Unseriousness of Human Affairs: Teaching, Writing, Playing, Believing, Lecturing, Philosophizing, Singing, Dancing by Fr. James Schall:
From Publishers Weekly
Although Schall's title might seem to promise a romp through the Elysian Fields with Epicurus and Nietzsche, nothing could be further from the truth. Recruiting philosophy and literary theory into an inspirational narrative, Father Schall (A Student's Guide to Liberal Learning), who teaches at Georgetown University, contends that "unseriousness" derives from the realization that while humankind is not the highest thing in existence, human beings are good. Humanity's joy, then, comes in its celebration of being-in-the-world; those enjoyable activities, which might seem like wasting time, are in fact related to "our transcendent destiny," our spirituality. Taking passages from Plato, Augustine, Aquinas, Dante and Chesterton, Schall argues that our lives have a particular gravity, but that they are unserious compared to the seriousness of God. Our lives are merely, then, responses to an order that exists beyond us, and Schall demonstrates through readings of philosophers ranging from Aristotle to Peanuts' Charlie Brown that various unserious behaviors playing, dancing, singing, writing provide the skills to connect to that transcendent order. For example, he observes that "[e]ssays keep us alert to the wonder of things," and "[l]etters keep us in touch when we are not literally before those whom we would see face to face." Schall weaves together his meditations with theological interludes in which he explores briefly such topics as redemption, salvation and eschatology. Although these reflections do not break any new ground or open up any radically different channels of discussion, Schall's book will appeal to fans of C.S. Lewis, Chesterton and Peter Kreeft.
From Booklist
Letters and essays are Schall's favorite reading, and the leisurely concentration characteristic of those forms distinguishes his own writings, which both entrance and infuriate. What is entrancing about them stems from the religiously informed perspective suggested by the book's title--that the most human actions (see the subtitle) aren't necessary but recreational--and from Schall's citing and reciting of ideas that his career as a teacher has verified, such as the observation of Saint-Exupery's Little Prince that the only time that counts is the time we "waste" with friends. His essays infuriate when they don't seem to come to the point; "On the Teaching of Political Philosophy," for instance, Schall talks little about statecraft but much about ascertaining the truth--the object of philosophy per se. They also infuriate by recommending self-discipline, rejecting moral relativism, holding with Samuel Johnson that the highest truths "are too important to be new," and taking other positions that bespeak Schall's status as a priest as well as a professor. On the other hand, they delight for the same reasons.
- *And if Ib wonders, yes, I've read it . .
"The jawbone of an ass is just as dangerous a weapon today as in Sampson's time."
--- Richard Nixon
******************
"I consider looseness with words no less of a defect than looseness of the bowels."
—John Calvin
--- Richard Nixon
******************
"I consider looseness with words no less of a defect than looseness of the bowels."
—John Calvin
Re: Work: What is it good for?
The article questions the ability of our educational system to prepare kids to make informed decisions about what is good for them, and as a parent, I must agree. Schools are too busy cramming test answers into kid's heads, there is no mandate to teach them how to think. It's clear that we parents have a duty to teach our children to think critically, yet most parents, themselves the products of a woefully inadequate education, often have little to draw on to accomplish this goal, if they even recognize the need.
Consumerism is not the the only hazard facing an uncritical mind.
Consumerism is not the the only hazard facing an uncritical mind.
- Miss_Faucie_Fishtits
- Posts: 2153
- Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 9:58 pm
Re: Work: What is it good for?
You don't teach people how to think if you don't believe there is thinking in the first place.....'>.........
She irons her jeans, she's evil.........
- Juggernaut Nihilism
- Posts: 1417
- Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2012 7:55 pm
Re: Work: What is it good for?
Tough to figure out what an education that is not also a cultural indoctrination would look like. I'm skeptical that such a thing is even possible. During the whole post-war period, education was focused on turning out obedient workers, sure, but there was also a very explicit project to break down and question the inherited belief systems and traditions that formerly bound thought and affect. But we can see now that we weren't freeing anyone; we were simply replacing one dogmatic regime with another. And I don't know if it is possible to do anything else. Or that such a thing would be desirable if it was. It seems that men cannot function very well without a strong structuring system to provide context and motivation for their actions and thoughts, but structure itself implies inclusion/exclusion, good/taboo, us/them, and a whole host of prejudices and arbitrary assumptions. These are all necessary for human life. The thing is, they seem to stop working as soon as we become aware that they exist. No set of initial assumptions can ever stand up to rational analysis.
