Slashdot Log In
High School Students Forced To Declare A Major
Posted by
samzenpus
on Thu Aug 16, 2007 07:03 AM
from the elementary-trade-school dept.
from the elementary-trade-school dept.
i_like_spam writes "As reported in the NYTimes, high school freshmen at many high schools across the nation are now being forced to pick a major. Starting this Fall, 9th graders in Florida will have to choose to major from among a set of state-approved subjects, while some students in Mississippi will have to follow one of nine designated career paths. High school administrators hope that having students declare majors will lead to greater student interest in school until graduation. College administrators think otherwise: 'youngsters should instead concentrate on developing a broad range of critical thinking and communication skills,' says Debra Humphreys from the Association of American Colleges and Universities."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
This is stupid. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:This is stupid. (Score:5, Funny)
I'm 37 and haven't decided on a career yet... just waiting to see if these computer things catch on.
Re:This is stupid. (Score:5, Insightful)
But back to the FA. Forcing kids to choose a major? Stupid. It should be an option that guides you into the most appropriate courses to get you where you want to go. Kids need high school to learn about careers and THEN make a decision. What does an eighth grader know about what a physician really does? Or a chemist? Or a physicist? Hell, do they have majors for "fireman?" What about the kids who just want to be a carpenter like their dad, and HIS dad, take over the company business?
Most "educator's" are totally disconnected from reality. They surrounded themselves in school their entire lives, generally in a public servant type role. They think they know what's best for kids but really they have just overdosed on talks and reports from overpaid sociologists that pull theories out of their asses. This is why I refuse to send my kids to public school.
Re:This is stupid. (Score:5, Insightful)
I went the AP/engineering/college bound path. My small rural highschool had a Vocational program for auto repair and an Ag path.
I took AP Calculus my junior year. I had literally run out of classes to take, but I wasn't allowed to take any of those 'other' classes. I'm not a Mechanical Engineer that has no clue how to weld. Even my college guidance counselor told me that welding was 'a waste of time.' We have a huge disconnect between engineering and manufacturing and there's a pretty clear reason why. Force everyone to take 1 shop and 1 welding class then ask the engineer why his 1.00000000 mm tolerance is a bit strict.
It's taken me 6+ years and lots of trial and error to learn how to fix my car. I started with oil changes and my biggest job to date was replacing the head on my car.
It's problem enough that we pigeon hole kids in college. I'm an engineer. It's my 'only' marketable skill. C/C++, Matlab, VB, Simulink, Free body diagrams are great for bringing home money now. But they're not going to help me redo my kitchen or paint my house or fix my car. If I had to do college over again. I'd tell my counselor to shove it and take 5-6 years for a BS degree. I'd take one of those classes most engineers looked down on, like how to wire a house, how to run plumbing, etc.
If only I went to a place where I could have learned all of this, at an early age, for free. Wait. I did.
Re:This is stupid. (Score:4, Insightful)
Here, universities have decided it's a smart idea to narrow down your field of eduation. So if you choose your path crafty, you can circumvent all those math-heavy hardware related courses and go software-only.
Which in turn produces people who wonder why there are side effects when they consider their hardware to work "immediately" and why an "undefined" state can even exist. With a doctorate degree, no less.
Re:This is stupid. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:This is stupid. (Score:5, Insightful)
It went something like this:
"If you were to ask the shop up the road to make you a cube with the following dimensions, this is what it'd cost:
1 inch = $10
1.0 inch = $50
1.00 inch = $200
1.000 inch = $500
1.0000 inch = $1000
1.00000 inch = $5000"
I'd say 85% of my graduating ME class from a school that's considered a 'good' engineering college wouldn't be able to tell you the difference between the $50 and the $5000 option. "Well the numbers are all zero so they don't matter".
Then they wonder why they get yelled at by production when some print they came up with asks for 1.0000 mm between 2 holes that are
1 shop class could have easily helped this concept, even back in HS. Let people put their hands on the metal and maybe the next time they're designing something they can remember back to that HS course.
No, instead lets make them declare a major and keep them away from those dirty shop classes with all the potential dropouts.
My HS shop had an *expensive* dark room. Complete with rotating door to keep out light... In me and my siblings 9 years there, no one had once used it for anything more than storage. And now I'm having to back pedal trying to figure out what the heck all these settings are on my fancy new SLR.
