5 ms·

I think you're missing the point, maybe because you too went through a traditional school? Most kids in traditional schools who don't want to do math or read be

by spraak 9y ago

I think you're missing the point, maybe because you too went through a traditional school? Most kids in traditional schools who don't want to do math or read because they don't have something hard or interesting to motivate them. But in free school settings the focus is first on what you want to accomplish and then how to do that, which most often then involves learning to read, write and math as an avenue to achieve something greater. It's similar to your pianist example but the motivation is internal. I wouldn't want to force any child to continue doing something they don't like just because I see value in it. I highly doubt "all great piano players" have been coerced that way. And those who have are probably out of touch with what they really want to be doing. Just because you can be great at something doesn't make it your calling.

deepsun 9y ago
The assumption you're making is that it's always possible and easy to create that motivation. I totally agree that motivated student studies 100x better, I just think it's impossible to motivate student 100% of time. A teacher that is able to achieve 50% motivation deserves the Medal of Honor. In the end, it all boils down to teachers. Good teachers worth gold by weight. From my own life example: I was literally forced to learn some subjects in college (I'm mathematician), but 10 years later I'm re-studying the same subjects, now on my own. And it really helps that I learned them previously, as I already have a global overlook of the whole area, and know where I am, what should work, and what must be too hard to try.
- spraak 9y ago
  The biggest point you missed is that I am talking about non traditional schooling. Of course things are easier when you previously learned them. You're also missing that I'm talking about encouraging what someone already wants to learn. I didn't learn computer science until I was 24, but now I'm employed as a software engineer. I only needed my own internal motivation to study. There's no reason you couldn't be a mathematician later in life without previously having studied mathematics. It's just an excuse to think you couldn't do it without having been forced to earlier.
watwut 9y ago
I always disliked learning foreign languages, but the hell I am happy that I can speak English. It would be huge disadvantage now and it would be harder to learn it now. I was never particularly interested in history, but I am glad they taught me some basics in elementary school. I could go on. You assume that only top level knowledge matters. You also assume that every kid will be interested in everything, if only the teacher and environment did everything perfectly. Neither is true. It is possible to learn things you are not particularly excited about. It is also possible to become later on interested in something you was not excited about initially. Things tend to become easier and more pleasant once you learned basics, learning basics part is the hardest one. "But in free school settings the focus is first on what you want to accomplish and then how to do that, which most often then involves learning to read, write and math as an avenue to achieve something greater." I prefer teachers who can make kids interested in math itself and physics itself and history itself and writing itself even if it is not immediately useful. It wont work on every kid and all kids will like some things more then other things, of course. But starting with assumption that it is not possible for them so lets not even try sound like definition of low expectations.
- spraak 9y ago
  > You also assume that every kid will be interested in everything, if only the teacher and environment did everything perfectly. Neither is true. No, I'm saying that the teacher/school environment is contaminated and we don't need it. It's imperfect, so let's get rid of it. It can't be made perfect. I'm saying that everyone has something they are naturally interested in. Even if that's just being on Facebook. Eventually you'll learn to read if you want to browse Facebook. > It is possible to learn things you are not particularly excited about. It is also possible to become later on interested in something you was not excited about initially. Yes, that's true. But it doesn't mean that's the only way. > I prefer teachers who can make kids interested in math itself and physics itself and history itself and writing itself even if it is not immediately useful. Uhm, why? There's no real reason. > But starting with assumption that it is not possible for them so lets not even try sound like definition of low expectations. I didn't say it's not possible. I said it doesn't work well. There are countless examples of being taught something we don't like and yet we're good at it. Yes, you're grateful for being encouraged to learn English in school, but you could have just as well learned it through your own motivation.
Balgair 9y ago
"Most kids in traditional schools who don't want to do math or read because they don't have something hard or interesting to motivate them." Yeah, I'm gonna call shenanigans here. SO is a HS teacher, her kids really really really do not want to learn. They want to either play Minecraft, snapchat their genitals to each other, watch porn, or just gossip between themselves. Oh and drugs and sex in the bathroom, as usual. Occasionally, they turn to real crime and assault each other (one is still in a coma), pimp themselves out on Instagram for money (either sex), or hurt themselves (suicide clusters, it's 'a thing' now [1]). For about 1/3rd of her kids, if they come to school stoned to Pluto or drunk as skunks, that's a victory; at least they came to school and weren't out committing felonies or having felonies committed against them. Look, the super-crunchy idea of kids that are naturally curious is really just ... rich and white. Like, kids in an inner city/dense urban environment have waaaaaay more serous shit to deal with. They get raped habitually by their mother's many 'boyfriends', they don't eat all weekend and if they do it's 2 bags of Cheetos, they have drugs forced on them by family members that really do think pot is medicine and can cure everything, their parents think school is nonsense and they should start working the fields to earn something for the family, etc. You ideas are great, but that is not how life is these days, poverty and racism fucking suck. [1] Not my SO's state, but a good overview: http://www.newsweek.com/2016/10/28/teen-suicide-contagious-colorado-springs-511365.html http://www.newsweek.com/2016/10/28/teen-suicide-contagious-c...
- wyldfire 9y ago
  > SO is a HS teacher, her kids really really really do not want to learn. ... [lots of examples of bad behavior at school and awful things that happen to kids] Your point does seem reasonable that many kids would not thrive at all in a self-directed learning environment. But maybe you also (unintentionally) make the point that they shouldn't be in the traditional school either? What is the function of the traditional school for students whose motivations are so far apart from the school's? Merely to detain them to avoid the bad behavior near their homes? Do those kids grow up to be adults who think "thank goodness I went to high school otherwise I would have done yet more crime+drugs?"
  - coding123 9y ago