We can consciously try to develop certain values through the education system, but it will be the unelucidated values that inform the system itself that will be the true structuring elements.
We can consciously try to develop certain values through the education system, but it will be the unelucidated values that inform the system itself that will be the true structuring elements.
"The fundamental rule of political analysis from the point of psychology is, follow the sacredness, and around it is a ring of motivated ignorance."
Re: Work: What is it good for?
Non-indoctrinational education is easy to imagine.
Give every student an iPad that has all the core curriculum on it or access to a server with all the core materials, including online robo-tutorials. Have people in a big area with teaching assistant's roaming around who can be summoned like airline stewardesses any time you have a problem. Have a call-center full of librarians ready to field any research question. Have small auditorium classrooms where you can sit in on lectures that regard subject matter. Arrange the hierarchy of 'grading' like video game 'achievements'. (Don't tell me kids won't grind out the achievements because they do it with no tangible payoff in games all the time.) The entire curriculum is just a set of certifications. You prove that you have mastered the subject matter by playing the educational games of each topic. People can work in groups or by themselves. If people focus too much on the subjects they are best at you can lock out those subjects until they complete others. Like if someone is great at English only allow them to do English coursework 1 hour for every 5 of Algebra they do until they complete the Algebra coursework. You can put mandatory certification requirements that have a set timeframe. You can also have constant refresher quizzes that tell you if a student needs additional coursework in a subject they are already certified in. If a kid needs remedial education in one subject they can go and find the tutor on their own or the tutor finds them and not be removed from a class in front of all the other kids.
Give every student an iPad that has all the core curriculum on it or access to a server with all the core materials, including online robo-tutorials. Have people in a big area with teaching assistant's roaming around who can be summoned like airline stewardesses any time you have a problem. Have a call-center full of librarians ready to field any research question. Have small auditorium classrooms where you can sit in on lectures that regard subject matter. Arrange the hierarchy of 'grading' like video game 'achievements'. (Don't tell me kids won't grind out the achievements because they do it with no tangible payoff in games all the time.) The entire curriculum is just a set of certifications. You prove that you have mastered the subject matter by playing the educational games of each topic. People can work in groups or by themselves. If people focus too much on the subjects they are best at you can lock out those subjects until they complete others. Like if someone is great at English only allow them to do English coursework 1 hour for every 5 of Algebra they do until they complete the Algebra coursework. You can put mandatory certification requirements that have a set timeframe. You can also have constant refresher quizzes that tell you if a student needs additional coursework in a subject they are already certified in. If a kid needs remedial education in one subject they can go and find the tutor on their own or the tutor finds them and not be removed from a class in front of all the other kids.
Men often oppose a thing merely because they have had no agency in planning it, or because it may have been planned by those whom they dislike.
-Alexander Hamilton
-Alexander Hamilton
Re: Work: What is it good for?
You are exactly right, and if you haven't read Michael Polanyi, you would enjoy him.Juggernaut Nihilism wrote:Tough to figure out what an education that is not also a cultural indoctrination would look like. I'm skeptical that such a thing is even possible. . . men cannot function very well without a strong structuring system to provide context and motivation for their actions and thoughts, but structure itself implies inclusion/exclusion, good/taboo, us/them, and a whole host of prejudices and arbitrary assumptions. These are all necessary for human life. The thing is, they seem to stop working as soon as we become aware that they exist. No set of initial assumptions can ever stand up to rational analysis.
We can consciously try to develop certain values through the education system, but it will be the unelucidated values that inform the system itself that will be the true structuring elements.
You lost it right there, Tinker . .Enki wrote:Non-indoctrinational education is easy to imagine.
Give every student an iPad that has all the core curriculum on it . .
"The jawbone of an ass is just as dangerous a weapon today as in Sampson's time."
--- Richard Nixon
******************
"I consider looseness with words no less of a defect than looseness of the bowels."
—John Calvin
--- Richard Nixon
******************
"I consider looseness with words no less of a defect than looseness of the bowels."
—John Calvin
Re: Work: What is it good for?
Sorry, I stopped reading there.Enki wrote:Non-indoctrinational education is easy to imagine.
Give every student an iPad...
Re: Work: What is it good for?