Re:This is stupid. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:This is stupid. (Score:4, Insightful)
You're right, from a practical point of view, having people with broader knowledge is very important. In my high school career, I took 5 years of electronics, everything from the basics of resistors and capacitors to programming microcontrollers. It was one of the most valuable set of courses I took because now in my chosen career of software engineering, I have a better understanding of what's actually happening inside this equipment I write code for.
But school should not simply be job training centres, despite what some in business would like. We also need well rounded people. Techies needs to be familiar with art and literature. And artsies needs to know how to change the oil on their car. We need more renaissance men and women, not simple robots trained to do one job. Only then can we better understand each other and think outside the box to solve problems.
But to paraphrase a Central American dictator, we don't need educated people, we need oxen.
Re:This is stupid. (Score:4, Informative)
I just finished my aerospace engineering degree at Georgia Tech. The only time we ever used tools was during a single fluids lab, to change out the test articles. The program is heavily geared towards preparing you for graduate school, in controls, fluids/thermodynamics, or structures. There is very little focus on real-world engineering; it's almost all theoretical. People go the entire program and still don't understand anything about airplanes or spacecraft; all they know is a bunch of formulae and equations. The department has a machine shop, but it's forbidden except to a very special few working on things like autonomous UAVs.
I don't think this attitude is as prevalent in other departments; for example, the ME program has a few classes where they actually have to build things. It's still pretty sad, though, considering how the school used to be; shop and manufacturing were major parts of the curriculum back then. For example, part of the electrical engineering course was designing and building an electric motor from scratch.
Most of my tool experience comes from my dad; I started helping him fix cars and household stuff from a young age, built model airplanes, and later on built a real one. Later, during one of my internships, I had the opportunity to work in a machine shop. I didn't get to use the mill or lathe, but I did try my hand at MIG welding and some other stuff, and was teaching the other interns and one of the electricians how to use the radial and band saws. One of the other interns didn't even know how to read a tape measure when he started... and his dad was a senior mechanic! That was probably the best summer I've had; there's something real satisfying about coming home all filthy after a good day's work. It was a special treat on the days I got so dirty that I needed to go home and take a shower during lunch, like the day we were welding outside in 110+ degree heat indices. Driving Catia all day just doesn't compare.
Hell, if it paid better, I'd say "the hell with engineering" and be a mechanic. Really, I'd like to fly corporate or flight test for NASA or a manufacturer, but I don't want to take on tens of thousands in loans and live in poverty for years to do it. I'll just build my own airplane.
Re:This is stupid. (Score:4, Informative)
Re:This is stupid. (Score:5, Interesting)
Amen, brother.
I majored in Physics in college, only to find that I was exceptionally good at explaining things in our campus planetarium and observatory. After two years of friends, family, and planetarium patrons telling me I should become a teacher, I took the plunge and added Secondary Education to my major.
I met with my new adviser who told me, "You have a lot of ground to cover -- you've missed two years... I just don't know how you're going to make it up in time."
Then I attended my first class. Every test -- EVERY test -- was based on the bold letter definitions in the text book. Hell, in one of my "advanced" classes (500-level (I had to get "special permission" to take it as an undergrad)) the professor handed out the final exam on the first day of class. She said, "Have this back to me by the end of the semester. It's really hard, so I figured I'd give you the whole time. Again, bold-letter definitions and requests to copy and paste -- err, transcribe -- huge segments of text from the textbook into the space provided.
My most memorable experience was coming from a Stat Therm in the morning. The prof in that class said to us, "I realize nobody has the book yet, but the first 10 problems are due tomorrow. There's a copy of the book in the library, so not having the book is not an excuse." I went from that to my education class, wherein the prof said, "Here's a 90-page novella that I think is nice. Please read it by the end of the semester and write a paragraph on what you thought."
I can't tell you how shocked I was when the hands went up and the litany of childish grunts from ALL of the other students began:
These are the people to whom we trust the education of our children.
Ugh.
Re:This is stupid. (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd rather work retail minimum wage, was my conclusion.
