diyAudio

diyAudio (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/)
-   The Lounge (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/lounge/)
-   -   Kids can't be force fed knowledge (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/lounge/226730-kids-cant-force-fed-knowledge.html)

gmphadte 31st December 2012 03:43 AM

Kids can't be force fed knowledge
 
Watch the video.

Laws of Physics Can't Trump the Bonds of Love - NYTimes.com

Gajanan Phadte

Aucosticraft 31st December 2012 03:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gmphadte (Post 3305127)

Thanks Man good sharing.

freax 31st December 2012 07:18 AM

Its a british belief that children must be forced information like they are dogs, and I never understood it, I learnt only by learning by myself.

Here in australia its also a common belief that if you are rough with dogs they will obey you, which is true in a way but there are other means of training.

M Gregg 31st December 2012 10:25 AM

The problem,

With learning is the student has to want to know what’s being taught..so it goes that most things in the world of business "they" want you to know, is the stuff most people try to avoid..(Even most of the quals required for any path in life) how much do you use in the job after your head is crammed with information (most of it unnecessary for the job). I remember a guy saying to me once these people are illiterate "read useless"..I said if you were stuck by a river stranded and one of the illiterate people could make a boat would they still be useless? He didn't answer.

Regards
M. Gregg

M Gregg 31st December 2012 10:59 AM

I remember,

Being "told" by someone in a college..people should be taught how and what to teach...Rammed down your throat so nothing else matters..not even the subject being taught...

Maslow's hierarchy of needs - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The above link is a good example..then you are told by the college..stuff all that and money and funding is the primary and only issue...Go and get the class full of students...fill the paperwork in triplicate then do the same on the computer system because the paperwork is just in case its lost...:rolleyes:

So you have OFSTED<<<What a bunch of idiots...preaching learning..followed by the college after they have gone...stuff that get the money and funding sorted..What about the lessons<<<well fit them around the funding...

(The college)Oh look..we can make thousands of pounds if we teach key skills..but the students already have a "C" in Maths and English...Make them do it again and we can claim all the funding...What adout the course they are doing just get them through so we can do it all again..this is a buisiness now so think of it as production..:eek:<<<don't argue or you can see me in the office for a warning..:eek:..

Regards
M. Gregg

whmok 31st December 2012 11:05 AM

Thanks for sharing!!!

DF96 1st January 2013 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by freax
Its a british belief that children must be forced information like they are dogs, and I never understood it, I learnt only by learning by myself.

That must be a different Britain from the one I live in. Here the main belief is that children can learn by being tested continually, although using tests which are 'grade inflated' when compared with the ones from 40 years ago. The main snag is that rigid marking schemes encourage those with good memories instead of knowledge.

Being forced to actually learn things would be a step forward, although still inferior to deep understanding.

PlasticIsGood 1st January 2013 10:20 PM

Old folk have always blamed education and bad parenting for the perceived problems of youth.

Many subjects are pretty much the same as they were 40 yrs ago, and are taught in the same way, to the same standards. English literature A level, for example, still does Shakespeare, and novels and poetry selected for their Empire values and anti-socialist propaganda.

The big changes are in maths and sciences. The scale and scope of the subjects themselves have been transformed, so comparison is very difficult.

It's certainly true that a gulf has opened up between good and bad schools, in relatively rich and poor areas respectively. Alternative and corrupted standards apply to qualifications for the poor. FE colleges have always been thoroughly corrupt, but it's in nobody's interest to raise the matter.

That division, it seems to me, puts us back 50 yrs to a time when educating the proletariat would only make them troublesome. Same applies now, for a different reason. Other than keeping young people off the street, what would it be for?

Occasionally, there is an echo of Wilson's "white heat" speech, but it's fainter each iteration. Who can predict what kind of work all these people will be doing 5 yrs from now?

Ours were halcyon days.

DF96 2nd January 2013 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PlasticIsGood
The big changes are in maths and sciences. The scale and scope of the subjects themselves have been transformed, so comparison is very difficult.

No, comparison is straightforward. Significant chunks of the more difficult mathematics, such as calculus and logarithms, have simply been removed from the pre-16 syllabus and put into the sixth form. As a result children at 16 get higher marks in an easier exam, yet have less mathematical knowledge and experience. They find a big jump to A-level, and an even bigger jump to university. By the time they leave university they are still below the standards of the previous generation.

Some may argue that UK school and undergraduate standards were too high (and too narrow) 30-40 years ago so it was right for us to adopt a broader shallower system, but I disagree. What is definitely true is that our system has lost depth.

Quote:

It's certainly true that a gulf has opened up between good and bad schools, in relatively rich and poor areas respectively.
Yes, I agree. Having abandoned school selection by ability, we now have selection by parental income. Selection at university entrance is now more of a lottery than it was, as both the excellent and the good students have a set of A and A* to offer.

I was fortunate to go through school in the late 1960s and university in the early 1970s. My relatively poor working-class background was no hindrance. British children of today, whatever their ability, get a very raw deal in comparison.

chris661 2nd January 2013 10:27 AM

DF96, the difficult subjects such as calculus are replaced by other subjects, which I (now that I'm doing a Physics degree) have found very useful to have: surds and circle theorems (the former helped with the mindset needed for imaginary numbers; the latter is useful in some mechanics - for the record, neither are particularly useful in themselves at GCSE level).

A-level wasn't a big jump. University is, but I suspect that's more down to the fact that most students are thrown into lectures and living independently, both of will be new to the majority.

Chris


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:29 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2014 diyAudio


Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2