To whom?Zack Morris wrote:An interesting article about the relative virtue of work and leisure from Notre Dame's philosophy faculty: What Work is Really For. Prof. Gutting does a good job grappling with the complexity and ambiguity of questioning the value of work and asking what the appropriate balance between work and leisure should be. He reaches an interesting conclusion and offers that education might resolve the problem:
Of course, just as Gutting asked 'who decides what is of real value?'From our infancy the market itself has worked to make us consumers, primed to buy whatever it is selling regardless of its relevance to human flourishing. True freedom requires that we take part in the market as fully formed agents, with life goals determined not by advertising campaigns but by our own experience of and reflection on the various possibilities of human fulfillment. Such freedom in turn requires a liberating education, one centered not on indoctrination, social conditioning or technical training but on developing persons capable of informed and intelligent commitments to the values that guide their lives.
This is why, especially in our capitalist society, education must not be primarily for training workers or consumers (both tools of capitalism, as Marxists might say). Rather, schools should aim to produce self-determining agents who can see through the blandishments of the market and insist that the market provide what they themselves have decided they need to lead fulfilling lives. Capitalism, with its devotion to profit, is not in itself evil. But it becomes evil when it controls our choices for the sake of profit.
Capitalism works for the good only when our independent choices determine what the market must produce to make a profit. These choices — of liberally educated free agents — will set the standards of capitalist production and lead to a world in which, as Aristotle said, work is for the sake of leisure. We are, unfortunately, far from this ideal, but it is one worth working toward.
In the abstract (ought), or actual (is)?
Again, to whom? Is this an Is question? Or an Ought?I ask: Who decides what is to be taught?
As a question, I think it's broken. As a topic for discussion, I think it's fantastic.It's a difficult question. What do you guys think?
Re: Work: What is it good for?
What a bizarre response to what is the least controversial and most certain to be implemented aspect of what I wrote there.jj_appelbaum wrote:Sorry, I stopped reading there.Enki wrote:Non-indoctrinational education is easy to imagine.
Give every student an iPad...
And just in case I overestimated people's intelligence, I meant 'tablet PC', and not specifically one particular company's brand of tablet.
Men often oppose a thing merely because they have had no agency in planning it, or because it may have been planned by those whom they dislike.
-Alexander Hamilton
-Alexander Hamilton
Re: Work: What is it good for?
Marcus wrote:You lost it right there, Tinker . .Enki wrote:Non-indoctrinational education is easy to imagine.
Give every student an iPad that has all the core curriculum on it . .
How so? That's the least controversial thing that I've said. You can put the entire curriculum of every textbook for every class for any grade on a 1 gb thumb drive. A full-color PDF is less than a megabyte per page.
Men often oppose a thing merely because they have had no agency in planning it, or because it may have been planned by those whom they dislike.
-Alexander Hamilton
-Alexander Hamilton
Re: Work: What is it good for?
Any curriculum is the product of a world-view and is thus indoctrination into that world-view.Enki wrote:Marcus wrote:You lost it right there, Tinker . .Enki wrote:Non-indoctrinational education is easy to imagine.
Give every student an iPad that has all the core curriculum on it . .
How so? That's the least controversial thing that I've said. You can put the entire curriculum of every textbook for every class for any grade on a 1 gb thumb drive. A full-color PDF is less than a megabyte per page.
"The jawbone of an ass is just as dangerous a weapon today as in Sampson's time."
--- Richard Nixon
******************
"I consider looseness with words no less of a defect than looseness of the bowels."
—John Calvin
--- Richard Nixon
******************
"I consider looseness with words no less of a defect than looseness of the bowels."
—John Calvin
Re: Work: What is it good for?
Ok, fair point. I would support curriculums developed by the local schools with some basic ideas. Like sure it's indoctrinating someone to teach them algebra, but I think it's still worthwhile.Marcus wrote: Any curriculum is the product of a world-view and is thus indoctrination into that world-view.
Men often oppose a thing merely because they have had no agency in planning it, or because it may have been planned by those whom they dislike.
-Alexander Hamilton
-Alexander Hamilton
Re: Work: What is it good for?
It is indeed, Tinker, but more than worthwhile, it's inescapable. The best we can hope for is epistemological self-consciousness and balance.Enki wrote:Ok, fair point. I would support curriculums developed by the local schools with some basic ideas. Like sure it's indoctrinating someone to teach them algebra, but I think it's still worthwhile.Marcus wrote: Any curriculum is the product of a world-view and is thus indoctrination into that world-view.
"The jawbone of an ass is just as dangerous a weapon today as in Sampson's time."
--- Richard Nixon
******************
"I consider looseness with words no less of a defect than looseness of the bowels."
—John Calvin
--- Richard Nixon
******************
"I consider looseness with words no less of a defect than looseness of the bowels."