Unionised fat cat 20 year service teacher who did NOTHING, they lost the will to live practically. Arrive @ 8:55am and in the parking lot by 3:05pm each day. Teachers who actively mocked their students. Self absorbed moaning about their hard hours, when most of these teachers had been in the same education system cradle to grave, no real world experience. What I found most distressing was an active contempt for people oriented towards manual trades vs academic performance. The world can't be made up 100% of lawyers and doctors damnit!
I came to the sad realistation that my ignorant assumptions at the ages of 6 and 8 and 10 than my teacher might be a 'stupid head' or idiot were most likely accurate at the time. The few teachers that somehow survive the byzantine bureacracy and escape the repetitive formula of class curriculum are truly blessings...who have no way of being rewarded for their higher performance or value. An elaborate system that breeds mediocrity only under the best circumstances.
10 years in IT now, I'm a director of Q/A and am very happy with my career choices. But I have no idea what I'm doing with my kids in a few years when they enter school... I hate to be an elitist snob, but private schools might be the only realistic option available to us.
Re:This is stupid. (Score:5, Interesting)
I think there needs to be a distinction between "educator", "Teacher", "Administrator", and "F'n state department of Ed".
The vast majority of teachers really do care about the students, and about teaching the students what they really need to know, and making them well-rounded individuals. As a whole, so do educators... however, as a general rule these days, teachers don't get to teach.
No Child Left Behind (or NCLB as it's known) has forced massive numbers of assessments on the students. There are literally over 5 different assessments that have to be done on the students at the school here, at least twice a year. These assessments sometimes take over a week to do with each child in the class individually. During this time, the teacher is often out of the room, assessing a student, and so can't be teaching the class.
Then there's the "Warm fuzzy shit" that has to be taken care of, because kids just aren't getting it at home.
Then there's the attitude (often "enforced" by administration) that homework is a burden on students, and it takes them away from their social life/basketball/etc. So you can't keep kids after for academic reasons.
Then there are the parents that threaten to sue the school any time their kid gets kept in for recess for slugging another kid (and the school has it on camera)
Please, do me, the rest of the country's educators, and the kids a favor... Be active in education. Find out when your local school board meets. Go to the meetings, inform yourself about the issues, talk with the board members. volunteer at the school.
Don't just worry about taxes, because that's what pays for the schools. Worry about how the school district is using the money. Work with the educators to make the schools better, Please.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:This is stupid. (Score:5, Insightful)
Throwing more money at it isn't necessarily the fix needed. Some places with relatively high spending per child have the crappiest schools.
Re:This is stupid. (Score:5, Insightful)
Lowering the bar and worrying more about a child's "self esteem" rather than academics things things such as playing nanny to students AND wasting money on programs like sex education (sorry that is the job of the parents) AND sensitivity training are hurting academic performance. When teachers are expected to be nannies rather than teachers, do u rly expect students 2 xl @ math & science, & b able 2 sp34k in nything but aol sp35k? ZOMG LOL WTF!
Re:This is stupid. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:This is stupid. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:This is stupid. (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/
Or, a few clicks from that page is the actual report (2005 data, released April 2007):
http://ftp2.census.gov/govs/school/05f33pub.pdf [census.gov]
Page 12 ranks each state spending per pupil per year for primary and secondary education. Top 10 spenders are, in order: New York, New Jersey, DC, Vermont, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Delaware, Arkansas, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island.
From this page: http://www.psk12.com/rating/USthreeRsphp/STATE_US
Clearly there is no strong correlation between money spent and education quality. Here is a list of the top 10 states by education rank (again, middle schools only!) with their spending rank in parenthesis: Massachusetts (#5), Minnesota (#23), New Hampshire (#15), North Dakota (#25), Vermont (#4), Montana (#28), South Dakota (#41), Iowa (#30), Colorado (#31), Connecticut (#5)
Interesting that South Dakota is apparently 7th in the nation for education quality and 41st in the nation for education spending... And DC is #3 in spending but dead last in results... By a huge margin, too! The difference between #50 and #15 (33 points) is more than two thirds the distance between #1 and #50 (45 points)! Smells like corruption to me.
