School, Learning
-
Dávid Kocsis wrote:
More than half of my class even not know unit conversions.
What's unit conversions between what and what and how is that related to maths ? :confused: All topics are important; IMO the education system should try to educate youngster at being "intelligent" and "resourceful" instead of being just technician (i.e. just knowing how to apply a formula).
Watched code never compiles.
For example from kA to micro ampere, etc. I don't say that we shouldn't learn any think else, but learning analysis of novels and poems...
-
I think middle, but the system probably isn't the same. I'm at electronics.
IMO, Electronics is a specialty course; and should not be part of a general education.
Watched code never compiles.
-
For example from kA to micro ampere, etc. I don't say that we shouldn't learn any think else, but learning analysis of novels and poems...
This is specialized education. If your electronic classes do not teach those, then look somewhere else.
Watched code never compiles.
-
IMO, Electronics is a specialty course; and should not be part of a general education.
Watched code never compiles.
It is not part of it. It's an extra subject.
-
This is specialized education. If your electronic classes do not teach those, then look somewhere else.
Watched code never compiles.
They tought it recently and we wrote a test and I was the only student who could do it flawlessly, and 1 or 2 who wrote a 4. There was only 5 exercises
-
Why is that the literature and history are so important and maths is not? Or that is only in Hungary? There are also some people who say literature and history are necessary and math is an unnecessary incomprehensible subject while using things that are invented by scientists. More than half of my class even not know unit conversions.
It's much the same in the USA. Much concern about illiteracy but negligible interest in innumeracy. Absence of science knowledge is not even a whisper. I deduced a reason for this. The vast majority of those administering schools/district/state educational systems are from the English/History/Social "Sciences" herd. They, themselves didn't like subjects like math or that (shudder!) required the use of math. The school systems and entire educational systems for that matter, follow their lead. Time and time again, I've even seen TV "personalities" appear to be proud of their ignorance (about nearly anything, actually) - as though being ignorant (or stupid?) is the membership key to a popular club one of which one really wants to be a part. If you don't think stupidity and ignorance are a popular state, consider George W. Bush's popularity! (This is Not a political remark). He was quite proud that he wasn't a reader (for example), and his knowledge of how government worked (in 2000 election he didn't know Social Security is a Federal program). BUT, he was folksy! As it was oft said, he's someone you'd want to have a beer with. Intellectualism is considered a negative characteristic - has been for a very long time. You can take advantage of this situation: my progeny were brought up thinking math was fun and since was amazingly interesting. In that respect, they had/have a substantial competitive edge. A pragmatic (and possibly a tad cynical) point of view: most of the bees in a hive are workers, anyway.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
-
Good literature helps to convey ideas in their complexity. It can also help in the understanding of the subtleties in the psychological make-up of people. It will also expand your vocabulary and help give you different perspectives. I don't think that maths and literature need comparing - however reading good literature has really enriched my experience of life :)
Continuous effort - not strength or intelligence - is the key to unlocking our potential.(Winston Churchill)
Good point Guy, I for one think they are not mutually exclusive items either. This whole, your EITHER analytical OR creative bullshit needs to end. Many authors and artists were talented in what would be considered sciences, too. I do think that some people go into creative endeavors because they aren't interested in sciences and maths, and vice versa. If schools allow people to choose ONLY one path early on, then we would have only uninspired engineers and impractical creatives. From my experience, those that I have worked with in the arts community that have been the most successful are driven and interested in all subjects. You'd be surprised how many art school kids are interested in sciences. I'm even trying to get a job teaching maths and sciences at the local arts college.
"I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours. " — Hunter S. Thompson My comedy.
-
For example from kA to micro ampere, etc. I don't say that we shouldn't learn any think else, but learning analysis of novels and poems...
Dávid Kocsis wrote:
but learning analysis of novels and poems...
David, it will be better for you in the long run to learn to analyze more than numbers. Being able to analyze language, symbolism, and emotions will heighten your problem solving skills and total awareness. Perhaps you are stuck in an absorbing information kind of student mode right now, but I hope you see the point of these classes. I went to a Liberal Arts college, but got a Bachelors of Science in Business and CS. I would never trade my arts electives for an engineering track, ever. Sure, I'm full of knowledge that I don't get to use everyday, but if your education ends at maths and sciences, you may appear grossly uneducated to anyone outside of your field, and as an engineer, you deal with a lot of non-engineers; called customers.
"I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours. " — Hunter S. Thompson My comedy.
