The future of learning
Now can we extend this even down to grade school level and get kids OUT of these ridiculous government-mandated standardized exams!?!
- Hot
- New
- Categories...
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
- Marketplace
- Members
- Store
- More...
Nevertheless, the state-mandated exams were administered, and most people on my campus did not do very well on them. Yet--the majority of us had jobs. I don't see the exams going away; there's so much money backing them. In a public school setting, I'm not sure how to circumvent that.
about this::: "recentered, more project-focused world."
as a graduate of that world, from a plant whose workforce
numbers about 4,300, it's the project orientation
which is hurting us.
the problem is that people consider the workplace
a "thing," and they mess with it using temporary
sessions called "projects." . what is needed is
ownership, rather than consultancy. . when you
stick around to see, touch and feel the results
of your "project," there is learning. . lots more
learning than they taught in school. . the people
teach you -- those whose lives you are influencing.
ownership or permanency is like accountability:::
you lie in the bed which you helped to make, and
see how it feels.
it could be good to polish your talents with the feedback
of intimate, direct, no-nonsense knowledge. -- j
p.s. but, of course, sticking around after the
"project" diminishes the "elite" status of the
consultant whom these colleges are trying
to create -- someone more than 50 miles from home,
with a briefcase. . and yet, people from the head
shed at a plant like ours acted like consultants,
as did the separate engineering division, the
separate safety department, the separate
industrial hygiene department, etc. . poor
internal harmony comes from these separations.
assignment to a production department cures
this -- including real supervision, with pay and
benefits controlled "jointly" -- one helluva challenge.
.
want to do "drive-by" consulting, unloading a bunch
of advice and leaving. . just stirs up the stew and
fixes nothing -- distracts from fixes in progress!!! -- j
.
I've also seen some smart testing that not only notes what was wrong but knows of all the people who made the same mistake, what part of the source material is responsible and provides additional training on the gap.
By the type of error, they were able to isolate which part of the material was misunderstood and give you a brief tutoring based on not only what you missed but how you missed it.
(Not trying to be argumentative, just trying to understand how the process works)
http://www.ted.com/talks/daphne_koller_w...
I am intrigued by the idea of 'best lecture' that multimedia can give you. We have almost 70,000 elementary schools in the U.S. This means that every day as many as 100,000 teachers (more than one class per school). Go into the classroom and try to tech a lesson in a system that was developed when we couldn't afford books for all the students. Some will do well, some will not. Is this really the best way to do this?
"So here's an example of that, also from Andrew's Machine Learning class. This is a distribution of wrong answers to one of Andrew's assignments. The answers happen to be pairs of numbers, so you can draw them on this two-dimensional plot. Each of the little crosses that you see is a different wrong answer. The big cross at the top left is where 2,000 students gave the exact same wrong answer. Now, if two students in a class of 100 give the same wrong answer, you would never notice. But when 2,000 students give the same wrong answer, it's kind of hard to miss. So Andrew and his students went in, looked at some of those assignments, understood the root cause of the misconception, and then they produced a targeted error message that would be provided to every student whose answer fell into that bucket, which means that students who made that same mistake would now get personalized feedback telling them how to fix their misconception much more effectively."
That's pretty much what I thought: they had to first get a basic data set and then after an initial beta from the students, they could add material to help with specific test questions. It might be "instant" to the later students, but until there was a critical mass of incorrect answers there was nothing there but simply the notation of an incorrect answer.
As I have done some study into improved testing methods, one thing that stands out to me is that there are typically three different methods by which students acquire information: auditory, visual, or kinetic. A lecture format typically tends to appeal to the auditory learner, and (if accompanied by slides or demonstrations) to some degree to the visual learner. But the kinetic learner actually needs the hands-on practice right there to grasp things. To me, an effective delivery is going to incorporate all three.
My son uses Khan Academy for his mathematics study and it fits very nicely. It provides an animated lecture demonstrating the concepts just like a teacher would on a blackboard and then gives the students a chance to practice right there until they can answer five questions in a row correctly. For the hard sciences, this seems to be quite effective. I haven't seen how it approaches English or literature, so I can't comment on those yet.