=Smidge=
Re:This is stupid. (Score:5, Insightful)
The real problem with public education is that it has become the dumping ground for kids whose parents don't care and can't take the time to be engaged in their children's lives. Parents that care, do whatever they can to send their children to a private school or home school them. The public school system is full of kids who have no positive educational influence at home and are just a negative influence on kids that are trying to learn. Until you can get the majority of public school parents to care about their children's education and become a "champion" in their lives for an education, the system won't change and will continue to go down hill.
Re:This is stupid. (Score:4, Interesting)
Simply throwing money at problems rarely solves them.
In 2004, the City of Minneapolis was spending more than $11500 per student, for a math proficiency below the 40th %ile, and reading around 55th %ile. And don't tell me it's the crowded classrooms...15.2 students/teacher. That would be a joke, if it wasn't so serious.
http://www.schoolmatters.com/app/location/q/stid=2 4/llid=116/stllid=148/locid=956260/stype=/catid=-1
So tell me again, it's the MONEY?
Let's take a good sized class, perhaps 25 students.
That's $287,500 per year to educate them.
Let's give the teacher a really nice salary - we want someone GOOD, who enjoys their work! - of $87500, leaving us $200,000.
Good suburban office space is leasing at just under $2/sqft...let's give these kids LOTS of space, and assume a goodly portion of shared spaces (a gym, a cafeteria, auditorium, etc.) 2500 sqft = 60,000 per year leaves us with $140,000. (Ignoring for the moment that School Districts and cities can/should obviously do MUCH better than 'market'.)
Let's even hire a nicely-paid assistant for the class, always better to have smaller groups learning when you can, and there's a lot of paperwork to teaching: $40,000/yr.
You're telling me that a class of 25, with a budget of $100,000/yr for materials, can't manage better than 40th percentile in Math?
If that's true, is another $200/student really going to make any difference? $2000?
You could buy them each an adequate laptop and STILL have $60,000/year for other supplies.
I call complete BS on your "underfunded" assertion - that's the lazy answer. US Public education is a perfect example of waste, bureaucracy, sinecure, and mismanagement from top to bottom.
Teaching is one of the hardest jobs there is. I believe that more of the $$ should be going to the teachers and students, than whatever rathole it's disappearing down now. Many schools in the Western world are doing much, much better on much, much less than the US spends per pupil. We need to examine why, and see if we can emulate it.
Nota bene: it's easy to be a critic, but harder to provide suggestions, so I'll make a few
- schools have suffered from 100 years of 'mission creep' (ok, really only the last 40). School != Parents, and we need to stop expecting that teachers will parent our children for us.
- less funding for special-needs students. Yes, we all feel sorry for them, but schools are now doing the work that mental hospitals used to do. Why? I can understand that if Timmy is slightly disabled, having an aide work with him to get him up to speed is fine; but when you have 2 full time special-ed teachers in 1 elementary school to deal with a roomful of children who (AT BEST) *might* be able to feed themselves? That is educational dollars being wasted in medical care. That should NOT be a school's responsibility.
- English...the Mpls Schools crow about their 'diversity' of having courses in some 60+ languages. That's idiotic and wasteful. Elementary and High School ESL classes, otherwise all English.
- End social promotion. Teachers found passing children who do not meet grade benchmarks are fired. Stop the focus on 'self-esteem'. If a kid has trouble, hold him back. If this makes him sad, perhaps he'll work a little harder.
- 8-5 school day, 48 weeks a year.
Yes, this is harsh. But I'm 39, and my opinion of high school is informed by my experience. As a junior, I stopwatched my school days for a week. Out of a 7.5 hour day, I would start the timer whenever we were going over new material, or reviewing it the 1st time, or testing. I
Re:This is stupid. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:This is stupid. (Score:4, Insightful)
I think the first indication that this isn't going to be done right is according to TFTitle high schoolers are going to be forced to pick a major - that is idiotic. However, if it were an option, to pick a major if you were interested, and if you were guaranteed to get a well rounded education regardless of your decision, and if there was little to no penalty for switching majors, this could be a good tool for keeping kids engaged.
I went to a college prep high school, so I didn't have as many choices when choosing my classes as those in public schools (no shop, no home economics, and would have had to travel to a different school for art), in fact I didn't get to make any choices about my curriculum until I was a junior (aside from choosing which of 2 math courses to take at the sophomore level) but even still I conscientiously steered myself towards physics and math, and avoided classes like geography, criminal justice, and psychology. But I knew by the time I was a junior that I wanted to be an engineer, and I never did change my major in college.
So, I essentially choose pre-engineering anyway. If this plan is a way of telling kids, "Hey, these classes are great for people with your interest!" Well then great. If it's a way to tell kids you have choose what classes you're going to be taking in four years now, or worse, you better figure out what you want to do with your life, then this is doomed to failure.
Re:This is stupid. (Score:5, Interesting)
The counselor (a woman) proceeded to tell me I had better decide right away what I was going to do with my life, what my career would be. "How do you expect to support a wife and family?" she asked pointedly.
That just further reinforced my impression at the time that at best adults were clueless idiots, and at worst dangerous.
Best. Troll. Ever. (Score:5, Funny)
Nice job. That post took a lot of work.
My favorite part:
Again, congratulations.
Re:Best. Troll. Ever. (Score:5, Funny)
I thought it looked familiar... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:This is stupid. (Score:5, Insightful)
With top down decisions like this (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:With top down decisions like this (Score:5, Insightful)
As I understand it, High School is part of what we in Sweden call "grundskolan", which is required here. It is illegal not to attend school up to this point. After that, everything is elective. To specialize so early reeks of desperation. Up until this point, kids are kids. They need to be told what to do and when to do it. Of course they need free time, but at this age school is for two things: learning basic "booksmart" skills to make it in life (math, reading, writing, how the government works) and human interaction. The human interaction part is recess and after school, during class they need to be told what to do and everyone needs the same stuff.
After you've attained the minimum level (lvl 1, 10,000xp) where you're able to function in society, you can choose where you want to go in life: directly to work (McDonalds, cleaning, aso) or you can get a higher education in some area of your interest.
Specializing earlier and earlier has become common these days. This appears when schools start competing for students. Generally I think this is a bad thing. Mostly because this means that you have to decide what you want to be/do when you really have no idea and really shouldn't be making life-altering decisions like this.
Anyone who has chosen College (or University) programs based on "what will be in demand" when you're finished will have chosen wrong. The world changes so fast that choosing what you are going to work with in 5-10 years based on what is in demand now will almost invariably mean that things have changed and you will find yourself in tough competition. It is generally better just to choose what to do based on what you want to do and hope for the best. At least then you'll be competing with others in a field you love.
Re:With top down decisions like this (Score:4, Informative)
Actually, High school would be closer to what's called "Gymnasiet" in Sweden.
Grundskolan is all compulsory and almost all students go on to gymnasiet. After gymnasiet you go to college (högskola)/university or join the workforce. In gymnasiet you get to choose between a large number of college-preparatory or vocational paths, none of which completely disqualify you from going to college although to be able to take certain college classes/majors you need to have taken certain classes in gymnasiet. Most engineering majors require that you've taken Math A through D (sometimes E), Chemical engineering requires Chemistry B and so on..
/Mikael
Mixed (Score:5, Insightful)
On the other hand, I hate the concept that all students must be prepared for college. A lot of people just aren't cut out for it. Some are looking for blue collar careers, and would be better served by programs that prepare them for this vocation.
Combine this with kids who are at risk of dropping out of school. I see a lot of this. Some areas have a higher than 50% drop out rates. If you can take these kids and show them that when they are done with high school, they will be ready for a job as an electrician, a plumber or a mechanic, they'd be more likely to stay in. Tell them that they need to have 4 semesters of English, two of history, and they will be required to take some arts classes, and their reward will be two years of post-secondary trade school, and then they might get a job... well, some back grounds just don't value the education enough.
I see downsides to the "track" approach, but I see upsides as well.
Re:Mixed (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually I see many downsides....
I was interested in CS all through high school and took every programming course (all 3...it was the mid-80s) that my school had to offer. But I also marched in the band.
What if this new major program prevented (via scheduling, resource, and location conflicts) the students ability to be engaged in multiple interests?
If I were back in high school and confronted with this, I probably would have chosen band over CS courses simply because that was where all my friends were.
Maybe... (Score:5, Insightful)
I had a roommate who couldn't decide on a major, and in fact didn't have one until around his Junior Year
Some people know what they want to do when they turn 14, some people don't. I do not see the value of making the people who don't pick one anyway.
