5 ms·

Most people spend their whole time in school learning things that they will never, ever use. Pardon my linking to twitter, but this thread really sums it up: h

by rland 7y ago

Most people spend their whole time in school learning things that they will never, ever use. Pardon my linking to twitter, but this thread really sums it up: https://twitter.com/3liza/status/1190843201315147776 https://twitter.com/3liza/status/1190843201315147776 It's been my experience as well. I used to read pop-sci books voraciously from ~1st grade onward, and as a result everything in science classes from middle school until the middle of college were basically review for me. (As a result, I was bored and did poorly in most science/math type courses) Another example is a kid in my high school who was running a reptile business during his sophomore year. They had him doing algebra and writing papers about US history. Why? The kid already knew more than the biology teacher about reptiles. And he made more money than any of us did at 16. Why is he spending 8 hours a day training to take the SAT? 18 year olds can know quite a lot, they're just not allowed to spend time learning things. Instead they have to learn a bunch of useless crap in school, from elementary school onward. All the way up to upper div in college. This is only getting worse, since school (especially "college prep") is sucking all free time out of the lives of children.

ksdale 7y ago
This is largely my position as well. I think kids are capable of drastically more than we expect from them, especially when they are motivated, and there's no reason that 18 year olds shouldn't be perfectly capable of making an impact right at the beginning of adulthood.
kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
Here be dragons. An ignorant electorate will devolve into a society run by subjective mob rule. All those "useless" skills developed in school actually have indirect benefit to society.
- ksdale 7y ago
  Why are you assuming ignorance? In the parent's examples, the kids knew lots of things. Additionally, it is our current state of education that's led to such a large portion of the population being unable to do basic math and the like, which is the definition of ignorance. No one is suggesting less education, just different education.
  - nradov 7y ago
    Did those kids actually know a lot of things, or did they just think they knew a lot of things? My daughter has reached the developmental stage where she's an expert on everything, and on the surface she knows a lot of facts, but her understanding is rather shallow. It takes some age, experience, and (usually) rigorous education to go beyond that stage.
    - closetohome 7y ago
      Because there's more to participating in society than hyper-specialization. You may be the world's greatest herpetologists, but you still need to maintain your finances, do your taxes, and vote in a way that requires historical and contextual knowledge.
      - ksdale 7y ago
        Are kids learning enough to maintain their finances, do their taxes, and vote in a way that integrates historical knowledge? It's not my experience that the average 18 year old knows any of those things, and the article suggests that many people aren't coming away from school with basic literacy or numeracy. This all goes back to a point I alluded to in my first post. When someone suggests that public education is badly broken and perhaps could use an overhaul, they are bombarded with arguments about the importance of education that seem to ignore the fact that a very disappointingly large number of people are not, in fact, receiving anywhere near that level of education.
  - jolmg 7y ago
    Ignorance is a given. The kids knew lots of specialized things, not a well-rounded education. History is important to not repeat the mistakes of the past. Math is important to develop critical thinking skills and a disciplined use of logic. Being educated in these areas offer an "indirect benefit to society", as kevin_thibedeau mentioned. People, though they may be individually smart/educated in their own areas, are dumb in aggregate and in general. It's only by all sharing a holistic education that we can have an educated electorate. After all, in any given area of study, a group of people making decisions by vote is only as smart/educated as the average individual.
Invictus0 7y ago
The 16 your old in your example could have dropped out if he wanted to. Why didn't he?
- tristor 7y ago
  Because dropping out of primary education is HEAVILY penalized in our society in multiple facets, sometimes in non-obvious ways. Dropping out of college does not create a major barrier to success for motivated people, dropping out of high school statistically nearly guarantees a bad life outcome. Even people who drop out and then attain a GED (arguably harder than just graduating) have lower statistical success indicators. As a simple anecdotal example, I have an acquaintance who dropped out of high school because he was bored. He's actually quite above average in intelligence and educated despite not being formally educated. Nonetheless, he had a minor run-in with the law (bar fight, he didn't start it), and due to having his official record with the state showing he was a drop-out he was treated more harshly by the justice system, including having a higher bail set and receiving harsher sentencing. Our society basically just operates under the assumption that if you drop out of high school you are complete fuck-up, so that's the context of how you're judged.
- rland 7y ago
  He did, if I remember right, but it was a mighty struggle. The school fought it at every turn, because it was bad for their metrics.

by rland 7y ago

ksdale 7y ago

This is largely my position as well. I think kids are capable of drastically more than we expect from them, especially when they are motivated, and there's no reason that 18 year olds shouldn't be perfectly capable of making an impact right at the beginning of adulthood.

kevin_thibedeau 7y ago

Here be dragons. An ignorant electorate will devolve into a society run by subjective mob rule. All those "useless" skills developed in school actually have indirect benefit to society.

ksdale 7y ago
Why are you assuming ignorance? In the parent's examples, the kids knew lots of things. Additionally, it is our current state of education that's led to such a large portion of the population being unable to do basic math and the like, which is the definition of ignorance. No one is suggesting less education, just different education.
- nradov 7y ago
  Did those kids actually know a lot of things, or did they just think they knew a lot of things? My daughter has reached the developmental stage where she's an expert on everything, and on the surface she knows a lot of facts, but her understanding is rather shallow. It takes some age, experience, and (usually) rigorous education to go beyond that stage.
  - closetohome 7y ago
    Because there's more to participating in society than hyper-specialization. You may be the world's greatest herpetologists, but you still need to maintain your finances, do your taxes, and vote in a way that requires historical and contextual knowledge.
    - ksdale 7y ago
      Are kids learning enough to maintain their finances, do their taxes, and vote in a way that integrates historical knowledge? It's not my experience that the average 18 year old knows any of those things, and the article suggests that many people aren't coming away from school with basic literacy or numeracy. This all goes back to a point I alluded to in my first post. When someone suggests that public education is badly broken and perhaps could use an overhaul, they are bombarded with arguments about the importance of education that seem to ignore the fact that a very disappointingly large number of people are not, in fact, receiving anywhere near that level of education.
- jolmg 7y ago
  Ignorance is a given. The kids knew lots of specialized things, not a well-rounded education. History is important to not repeat the mistakes of the past. Math is important to develop critical thinking skills and a disciplined use of logic. Being educated in these areas offer an "indirect benefit to society", as kevin_thibedeau mentioned. People, though they may be individually smart/educated in their own areas, are dumb in aggregate and in general. It's only by all sharing a holistic education that we can have an educated electorate. After all, in any given area of study, a group of people making decisions by vote is only as smart/educated as the average individual.

Invictus0 7y ago

The 16 your old in your example could have dropped out if he wanted to. Why didn't he?

tristor 7y ago
Because dropping out of primary education is HEAVILY penalized in our society in multiple facets, sometimes in non-obvious ways. Dropping out of college does not create a major barrier to success for motivated people, dropping out of high school statistically nearly guarantees a bad life outcome. Even people who drop out and then attain a GED (arguably harder than just graduating) have lower statistical success indicators. As a simple anecdotal example, I have an acquaintance who dropped out of high school because he was bored. He's actually quite above average in intelligence and educated despite not being formally educated. Nonetheless, he had a minor run-in with the law (bar fight, he didn't start it), and due to having his official record with the state showing he was a drop-out he was treated more harshly by the justice system, including having a higher bail set and receiving harsher sentencing. Our society basically just operates under the assumption that if you drop out of high school you are complete fuck-up, so that's the context of how you're judged.
rland 7y ago
He did, if I remember right, but it was a mighty struggle. The school fought it at every turn, because it was bad for their metrics.