Don't stay in school

onomatopoeia99

pickledonionspaceraider wrote: »

The video is spot on, in my opinion.

My experience of school was:-

They confuse memory with intelligence.

You cannot pass a Maths of Physics A level with memory (and you would have struggled with the O level as well). You have to be able to understand concepts and use that understanding to apply them to solve problems.

coolcait

I believe that, by law, a child must receive education. That is usually achieved by sending them to a school - but other options are available.


If children learn how to count, they will be better placed to manage finances - including understanding taxes.


If children learn how to read, they will be better placed to learn a huge range of other subjects.


If children learn how to research, they will be better placed to find out information on any issue which interests them.


If children learn how to analyse information, they will be better placed to make informed decisions.


If an adult says "I don't know how to vote" - and refuses to read the information on the polling card, or the information available at the polling station, or doesn't even listen to the information being given by the person giving out the polling card - then I don't believe that a class on "How to vote" would have had much effect.

Anatidaephobia

onomatopoeia99 wrote: »

Want to know about voting? Chances are a child will live with at least one adult that is able to vote who can explain to them that they need to write an X on a piece of paper. It does not need a lesson at school.

I think most schools cover this anyway, or at least they did here. In our first couple of years of secondary school, you rotated between history, geography and modern studies, and modern studies included politics, how to vote, and mock elections. Everyone in my year participated in the mock election and were perfectly capable of taking that experience and applying it to real life once they were old enough to vote.

Yet I see posts on Facebook from people who claim they can't vote because they don't know who to vote for. They are capable of using the internet so they are capable of using Google and researching their local candidates but they choose not to. They know how to vote and know the theory of why they should but either don't recognise that they have to take some responsibility to educate themselves or are too lazy to do so.

They were taught how to do everything that is required to vote in school yet they still say they can't. I don't know exactly what the reason is that some people just won't vote but I don't think their school is responsible.

pickledonionspaceraider

onomatopoeia99 wrote: »

You cannot pass a Maths of Physics A level with memory (and you would have struggled with the O level as well). You have to be able to understand concepts and use that understanding to apply them to solve problems.

Maths of Physics? I've never even heard of Maths of Physics so I am sure i would never pass that hahaha

I thought we were talking of school years, A levels and O levels weren't done at school when I went, maybe they are now, back then you had to go off to college for them - I was just recounting my experience of school - I am sure it is different for everyone, different schools, eras.

In our school, intelligence was deemed on the ability to regurgitate information which was rather dull and any kind of non conformity thinking for yourself was frowned upon, it was all rather stifling

Anatidaephobia

coolcait wrote: »

I would have found that lesson fascinating. I taught myself about clouds (from a Ladybird book!), and still find myself looking at clouds, trying to identify them, and - most importantly - remember what kind of weather they are likely to bring. I do find that it was a useful thing to learn.

I still find myself thinking of the names of different types of clouds when I look in the sky

It's funny the lessons that stick with you. I also think of oxbow lakes when I see a meandering river.

Flyonthewall

Anatidaephobia wrote: »

Ultimately though (and I think this point was made more articulately very early on in the thread), the most important thing is to teach them how to learn, how to problem solve, how to apply themselves, how to work things out for themselves etc. If they can do that, they can work out how to deal with any future problem they encounter. They might not immediately know the answer - so they're not going to think "ooh, wait, I do know this" - but they'll have the skills to work it out for themselves.

Or you could just choose the three most important things and teach them those and they'll be able to deal with those situations perfectly but how does that help them with the rest of life?

Is it not better to teach them the skills to work out things along side teaching them the important things? That way they know the important things or can use their skills to work out any missing pieces they've forgotten, which should take less time than working it all out.

They can then spend more time figuring other things out because they've got the important things sorted already.

Why does it have to be one or the other? Kids spend years and years in school, many days, many hours. There's numerous things that could probably be cut or different choices we could give them instead and overall there is plenty of time to learn both sides.

I mean in the PSHE lessons, that was a couple of hours a week right there, 5 years worth, without any other changes to the rest of the lessons where they could have covered all the important things. Even if only 2 or 3 lessons on each thing at least it's a start. By the sounds of it some schools do this to a certain point already so it's just getting all schools to do so and making sure the important things are covered.

It's not possible to teach kids every little thing, but that doesn't mean we can't make a change and teach them differently.

Anatidaephobia

Flyonthewall wrote: »

Is it not better to teach them the skills to work out things along side teaching them the important things? That way they know the important things or can use their skills to work out any missing pieces they've forgotten, which should take less time than working it all out.

They can then spend more time figuring other things out because they've got the important things sorted already.

Why does it have to be one or the other?

I don't think it does have to be one or the other but I suppose it depends what you mean by "the important things" as I've already written a post explaining why I think tax should be taught in schools. As for things like voting, I've also posted about how my school taught about voting and held mock elections so that already happens.

missbiggles1

pickledonionspaceraider wrote: »

These days too, going to Uni is not the be all and end all. A degree is not the guarantee of a job these days

Kid A leaves school and starts up bottom rung of ladder in a company, works hard, spends 3 years working his way up the ladder so by 21 he could easy be earning more than:-

Kid b leaves school and goes to Uni for three years, and in tens of thousands in debt, and goes to the same company as kid A, and starts on bottom rung of ladder as has no experience- if he can get a job having no work experience at age 21

Going to university isn't just about (or shouldn't be just about) how much you earn. To think that it is shows how much education has been downvalued in our society.

missbiggles1

Anatidaephobia wrote: »

I don't think it does have to be one or the other but I suppose it depends what you mean by "the important things" as I've already written a post explaining why I think tax should be taught in schools. As for things like voting, I've also posted about how my school taught about voting and held mock elections so that already happens.

It even happened when I was at school many, many years ago.

Flyonthewall

Anatidaephobia wrote: »

Yet I see posts on Facebook from people who claim they can't vote because they don't know who to vote for. They are capable of using the internet so they are capable of using Google and researching their local candidates but they choose not to. They know how to vote and know the theory of why they should but either don't recognise that they have to take some responsibility to educate themselves or are too lazy to do so.

Not to get into a whole debate about voting, but when people say they don't know who to vote for it's not always down to laziness.

You can know every single thing about all parties, but if you agree with some things and not others or you're not sure if the things you agree with will happen or another party is saying something that you may agree with if something else happens then deciding who to vote for is tough.

It's not always a straightforward decision of I agree (almost) completely with XXX so I'll vote for them.

No amount of research can give you a premonition of the future.

So, no matter how much they want to vote and know the importance of it and how to do it, they just can't make a decision they're happy with.