-
Why is that the literature and history are so important and maths is not? Or that is only in Hungary? There are also some people who say literature and history are necessary and math is an unnecessary incomprehensible subject while using things that are invented by scientists. More than half of my class even not know unit conversions.
Dávid Kocsis wrote:
literature and history
When taught these subjects in school I found them to be of no use what so ever. That may have just come down to some crappy teachers. I find them fascinating now.
Dávid Kocsis wrote:
maths is not
Most math is irrelevant to a huge portion of the population. Hell I got a Math minor in college and I'm a software developer. I seldom use math skills beyond the basic add, subtract, multiply, divide. I gotta say teaching geometry, calculus, or statistics to most people is just going to be mindless busy work that they'll never have a use for.
Kill some time, play my game Hop Cheops[^]
-
This is specialized education. If your electronic classes do not teach those, then look somewhere else.
Watched code never compiles.
That's not really specialized if you look beyond the explicit example. kAmp to micro-Amps. What about kG to micro-gram ?? kilo-anything to micro-anything. It's really understanding of the units of measurement that are needed to live your life with some modicum of competency. That's really the point. I've been at a sales counter where the cash register clerk couldn't figure out 10% of a price without a calculator. That's really pathetic. People buy all sorts of worthless crap (often ingesting it) because they don't know even the most basic concepts of science (like people believing microwave radiation remains in food cooked that way and so avoid it). By and large, it's to prevent one from going through life as an endless victim.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
-
Dávid Kocsis wrote:
literature and history
When taught these subjects in school I found them to be of no use what so ever. That may have just come down to some crappy teachers. I find them fascinating now.
Dávid Kocsis wrote:
maths is not
Most math is irrelevant to a huge portion of the population. Hell I got a Math minor in college and I'm a software developer. I seldom use math skills beyond the basic add, subtract, multiply, divide. I gotta say teaching geometry, calculus, or statistics to most people is just going to be mindless busy work that they'll never have a use for.
Kill some time, play my game Hop Cheops[^]
We all have to learn geometry, statistics, algebra if we want to have a degree in anything. But this is nothing compared to what we have to learn in literature.
-
Dávid Kocsis wrote:
More than half of my class even not know unit conversions.
What's unit conversions between what and what and how is that related to maths ? :confused: All topics are important; IMO the education system should try to educate youngster at being "intelligent" and "resourceful" instead of being just technician (i.e. just knowing how to apply a formula).
Watched code never compiles.
Maximilien wrote:
IMO the education system should try to educate youngster at being "intelligent" and "resourceful" instead of being just technician (i.e. just knowing how to apply a formula).
In my daughter's school they seem to try very hard to do exactly what you're suggesting. Her mathematics homework consists largely of questions like "Is 52% of 10 more or less than 61% of 11? Explain a quick way to determine your answer without any calculations." They expect an answer like "61% of 11 is larger because it is a larger proportion of a larger number than is 52% of 10." I understand their intent, but it does seem a bit ridiculous to sit there and phrase such things out when we could just perform a simple multiplication and comparison (.61 x 11 = 6.71 and .52 x 10 = 5.2). I end up having to explain to my daughter why she can't give answers like "61% of 11 is larger because it equals 6.71, whereas 52% of 10 is only 5.2, and 5.2 is less than 6.71." Ultimately, I think that by trying to teach such mathematical reasoning, these schools are setting the metaphorical bar too high. There are plenty of people who know how to divide fractions but who cannot explain why one must "flip the second fraction on its head." I would even venture to say that many primary school teachers fall into this caegory, and that is the reality with which we must live.
-
Why is that the literature and history are so important and maths is not? Or that is only in Hungary? There are also some people who say literature and history are necessary and math is an unnecessary incomprehensible subject while using things that are invented by scientists. More than half of my class even not know unit conversions.
-
That's not really specialized if you look beyond the explicit example. kAmp to micro-Amps. What about kG to micro-gram ?? kilo-anything to micro-anything. It's really understanding of the units of measurement that are needed to live your life with some modicum of competency. That's really the point. I've been at a sales counter where the cash register clerk couldn't figure out 10% of a price without a calculator. That's really pathetic. People buy all sorts of worthless crap (often ingesting it) because they don't know even the most basic concepts of science (like people believing microwave radiation remains in food cooked that way and so avoid it). By and large, it's to prevent one from going through life as an endless victim.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
I kid you not... I was at a jewelry counter at a local retail chain, and the salesclerk said, "1/4 is bigger than 1/2 isn't it?" I wanted to reply, "Of course. By the way, you have the prices reversed on all your diamonds..." :doh: WE ARE DYSLEXIC OF BORG. Refutance is systile. Your a$$ will be laminated. There are 10 kinds of people in the world: People who know binary and people who don't.