—John Calvin
Re: Work: What is it good for?
Yes, I think the very act of self-guided learning will allow students to learn that even if they are self-guiding through the labyrinth of a particular curriculum.Marcus wrote:It is indeed, Tinker, but more than worthwhile, it's inescapable. The best we can hope for is epistemological self-consciousness and balance.Enki wrote:Ok, fair point. I would support curriculums developed by the local schools with some basic ideas. Like sure it's indoctrinating someone to teach them algebra, but I think it's still worthwhile.Marcus wrote: Any curriculum is the product of a world-view and is thus indoctrination into that world-view.
I heard a story about a guy who took his kids out of their private school which they described as 'Hogwarts for Hipsters' and created a 'Danger School'. The kids learned about physics while building a trebuchet.
Men often oppose a thing merely because they have had no agency in planning it, or because it may have been planned by those whom they dislike.
-Alexander Hamilton
-Alexander Hamilton
Re: Work: What is it good for?
We took our kids out of public school in 1979 when they were nine and 11 respectively, home-schooled them from there. They learned physics on the end of a cant hook and a splitting wedge and biology on the end of a butcher knife. Both entered junior college at 16, both today have families of their own, have never needed a dime from us, and both, now in their 40s, have their homes paid off and are totally debt-free. We never let school get in the way of their education.Enki wrote:I heard a story about a guy who took his kids out of their private school which they described as 'Hogwarts for Hipsters' and created a 'Danger School'. The kids learned about physics while building a trebuchet.
"The jawbone of an ass is just as dangerous a weapon today as in Sampson's time."
--- Richard Nixon
******************
"I consider looseness with words no less of a defect than looseness of the bowels."
—John Calvin
--- Richard Nixon
******************
"I consider looseness with words no less of a defect than looseness of the bowels."
—John Calvin
- Juggernaut Nihilism
- Posts: 1417
- Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2012 7:55 pm
Re: Work: What is it good for?
I don't think there is too much wrong with the basic structure of our education system. It works wonderfully when the students are middle-class or higher well-behaved white kids with interested parents. Our system regularly turns out the smartest and most competitive people on the planet. The problem is how to make the system work for the rest of the kids, and I don't know if giving them iPads and letting the "direct their own learning" is really the way to get an abused corner kid more interested in Flannery O'Connor.
"The fundamental rule of political analysis from the point of psychology is, follow the sacredness, and around it is a ring of motivated ignorance."
Re: Work: What is it good for?
Gotta disagree, JN, ask any kid, a bunch of kids, from whom the United States gained its independence, and let me know the results of your survey.Juggernaut Nihilism wrote:I don't think there is too much wrong with the basic structure of our education system. It works wonderfully when the students are middle-class or higher well-behaved white kids with interested parents. Our system regularly turns out the smartest and most competitive people on the planet. . .
In my experience, we're turning out kids who can't read and won't work. Chinese and Indian kids can and will.
But maybe I'm just a pessimist . .
In his speech, “The Seven-Lesson Schoolteacher,” Gatto describes the seven lessons that are taught in all public schools by all teachers in America, whether they know it or not. He writes:
The first lesson I teach is confusion. Everything I teach is out of context. I teach the un-relating of everything. I teach dis-connections….Even in the best of schools a close examination of curriculum and its sequences turns up a lack of coherence, full of internal contradictions….Confusion is thrust upon kids by too many strange adults, each working along with only the thinnest relationship with each other, pretending, for the most part, to an expertise they do not possess….In a world where home is only a ghost, because both parents work…or because something else has left everybody too confused to maintain a family relation, I teach you how to accept confusion as your destiny.
The second lesson I teach is class position….The children are numbered so that if any get away they can be returned to the right class….My job is to make them like being locked together with children who bear numbers like their own.…If I do my job well, the kids can’t even imagine themselves somewhere else, because I’ve shown them how to envy and fear the better classes and how to have contempt for the dumb classes….That’s the real lesson of any rigged competition like school. You come to know your place.
The third lesson I teach is indifference….When the bell rings I insist they drop whatever it is we have been doing and proceed quickly to the next work station. They must turn on and off like a light switch….Bells inoculate each undertaking with indifference.
The fourth lesson I teach is emotional dependency. By stars and red checks, smiles and frowns, prizes, honors, and disgraces, I teach kids to surrender their will to the predestinated chain of command.
