Journal Zarf's Journal: Teach me, I don't know how to think 9
My education in the wilds of Alaska was not a typical American education.
NPR is running a series on American High Schools. So far the most scathing bit is on American High Schools failing to teach logical and critical thinking skills. As an Engineer, I use critical thinking skills daily. I isolate problems, formulate hypothesis, test them and decide on which hypothesis is correct or not.
Each time through this cycle I get closer to a solution to my assigned problem. Each trial gets me closer to the truth. Without this skill I would be unable to function. If I have ever had difficulty working with anyone it has been over the ability or inability to accept this method as a realistic means of working.
If you say something is better, you'd better be able to prove it. That's my official stance. In adult life all of my conflicts have been over this one issue... proof. Can you prove that claim? Is your proof sound?
Many times I've worked with people who find those two charges offensive. They are offended that I would question a claim or proof... that I would test another professional's assertions. This is sometimes read as arrogance. It is not. I expect my same assertions to be tested in the same light. I do not expect to make a claim and have that claim merely accepted because I said so. The experiment, the test, the proof are what separate engineering and science from religion, faith, and magic.
To me the idea that these concept is missing from modern American schools explains a great many things. For one thing, I do not have a typical "American" education. My education was heavily supplimented by my father. He was a field biologist and taught me from the age of ten how to collect samples, observe, and make notes like our naturalist fore-runners. By Junior High he had taught me how to have a control group in my experiments. He also taught me how to isolate an experimental variable.
He also taught me to think critically. To question and verify claims. He taught me how to use a lab and lab equipment. All this I learned from my father. He was the one that taught me to maintain mental rigor.
My mother taught me faith and religion and to love learning. She is the one who taught me art and meditation. She gave me the tools to know awe.
My education in the wilds of Alaska was not a typical American education. My parents educated me. It seems that the modern American is not educated by their parents. It seems to me that they are dropped off at school and forgotten.
If there is a problem with modern American education it is in the communication of culture. It's the teaching of rigor and awe that's missing. How do we fix this? How can we replace the role of parents? Should we do it?
NPR is running a series on American High Schools. So far the most scathing bit is on American High Schools failing to teach logical and critical thinking skills. As an Engineer, I use critical thinking skills daily. I isolate problems, formulate hypothesis, test them and decide on which hypothesis is correct or not.
Each time through this cycle I get closer to a solution to my assigned problem. Each trial gets me closer to the truth. Without this skill I would be unable to function. If I have ever had difficulty working with anyone it has been over the ability or inability to accept this method as a realistic means of working.
If you say something is better, you'd better be able to prove it. That's my official stance. In adult life all of my conflicts have been over this one issue... proof. Can you prove that claim? Is your proof sound?
Many times I've worked with people who find those two charges offensive. They are offended that I would question a claim or proof... that I would test another professional's assertions. This is sometimes read as arrogance. It is not. I expect my same assertions to be tested in the same light. I do not expect to make a claim and have that claim merely accepted because I said so. The experiment, the test, the proof are what separate engineering and science from religion, faith, and magic.
To me the idea that these concept is missing from modern American schools explains a great many things. For one thing, I do not have a typical "American" education. My education was heavily supplimented by my father. He was a field biologist and taught me from the age of ten how to collect samples, observe, and make notes like our naturalist fore-runners. By Junior High he had taught me how to have a control group in my experiments. He also taught me how to isolate an experimental variable.
He also taught me to think critically. To question and verify claims. He taught me how to use a lab and lab equipment. All this I learned from my father. He was the one that taught me to maintain mental rigor.
My mother taught me faith and religion and to love learning. She is the one who taught me art and meditation. She gave me the tools to know awe.
My education in the wilds of Alaska was not a typical American education. My parents educated me. It seems that the modern American is not educated by their parents. It seems to me that they are dropped off at school and forgotten.
If there is a problem with modern American education it is in the communication of culture. It's the teaching of rigor and awe that's missing. How do we fix this? How can we replace the role of parents? Should we do it?
Moo (Score:2)
What works for you will not work for others.
Most people are not NTs (Rationals) or NFs (Idealists), most people (like 85% of the population) are SPs (Artisans) or SJs (Guardians). They live in the real world (S) instead of the theoretical (N) so proofs are fun toys but not the real thing. This may be much to your chagrin as an N, being the roles are the exact opposite.
SPs want fun, and use the details to aid them. If it does not aid them
Re:Moo (Score:2)
Secondly: I don't buy it. Breaking people down into
Re:Moo (Score:2)
Well, that changes everything.
Breaking people down into discrete groups slapping labels on them as a way to determine how they should be educated is just shy of a caste system.
Not at all. One is based on who they are, the other is based on who people think they should be.
You are advocating separate but equal educational systems based on a personality test.
Well, based on personality. The test itself is merely a tool to find out what the personality is.
Personalities of chil
Re:Moo (Score:2)
I think I saw an ivory tower once. I threw stones at it. I think you were in there.
Which is *not* the purpose of the government.
But it apparently is the job of the government to provide everyone with equal access to education. Separate but equal education has been argued for in the past. The ideal education system would give everyone the tools they needed to participate in society as active citizens. Unfortunately, our
Re:Moo (Score:2)
Though, the separation was not for the purpose of advancement, rather an excuse for discrimination.
Advocating different schooling for different types (read: different learning styles) is quite different. If there is a fear of discrimination, simply offer the choices, make a suggestion, but let the family decide.
The ideal education system would give everyone the tools they needed to participate in society as active citizens.
That's one ideal (and ce
Re:Moo (Score:2)
And none of this has anything to do with the fac
Re:Moo (Score:2)
True. Though, bear in mind, that it is unlikely that non-Ns will want to become scientists.
Either way, personality should never restrict teaching. However, given that not all kids will be interested in the same things, the basic education that everyone gets should be minimal. For example, basic arithmetic, basic
Re:Moo (Score:2)
My issue is not understanding, it is disagreeing while I understand the conceptual basis of the tests. And alternate theoretical frameworks... I disagree with the proposed application. Typing is a trite over simplification of the complex n
Nothing to changed in many years (Score:2)
I was educated in the UK, and I don't find this surprising. Upto even undergraduate level a lot of the mass "education" works by "teacher says X, you must accept it as the holy truth without question" ... but this is especially true before sixth form (17+). Some of it is kind of warranted, because mathematical proofs of certain things are just not trivial ... but it also has a lot to do with bad teachers. In the words of Mark Twain: