5 ms·

What I have grown to appreciate recently is the social aspect of human learning. For a lot of us, perhaps most, being in a social environment greatly assists wi

What I have grown to appreciate recently is the social aspect of human learning. For a lot of us, perhaps most, being in a social environment greatly assists with learning. Hence having small classrooms where students and teachers can interact with each other. I found the importance of the social aspect most vividly in webinars: - A live webinar and a pre recorded webinar where attendees only passively watch and do not participate are exactly the same except for the feeling of being “live” - That said, individuals are many more times likely to dial into a live webinar than a pre recorded one —- it’s because of the social aspect I ran a series of webinars at work and saw these principles play out first hand (I did a write up on how to organize effective webinars for anyone interested: https://link.medium.com/Bpq4EH8Ymcb https://link.medium.com/Bpq4EH8Ymcb) I feel we will learn more from an average teacher who we socially interact with than the best teacher from who we are not socially connected. There’s something about humans being social creatures that we best accept knowledge in a social sphere. I say this as an anti social person who prefers to read textbooks than watch videos or talk to people :D But through the years I realize I am more in the minority. This is why meetings in companies are very important - for us hackers it sounds like a waste of time - but for a lot of the genera populace, a meeting is an easier way to absorb information because of the social aspects to it. Many people I think struggle to learn anything without an interactive session

powerapple 6y ago
A good teacher do so much more than an average teacher. I remember I was in school, and had a few good teachers. They are brilliant. They teach well, you learn faster, and you get hooked with the subject. My chemistry teacher on the other hand was mediocre, I had no interests in chemistry at all, and I did really bad. There were many students in my class did well in Chemistry, and many of us did well in Physics. The difference is teaching. Of course, social aspects is important, when you can have everything, having everything is the best you should aim for. The study of this shows a solution to schools which couldn't attract good teachers due to location, fund or something else, it is not applicable to general schools and general teaching.
- abhinav22 6y ago
  You raise valid points that I agree with. Perhaps to better rephrase, assuming an adequate level of teaching ability, in person teaching or well constructed digital sessions where the social aspect is not removed, is likely more effective than simply listening to the best teachers but in a less social manner. Our goal should be to increase the baseline level of quality for teachers and not just concentrate teaching to a select few orators who broadcast to large groups. My original comment was partly in response to another comment on this page, so apologize if it is a bit tangent to the study at hand
crispyambulance 6y ago
> where students and teachers can interact with each other. There's another dimension to interactivity that is not merely social. Really excellent teachers in a "small enough" class-size are able to assess individual students IN THE CLASSROOM. Interactivity in this context means the teachers pose questions to students individually or as a group and orchestrate coherent learning-focused discussions. This is the basis of the Harkness Method which is used in the most elite private schools where class-size is in the singe digits.
- abhinav22 6y ago
  Good point (and also hard to achieve - I tip my hat off to all the excellent teachers who do this everyday, not an easy task to achieve).
kodah 6y ago
Interestingly I've made a successful career in this field in the opposite way it sounds like you did. I dropped out of college for unforseen circumstances and had to self-learn things like maths, data structures, and algorithms as academics routinely use these as litmus tests in interviews. My learning wasn't social. It was spent during my breaks at my dead end jobs, after work, etc. If I found a topic I didn't understand there was no tutoring, professor to reexplain, or even friends to ask (for a long time I didn't know many people in this industry) The result is that I learn new things quite easily, I can usually distill topics down easily for folks or represent them in a multitude of ways, I'm unafraid of failure, and I don't spend my workdays socializing. I still enjoy socializing, just not at work. This is why meetings at companies seem so frivolous. What could be communicated in an email, slack message, or hallway conversation is left to a meeting and I often wondered if it's just because these folks want free lunch and some socialization.
- emteycz 6y ago
  I had the same experience. Exactly the same thoughts about endless meetings about stuff that can be easily sent in a message...
  - minot 6y ago
    Just playing the devil’s advocate here based on the top comment but what do we really mean when we say this meeting could be an email? Perhaps, the meeting isn’t interactive enough? Why have a meeting at all if not everyone in the meeting is providing input/asking questions? If the topic is already done and decided and the chapter is closed, I agree it could be an email to a list and you can reach out to the presenter with questions. Things like when a boss calls a meeting to say we are working from home until further notice and nobody is allowed to talk. But if we allow people to raise their hand and ask questions and things can change based on participant input then maybe a meeting is warranted? Just thinking out loud...
    - thrower123 6y ago
      It generally means that all of the signal amidst the noise and confusion that took up 30 minutes to an hour, multiplied across all the participants, could have been distilled down into 3-5 bullet points. Most meetings are held to transfer information, in the most lossy format possible.
bnralt 6y ago
> I feel we will learn more from an average teacher who we socially interact with than the best teacher from who we are not socially connected. Further - I wonder if students would do much better with 1/3 the amount of school time and 1/3 the class size. Instead of 6 hours a day in a class of 21 kids, 2 hours a day in a class of 7.
- abhinav22 6y ago
  It’s a good point - there may be a point of optimization, however my gut feel is 2 hours is too short and 6 hours too long. But that’s pure speculation as it’s not my field
  - a20201220 6y ago
    As a parent of two young children, 6 hours at school seems short. If both parents are away for 9 hours -- 8:30 AM - 5:30 PM, work 9-5 and half hour commute each way -- then who watches children for the 3 hours not at school? China's school hours are 7:30 AM to 5 PM, and include a 2-hour lunch [1]. That seems to yield academic excellence and a strong economy. [1] https://www.infoplease.com/world/social-statistics/school-years-around-world https://www.infoplease.com/world/social-statistics/school-ye...
    - slightlytyler 6y ago
      So we're optimizing for parents and their childcare needs. It always seemed to me that childcare was a separate but intersectional problem and we do a disservice to our students by confusing it as the same problem. Also China feels like a very poor comparison target as a westerner
      - a20201220 6y ago
        Childcare and education are not the same, but for working parents the intersection is massive and unavoidable. My question, phrased differently: given a scenario where both parents are away at work for 9 hours per day, and school is 6 hours per day, are the remaining 3 hours not in school more enriching for children than time in school?

powerapple 6y ago

A good teacher do so much more than an average teacher. I remember I was in school, and had a few good teachers. They are brilliant. They teach well, you learn faster, and you get hooked with the subject. My chemistry teacher on the other hand was mediocre, I had no interests in chemistry at all, and I did really bad. There were many students in my class did well in Chemistry, and many of us did well in Physics. The difference is teaching. Of course, social aspects is important, when you can have everything, having everything is the best you should aim for. The study of this shows a solution to schools which couldn't attract good teachers due to location, fund or something else, it is not applicable to general schools and general teaching.

abhinav22 6y ago
You raise valid points that I agree with. Perhaps to better rephrase, assuming an adequate level of teaching ability, in person teaching or well constructed digital sessions where the social aspect is not removed, is likely more effective than simply listening to the best teachers but in a less social manner. Our goal should be to increase the baseline level of quality for teachers and not just concentrate teaching to a select few orators who broadcast to large groups. My original comment was partly in response to another comment on this page, so apologize if it is a bit tangent to the study at hand

crispyambulance 6y ago

> where students and teachers can interact with each other. There's another dimension to interactivity that is not merely social. Really excellent teachers in a "small enough" class-size are able to assess individual students IN THE CLASSROOM. Interactivity in this context means the teachers pose questions to students individually or as a group and orchestrate coherent learning-focused discussions. This is the basis of the Harkness Method which is used in the most elite private schools where class-size is in the singe digits.

abhinav22 6y ago
Good point (and also hard to achieve - I tip my hat off to all the excellent teachers who do this everyday, not an easy task to achieve).

kodah 6y ago

Interestingly I've made a successful career in this field in the opposite way it sounds like you did. I dropped out of college for unforseen circumstances and had to self-learn things like maths, data structures, and algorithms as academics routinely use these as litmus tests in interviews. My learning wasn't social. It was spent during my breaks at my dead end jobs, after work, etc. If I found a topic I didn't understand there was no tutoring, professor to reexplain, or even friends to ask (for a long time I didn't know many people in this industry) The result is that I learn new things quite easily, I can usually distill topics down easily for folks or represent them in a multitude of ways, I'm unafraid of failure, and I don't spend my workdays socializing. I still enjoy socializing, just not at work. This is why meetings at companies seem so frivolous. What could be communicated in an email, slack message, or hallway conversation is left to a meeting and I often wondered if it's just because these folks want free lunch and some socialization.

emteycz 6y ago
I had the same experience. Exactly the same thoughts about endless meetings about stuff that can be easily sent in a message...
- minot 6y ago
  Just playing the devil’s advocate here based on the top comment but what do we really mean when we say this meeting could be an email? Perhaps, the meeting isn’t interactive enough? Why have a meeting at all if not everyone in the meeting is providing input/asking questions? If the topic is already done and decided and the chapter is closed, I agree it could be an email to a list and you can reach out to the presenter with questions. Things like when a boss calls a meeting to say we are working from home until further notice and nobody is allowed to talk. But if we allow people to raise their hand and ask questions and things can change based on participant input then maybe a meeting is warranted? Just thinking out loud...
  - thrower123 6y ago
    It generally means that all of the signal amidst the noise and confusion that took up 30 minutes to an hour, multiplied across all the participants, could have been distilled down into 3-5 bullet points. Most meetings are held to transfer information, in the most lossy format possible.

bnralt 6y ago

> I feel we will learn more from an average teacher who we socially interact with than the best teacher from who we are not socially connected. Further - I wonder if students would do much better with 1/3 the amount of school time and 1/3 the class size. Instead of 6 hours a day in a class of 21 kids, 2 hours a day in a class of 7.

abhinav22 6y ago
It’s a good point - there may be a point of optimization, however my gut feel is 2 hours is too short and 6 hours too long. But that’s pure speculation as it’s not my field
- a20201220 6y ago
  As a parent of two young children, 6 hours at school seems short. If both parents are away for 9 hours -- 8:30 AM - 5:30 PM, work 9-5 and half hour commute each way -- then who watches children for the 3 hours not at school? China's school hours are 7:30 AM to 5 PM, and include a 2-hour lunch [1]. That seems to yield academic excellence and a strong economy. [1] https://www.infoplease.com/world/social-statistics/school-years-around-world https://www.infoplease.com/world/social-statistics/school-ye...
  - slightlytyler 6y ago
    So we're optimizing for parents and their childcare needs. It always seemed to me that childcare was a separate but intersectional problem and we do a disservice to our students by confusing it as the same problem. Also China feels like a very poor comparison target as a westerner
    - a20201220 6y ago
      Childcare and education are not the same, but for working parents the intersection is massive and unavoidable. My question, phrased differently: given a scenario where both parents are away at work for 9 hours per day, and school is 6 hours per day, are the remaining 3 hours not in school more enriching for children than time in school?