by spraak 9y ago

deepsun 9y ago

The assumption you're making is that it's always possible and easy to create that motivation. I totally agree that motivated student studies 100x better, I just think it's impossible to motivate student 100% of time. A teacher that is able to achieve 50% motivation deserves the Medal of Honor. In the end, it all boils down to teachers. Good teachers worth gold by weight. From my own life example: I was literally forced to learn some subjects in college (I'm mathematician), but 10 years later I'm re-studying the same subjects, now on my own. And it really helps that I learned them previously, as I already have a global overlook of the whole area, and know where I am, what should work, and what must be too hard to try.

spraak 9y ago
The biggest point you missed is that I am talking about non traditional schooling. Of course things are easier when you previously learned them. You're also missing that I'm talking about encouraging what someone already wants to learn. I didn't learn computer science until I was 24, but now I'm employed as a software engineer. I only needed my own internal motivation to study. There's no reason you couldn't be a mathematician later in life without previously having studied mathematics. It's just an excuse to think you couldn't do it without having been forced to earlier.

watwut 9y ago

I always disliked learning foreign languages, but the hell I am happy that I can speak English. It would be huge disadvantage now and it would be harder to learn it now. I was never particularly interested in history, but I am glad they taught me some basics in elementary school. I could go on. You assume that only top level knowledge matters. You also assume that every kid will be interested in everything, if only the teacher and environment did everything perfectly. Neither is true. It is possible to learn things you are not particularly excited about. It is also possible to become later on interested in something you was not excited about initially. Things tend to become easier and more pleasant once you learned basics, learning basics part is the hardest one. "But in free school settings the focus is first on what you want to accomplish and then how to do that, which most often then involves learning to read, write and math as an avenue to achieve something greater." I prefer teachers who can make kids interested in math itself and physics itself and history itself and writing itself even if it is not immediately useful. It wont work on every kid and all kids will like some things more then other things, of course. But starting with assumption that it is not possible for them so lets not even try sound like definition of low expectations.

spraak 9y ago
> You also assume that every kid will be interested in everything, if only the teacher and environment did everything perfectly. Neither is true. No, I'm saying that the teacher/school environment is contaminated and we don't need it. It's imperfect, so let's get rid of it. It can't be made perfect. I'm saying that everyone has something they are naturally interested in. Even if that's just being on Facebook. Eventually you'll learn to read if you want to browse Facebook. > It is possible to learn things you are not particularly excited about. It is also possible to become later on interested in something you was not excited about initially. Yes, that's true. But it doesn't mean that's the only way. > I prefer teachers who can make kids interested in math itself and physics itself and history itself and writing itself even if it is not immediately useful. Uhm, why? There's no real reason. > But starting with assumption that it is not possible for them so lets not even try sound like definition of low expectations. I didn't say it's not possible. I said it doesn't work well. There are countless examples of being taught something we don't like and yet we're good at it. Yes, you're grateful for being encouraged to learn English in school, but you could have just as well learned it through your own motivation.

Balgair 9y ago

"Most kids in traditional schools who don't want to do math or read because they don't have something hard or interesting to motivate them." Yeah, I'm gonna call shenanigans here. SO is a HS teacher, her kids really really really do not want to learn. They want to either play Minecraft, snapchat their genitals to each other, watch porn, or just gossip between themselves. Oh and drugs and sex in the bathroom, as usual. Occasionally, they turn to real crime and assault each other (one is still in a coma), pimp themselves out on Instagram for money (either sex), or hurt themselves (suicide clusters, it's 'a thing' now [1]). For about 1/3rd of her kids, if they come to school stoned to Pluto or drunk as skunks, that's a victory; at least they came to school and weren't out committing felonies or having felonies committed against them. Look, the super-crunchy idea of kids that are naturally curious is really just ... rich and white. Like, kids in an inner city/dense urban environment have waaaaaay more serous shit to deal with. They get raped habitually by their mother's many 'boyfriends', they don't eat all weekend and if they do it's 2 bags of Cheetos, they have drugs forced on them by family members that really do think pot is medicine and can cure everything, their parents think school is nonsense and they should start working the fields to earn something for the family, etc. You ideas are great, but that is not how life is these days, poverty and racism fucking suck. [1] Not my SO's state, but a good overview: http://www.newsweek.com/2016/10/28/teen-suicide-contagious-colorado-springs-511365.html http://www.newsweek.com/2016/10/28/teen-suicide-contagious-c...

wyldfire 9y ago
> SO is a HS teacher, her kids really really really do not want to learn. ... [lots of examples of bad behavior at school and awful things that happen to kids] Your point does seem reasonable that many kids would not thrive at all in a self-directed learning environment. But maybe you also (unintentionally) make the point that they shouldn't be in the traditional school either? What is the function of the traditional school for students whose motivations are so far apart from the school's? Merely to detain them to avoid the bad behavior near their homes? Do those kids grow up to be adults who think "thank goodness I went to high school otherwise I would have done yet more crime+drugs?"
- coding123 9y ago