The fifth lesson I teach is intellectual dependency….It is the most important lesson, that we must wait for other people better trained than ourselves, to make the meanings of our lives….[Only], the teacher can determine what my kids must study, or rather, only the people who pay me can make those decisions, which I then enforce. If I’m told that evolution is a fact instead of a theory, I transmit that as ordered, punishing deviants who resist what I have been told to tell them to think….Successful children do the thinking I assign them with a minimum of resistance and a decent show of enthusiasm….Bad kids fight this, of course, even though they lack the concepts to know what they are fighting, struggling to make decisions for themselves about what they will learn and when they will learn it…Fortunately there are tested procedures to break the will of those who resist; it is more difficult, naturally, if the kids have respectable parents who come to their aid, but that happens less and less in spite of the bad reputation of schools. No middle-class parents I have ever met actually believe that their kid’s school is one of the bad ones. No one single parent in twenty-six years of teaching.
The sixth lesson I teach is provisional self-esteem….The lesson of report cards, and tests is that children should not trust themselves or their parents but should instead rely on the evaluation of certified officials. People need to be told what they are worth.
The seventh lesson I teach is that one can’t hide. I teach students they are always watched, that each is under constant surveillance by myself and my colleagues….The meaning of constant surveillance and denial of privacy is that no one can be trusted, that privacy is not legitimate.
"The jawbone of an ass is just as dangerous a weapon today as in Sampson's time."
--- Richard Nixon
******************
"I consider looseness with words no less of a defect than looseness of the bowels."
—John Calvin
--- Richard Nixon
******************
"I consider looseness with words no less of a defect than looseness of the bowels."
—John Calvin
Re: Work: What is it good for?
I think the notion that a kid should be interested in Flannery O'Connor is part of the problem of what's broken with our school system.Juggernaut Nihilism wrote:I don't think there is too much wrong with the basic structure of our education system. It works wonderfully when the students are middle-class or higher well-behaved white kids with interested parents. Our system regularly turns out the smartest and most competitive people on the planet. The problem is how to make the system work for the rest of the kids, and I don't know if giving them iPads and letting the "direct their own learning" is really the way to get an abused corner kid more interested in Flannery O'Connor.
Men often oppose a thing merely because they have had no agency in planning it, or because it may have been planned by those whom they dislike.
-Alexander Hamilton
-Alexander Hamilton
Re: Work: What is it good for?
Enki wrote:Non-indoctrinational education is easy to imagine.
Give every student an iPad that has all the core curriculum on it or access to a server with all the core materials, including online robo-tutorials. Have people in a big area with teaching assistant's roaming around who can be summoned like airline stewardesses any time you have a problem. Have a call-center full of librarians ready to field any research question. Have small auditorium classrooms where you can sit in on lectures that regard subject matter. Arrange the hierarchy of 'grading' like video game 'achievements'. (Don't tell me kids won't grind out the achievements because they do it with no tangible payoff in games all the time.) The entire curriculum is just a set of certifications. You prove that you have mastered the subject matter by playing the educational games of each topic. People can work in groups or by themselves. If people focus too much on the subjects they are best at you can lock out those subjects until they complete others. Like if someone is great at English only allow them to do English coursework 1 hour for every 5 of Algebra they do until they complete the Algebra coursework. You can put mandatory certification requirements that have a set timeframe. You can also have constant refresher quizzes that tell you if a student needs additional coursework in a subject they are already certified in. If a kid needs remedial education in one subject they can go and find the tutor on their own or the tutor finds them and not be removed from a class in front of all the other kids.
Implied in this model is relatively high level of focus, concentration, order, discipline, civility, and tacit acceptance of substantial periods of isolation. As we all know, these are things that kids have in spades. Especially those in the <50% of the bell curve, socioeconomic status, and black/latino youths.
Re: Work: What is it good for?
Ammianus wrote:Implied in this model is relatively high level of focus, concentration, order, discipline, civility, and tacit acceptance of substantial periods of isolation. As we all know, these are things that kids have in spades. Especially those in the <50% of the bell curve, socioeconomic status, and black/latino youths.
The model implies a near complete LACK of isolation. Most kids DO focus on the things that fascinate them. And it's not completely without guidance from teachers, in fact, it would have more access to 1 on 1 interaction from teachers. Also, analytics built into the kid's tablet can alert teachers to which students need more help.
It might not be a good model for kids fourth grade and under. But it's a highly collaborative model.
Men often oppose a thing merely because they have had no agency in planning it, or because it may have been planned by those whom they dislike.
