• BlackLaZoR@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    3 months ago

    Students don’t learn by just going to class then doing nothing afterwards

    Really? Then why are they going there in the first place???

    And how do you get that juicy job experience allowing you to negotiate higher wage? You spend time on homework given you by your boss???

    Jesus I wish I could get paid for just going to school.

    Maybe you should be paid for passed exams and decent grades?

    • Eggyhead@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’ve always believed that fiscal responsibility and interpersonal skills should be taught in schools. Add online etiquette and context interpretation to that list as well.

      Also, who’s going to pay you? You’re going to school so you can learn how to make money for yourself later. If you don’t do your schoolwork, you might end up making less than others who did because you’ll be less experienced with it.

      • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        That’s something only a teacher would say. As someone who did all their school work and got a fancy engineering job, a lot of it was bogus busy work that 99% of us have completely forgotten.

        You can’t tell me that I needed two teachers having me comb through the book for words that weren’t part of the index so that I could rewrite the word’s textbook definition on a piece of paper verbatim on a weekly basis and that that was a good education experience.

        You can’t tell me my high school study hall where they’d give you something to do if you were bored and forbid you from sleeping or playing games unless the study hall monitor “liked you” was a good experience.

        I mean my high school algebra teacher couldn’t even remember the algebra lesson she’d taught every year for over a decade when I had her. If it was really a life skill or that important, she would’ve remembered.

        In calculus they teach you the hard way to differentiate and then they’re just like “ah but actually you can do it this way and that’s how everyone does it.”

        Artificially raising the difficulty by forbidding formula sheets in math is also just stupid. If you can see the problem, recognize which formula to use, and use it, that should be enough.

        We’re just straight up wasting millions of hours of people’s time with our education system that has very little merit in terms of long term results and retention and negatively affects both people that come out of it “passing with flying colors” and people that flunk out because of various home life circumstances, bad teachers, difficult with the material, or a lack of interest.

        Students are miserable (suicide is at an all time high last I checked and I’m pretty confident it’s not just about social media), administrators are miserable, teachers are miserable, and kids really don’t learn all that much that stays with them into adulthood. We desperately try to shove way too much information into people’s heads in a very dry and uncaptivating way. We need to throw the system out and figure out how to teach what matters and change/replace stuff that doesn’t matter or make sense (e.g. we changed the spelling of various words in the past, why don’t we fix them instead of teaching a bunch of ridiculous spellings that make no sense like facade, ghost, llama, etc).

        • moomoomoo309@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          To the spelling point: The world, for the most part, has moved away from the grammarian tradition of the 19th and 20th century of having a handful of dictionary makers decide what English is proper and what isn’t - the language evolves on its own, and if a misspelling becomes popular enough, it becomes a proper spelling. For example, facade is a french word, spelled façade, the accent under the C means it’s pronounced like an S. We dropped it in English because we don’t use accents in English, and now we spell it facade. It’s a “misspelling”, but you’ve probably never spelled it correctly. The language was never consistent to begin with, pretending you can fix spelling to make it so is a fool’s errand.

          • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            I disagree that it’s a fools errand. Misspellings rarely become popular enough to become “proper” because we teach everyone the “proper” spelling and we have spell checkers on our computers that are used for virtually everything.

            There’s no method for the people speaking the English language to put pressure on a word that already exists because we’ve build up this infrastructure to "lock things in’ and insist that “they’ve been this way so they must continue to be this way.” The only way we get language evolution currently is via slang … which is hardly a way to get a better language.

            I know the history of facade, it’s like many other words we’ve stolen from other languages that don’t make a lick of sense in our alphabet. It’s not an infinite list, it’s fixable, but we need to change the mind share that “it has to be this way.”

            We made up official spellings, we can fix them, they’re not an immutable law of nature.

            • moomoomoo309@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 months ago

              The fool’s errand is trying to make the language consistent, when it never has been, especially trying to do it via spelling. English isn’t consistent. It’s not supposed to be. It takes pieces from every other language and integrates them into English whether it makes sense to or not, leading to inconsistency. That inconsistency, I think, is by design. It makes the language more versatile than any other, a “good enough” medium of communication for everything, but usually not the best, which for communication, tends to be fine.

                • moomoomoo309@programming.dev
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  That’s not at all the argument I’m making. My argument is that English’s inconsistency is, at this point, the reason it is successful. By integrating everything into it, it has become a good enough medium of communication for almost everything. That would not have been possible unless the language eschewed consistency.

                  Really, a better argument against changing the spelling is the classic “standards” xkcd, where now you’re just making another dialect of English where they spell words differently again, and now it needs to be adopted, fracturing the language further. Honestly, though? It doesn’t matter. Fix the spelling if you want. English can take the fracturing. The changes might take, they might not, but I doubt it’ll make the language more consistent overall, for every fix you put in, you’ll have someone who disagrees and doesn’t put it in, making your dialect more consistent, but the language overall less so, but it doesn’t matter. English will continue to be inconsistent, and that’s okay, that’s why it works.

                  • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    By integrating everything into it, it has become a good enough medium of communication for almost everything.

                    Except that’s not at all what we’ve done.

                    The only reason English dominates is because it’s the dominant language of the world super powers following world war II. It’s not because of some special design, principle, or properties.

                    English isn’t just “make up whatever rules and put them wherever”, particularly formal English which is what we’re talking about in the context of education.

                    Really, a better argument against changing the spelling is the classic “standards” xkcd, where now you’re just making another dialect of English where they spell words differently again, and now it needs to be adopted, fracturing the language further.

                    Language will evolve with or without direction. We have the structure in the form of schools to actually evolve it with direction in the name of making things more consistent and intuitive. We should use it, that’s all.