Although, it's possible that based on some evaluation of individual student's learning styles and interests there might be a set of lectures that could be picked from.
I'm very interested in Khan Academy and how that develops. As you can guess, I don't think delivering lectures is what teachers should spend their time doing.
On another note--particularly in the elementary grades, which is what I am addressing--I do believe a child needs to physically interact with a teacher. A video is one way to explain information, but in order to cover every kind of learning method, a person-to-person meeting can best facilitate that. A skilled teacher can check for understanding as she instructs (it can seem off-the-cuff, but someone who has planned well can have different delivery methods already pre-planned) and can change her method of delivery on the spot if she sees the students are missing something. Interacting with peers and learning how to communicate in different social settings with a diverse group of people is also valuable.
I do agree that human contact is important, but today's children are amazingly adept at interacting with technology, and the ones that aren't need to learn to keep up. With the technology we have, a room full of 30 people watching whichever teacher they happen to get present the material is not the most efficient way to do this. The teacher may have different delivery methods planned but how she adjusts this to match the needs of 30 different people is beyond me.
If we can develop programmatic instruction for the primary information path, then the teacher can actually spend their time with one-on-one interactions with the students.
I also point out that I don't agree with the idea of having a different teacher every time. Every individual has different teaching styles, mannerisms, etc., and these take time to adjust to. Especially in elementary education, children need a single stable source to look to. This helps not only with learning, but with discipline. I can't endorse the teaching by committee approach. Even personally, those have been the WORST educational experiences I've been associated with.
What does the model classroom or school day for a student in grade school look like for you?
I don't mind the standardized exams though, esp if they're not designed by the gov't. There's this push to get people to go to higher education, but it seems like our efforts would be better spent in grade school. I think grade schools should subscribe to specific widely-recognized (preferably not gov't-designed) curricula and exams, so hiring managers could see the degree and immediately know this person has good written English, algebra, or whatever. We desperately need for a high school transcript to prove someone has specific skills and knowledge.
I think there are still some reasonably priced educational institutions, but none of them that are involved in major college sports.
It''s hard to change the system, harder than it used to be but can still be done against the almost certain eventuality of being caught.
Really? Johnny's whatever never got filed. Oh we used a home school and provided all the material ourselves, Really we never used the children as a deduction. How about that?
The difficult part now is the absence of need for probable cause ...
The easy part is fiddling the computers. As long as your computer printout says A then it's a digital fight which programmer screwed up. Witness the IRS. I have never seen two years in a row when their method of doing things remains the same.
So what did Johnny miss out on because of that error on whomevers part?. Here is is GED from??? and so forth. Sign up for the draft? What draft? Oh so he can get a government job and a college loan? Wasn't needed?
Another friend routinely sends in his tax form in one ernvelope and the check in another ''for security reasons.' Both have the same national ID number. When queried he sends a copy and points out it was done and filed in February of the year in question and is no longer his problem. then he sends a copy of the check cashed by the IRS. Separate envelopes. For security and quality control reasons.
Third point is catch them in a mis use of the language. Insure versus Ensure for example.
Fourth? Die. Naturally and have your last known address listed as the plot number but only #549.
The government knows it's a bunch of screw ups. Just don't tell them that to their face or publicly...
Whoops!
We need more of what used to be called vocational education, not everyone needs years of college. However, the liberal arts courses still have value in helping students communicate and understand various groups of people and what they need done and why. A computer programer, must be able to communicate with an engineer or an accountant or they are worthless. We have too many CEOs who are so in love with their own indoctrination, that they cannot see beyond their own noses. I attended a college which included several mandatory interdisciplinary courses, where a an era or subject was studied from the subjects of science, math, art, and literature. I also has a professor who told students he could not give them knowledge, but he could show them how to find it for themselves.
.Maybe the market will cause change, but it is likely to still be a flawed change, with too may powers who want sheeple?