-Alexander Hamilton
-Alexander Hamilton
- Endovelico
- Posts: 3038
- Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 3:00 pm
Re: Work: What is it good for?
As a professor I try to do the following:
1. Introduce the subject.
2. Supply as much relevant literature as I can.
3. Summarize the different views existing on the subject.
4. Invite the students to think critically using as many different views as possible.
5. Require students to produce some critical work on any aspect of the subject.
6. Any attempt by the students to replace critical thinking with ideology will be severely punished...
1. Introduce the subject.
2. Supply as much relevant literature as I can.
3. Summarize the different views existing on the subject.
4. Invite the students to think critically using as many different views as possible.
5. Require students to produce some critical work on any aspect of the subject.
6. Any attempt by the students to replace critical thinking with ideology will be severely punished...
Re: Work: What is it good for?
i was pulled out of regular primary school for being a too quick to learn and put into a progressive experiment back in the day, no planned curriculum, just surrounded by resources, so i played handball for 12 months
then my parents got mad and pulled me out, the experiment shut down a year or so later i believe.
i was already a year ahead of my age group because they had already forced me to skip a year in an effort to slow me down so it just meant i ended back at normal pace again.
it does work with homeschooling environments, ive seen it, but its not for the average teacher to try and mange or inspire because the average teacher isnt very inspiring, they are niche hiding and jaded and waiting for the end time bell like the average kid is.
then my parents got mad and pulled me out, the experiment shut down a year or so later i believe.
i was already a year ahead of my age group because they had already forced me to skip a year in an effort to slow me down so it just meant i ended back at normal pace again.
it does work with homeschooling environments, ive seen it, but its not for the average teacher to try and mange or inspire because the average teacher isnt very inspiring, they are niche hiding and jaded and waiting for the end time bell like the average kid is.
ultracrepidarian
Re: Work: What is it good for?
This of course doesn't actually resemble what I was saying in any way, shape or form. It's not even similar.noddy wrote:i was pulled out of regular primary school for being a too quick to learn and put into a progressive experiment back in the day, no planned curriculum, just surrounded by resources, so i played handball for 12 months
It's not about teachers managing it, it's about altering the teacher student relationship so that it is not constant lectures throughout the day boring the kids and killing their enthusiasm for learning. There is direction, but there are teaching assistants rolling around through the area going to talk to people. With analytics watching the kids go through the curriculum you can see precisely where they need help.then my parents got mad and pulled me out, the experiment shut down a year or so later i believe.
i was already a year ahead of my age group because they had already forced me to skip a year in an effort to slow me down so it just meant i ended back at normal pace again.
it does work with homeschooling environments, ive seen it, but its not for the average teacher to try and mange or inspire because the average teacher isnt very inspiring, they are niche hiding and jaded and waiting for the end time bell like the average kid is.
The kids WOULD have assignments, they just wouldn't be like, "Do thirty equations tonight and turn them in in the morning.", it would be like, "Learn the order of operations by March 15th.", They would have multiple deadlines in multiple subjects, and if they are not meeting certain benchmarks, i.e. making progress in ANY subjects, that would alert teachers and they would give that student more personalized attention. They wouldn't wait a week or two with a kid just falling through the cracks, it's more like the teachers would be roaming around and speaking to kids directly asking them what they are studying and helping to direct them.
Men often oppose a thing merely because they have had no agency in planning it, or because it may have been planned by those whom they dislike.
-Alexander Hamilton
-Alexander Hamilton
Re: Work: What is it good for?
well, i did read it and the exact details where opaque to me and triggered memories of my self directed education experience at a young age.
making things more inspirational is a good idea and im not knocking it, but im still suspicious its going to work on the types that wanted to do manual labouring or manufacturing when they grow up.. it will be much better for the geekier ones who come from backgrounds or have personalities that do suit the modern curriculum.
if the parents are simple people with no interest in math/science and encouraging it at home i quite frankly think it does require a rare and inspirational teacher to break that and techno toys can only help so much.. i got all my love of learning from my parents and most people in my world did likewise.
making things more inspirational is a good idea and im not knocking it, but im still suspicious its going to work on the types that wanted to do manual labouring or manufacturing when they grow up.. it will be much better for the geekier ones who come from backgrounds or have personalities that do suit the modern curriculum.
if the parents are simple people with no interest in math/science and encouraging it at home i quite frankly think it does require a rare and inspirational teacher to break that and techno toys can only help so much.. i got all my love of learning from my parents and most people in my world did likewise.
ultracrepidarian