Umm... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Umm... (Score:5, Funny)
Counterproductive and damaging (Score:5, Informative)
As Paul Graham says,
[blockquote]If I were back in high school and someone asked about my plans, I'd say that my first priority was to learn what the options were... there are other jobs you can't learn about, because no one is doing them yet. Most of the work I've done in the last ten years didn't exist when I was in high school... In such a world it's not a good idea to have fixed plans.[/blockquote]
This. Is. So. Dumb. (Score:5, Insightful)
Second, the college folks are right on about needing a broader focus. As it is, students are too quick to dismiss fields of learning that they don't see as relevant to their interests. Sadly, most folks realize only after they leave school that the purpose of school at nearly all levels is not so much to teach you certain subjects, but to teach you how to learn.
Bad Thing (Score:5, Insightful)
And guess what? After learning the basics of pretty much everything (much at least) I'm damn sure I have a good base of general knowledge for the rest of my career, and life for that matter. When I need to pick something up I always have a place to start.
Had I been forced to focus on just a few subjects I would probably be a lot worse of in today's ever-evolving business world.
Florida always tries gimmicks like this (Score:4, Interesting)
The obsession with the FCATs is insane. Everything in the schools revolves around them. Some administrators in one school even "anointed" kids' desks before the test with holy oil, hoping for higher scores.
I see this as just another attempt to do that - all of the "majors" will certainly be things the FCATs focus on. This is just another way to raise artificial indicators of the success of the schools at the expense of a real education.
Sounds like a good idea! (Score:4, Interesting)
I agree with the idea that students shouldn't be all lumped into the same category. If you're destined to be a scientist, why spend half your high school career studying unrelated subjects? Cram all the knowledge in now, while your brain still has a huge memory capacity. That way, college is reserved for deeper study of a subject, not review of stuff you should have learned in high school.
Also, high school curricula are pretty much aimed at the lowest common denominator. It makes sense to separate those who are interested in learning from those who are interested in using up oxygen. Ever wonder why college degrees are almost required for any corporate job? Because high school doesn't give you enough preparation to do a "real world" job. This would also prevent people from being forced through college who otherwise don't need it. There are very few non-menial jobs you can get anymore without a degree, and some people, while qualified for a job, are not suited for advanced study.
This is what we did in the UK at age 14... (Score:5, Insightful)
When I was at school in the UK in the early 1980's, at age 14 we had to narrow our courses to about eight subjects in total (English, Maths and a couple of others mandatory, leaving quite a bit of choice) and we studied for national exams ("O" levels) at age 16. We then chose three or four subjects usually from the eight, to take to an advanced level ("A" level), leading to national exams at the age of 18. When it cam to university time, there was no such thing as this "undeclared major" rubbish that my son is doing at an American university starting this fall. Our university admission was into a particular course, based on prerequisite courses at "A" level at required grades. This allowed the universities to know the minimum level and rely on the expected knowledge of all the students in a given course, and there was no need for foundation years, or spending the first term or two catching everyone up. This is why we could have three year Bachelor's courses instead of the four year ones here in the US.
Today's kids are not being properly prepared for the work environment. I've lost count of the number of confident, self assured, broadly educated US Bachelors or Masters graduates I have interviewed for jobs in electronics who don't understand Ohm's Law or basic op-amp theory after graduating from between four and six years of study. It's time to stop the madness, and start preparing the kids for the new world, where they are competing against low wage earning graduates based in India or China, and if you think the UK system was harsh in making people choose, you should see the focus and emphasis on academics and career preparation in Asia...
Funny you mention Asia (Score:4, Insightful)
Having talked to people who've gone and taught there (actual teachers, not regular Joes called in to play teacher) they say it is all route memorization. To be smart is to have a lot of facts and formulas in your head. Well as it turns out memorization and analyzation are really only useful to a point. That makes you good at taking tests, but you need to be able to synthesize that knowledge in to what else you know, and apply it to novel problems to really be useful. What more for some subjects it just totally and utterly fails. Language would be a good example. They teach foreign language the same way: memorize hundreds of phrases a week. However one needs only to examine the way you use your native language to realise that's not how we process it.
I then get to see the results of this