-
Maximilien wrote:
IMO the education system should try to educate youngster at being "intelligent" and "resourceful" instead of being just technician (i.e. just knowing how to apply a formula).
In my daughter's school they seem to try very hard to do exactly what you're suggesting. Her mathematics homework consists largely of questions like "Is 52% of 10 more or less than 61% of 11? Explain a quick way to determine your answer without any calculations." They expect an answer like "61% of 11 is larger because it is a larger proportion of a larger number than is 52% of 10." I understand their intent, but it does seem a bit ridiculous to sit there and phrase such things out when we could just perform a simple multiplication and comparison (.61 x 11 = 6.71 and .52 x 10 = 5.2). I end up having to explain to my daughter why she can't give answers like "61% of 11 is larger because it equals 6.71, whereas 52% of 10 is only 5.2, and 5.2 is less than 6.71." Ultimately, I think that by trying to teach such mathematical reasoning, these schools are setting the metaphorical bar too high. There are plenty of people who know how to divide fractions but who cannot explain why one must "flip the second fraction on its head." I would even venture to say that many primary school teachers fall into this caegory, and that is the reality with which we must live.
_beauw_ wrote:
these schools are setting the metaphorical bar too high.
I disagree entirely. I think they are trying to get the kids to understand what they are doing and not to learn everything by rote. That way they can reverse engineer solutions if their memory gives out.
_beauw_ wrote:
many primary school teachers fall into this caegory
I agree - and they tend to be the bad teachers. Being told by teachers "you do it like this just because you do" rather than with explanations is, IMHO, poor pedagogy. It is certainly difficult to get kids to think about stuff when they spend much of their time at school being fed formulae of one sort or another, but that is a difficulty worth overcoming. To see a kid in an exam (true example) recently calculate that the amount of paint required to paint a room was 32,000 litres just shows how kids are not being taught how to think in your example
_beauw_ wrote:
we could just perform a simple multiplication and comparison
sure there are other ways of doing it, and you say you understand the intent. Does your daughter watch West Side Sotry rather than reading romeo and Juliet? same story By using a simple calculation the teacher is probably making sure the kids don't get frightened off. Also, it is simple for the kids to check their assumptions with such an easy calculation.
_beauw_ wrote:
that is the reality with which we must live.
What a defeatist attitude!
MVVM# - See how I did MVVM my way ___________________________________________ Man, you're a god. - walterhevedeich 26/05/2011 .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
-
_beauw_ wrote:
these schools are setting the metaphorical bar too high.
I disagree entirely. I think they are trying to get the kids to understand what they are doing and not to learn everything by rote. That way they can reverse engineer solutions if their memory gives out.
_beauw_ wrote:
many primary school teachers fall into this caegory
I agree - and they tend to be the bad teachers. Being told by teachers "you do it like this just because you do" rather than with explanations is, IMHO, poor pedagogy. It is certainly difficult to get kids to think about stuff when they spend much of their time at school being fed formulae of one sort or another, but that is a difficulty worth overcoming. To see a kid in an exam (true example) recently calculate that the amount of paint required to paint a room was 32,000 litres just shows how kids are not being taught how to think in your example
_beauw_ wrote:
we could just perform a simple multiplication and comparison
sure there are other ways of doing it, and you say you understand the intent. Does your daughter watch West Side Sotry rather than reading romeo and Juliet? same story By using a simple calculation the teacher is probably making sure the kids don't get frightened off. Also, it is simple for the kids to check their assumptions with such an easy calculation.
_beauw_ wrote:
that is the reality with which we must live.
What a defeatist attitude!
MVVM# - See how I did MVVM my way ___________________________________________ Man, you're a god. - walterhevedeich 26/05/2011 .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
I think that the goal (going beyond rote learning) is a good one. If there is a problem with the execution, I think it relates to the fact that teaching people how to work logic problems can be much more difficult than teaching people how to do arithmetic. My experience has been that many students and parents who can do the arithmetic problems for a given lesson find the accompanying reasoning problems to be difficult. This seems to me to relate to the simple fact that logic problems, word problems, analogies, and the like are difficult for many people. I suspect that this sort of work ought not to be conflated with the teaching of arithmetic or even algebra. It seems to me to rely on an entirely different set of skills, e.g. the ability to digest complex passages in natural language.