3 ms·

I don’t think that would necessarily work because some of the subjects deeply integrate with one another. For example, English and math have huge crossover beca

I don’t think that would necessarily work because some of the subjects deeply integrate with one another. For example, English and math have huge crossover because English classes are about being able to convey ideas and you need to have a strong grasp of English to succeed in, say, a statistics class. I think if we could fine-tune instruction to skill levels, while still requiring a strong foundation in each subject, we would be much better off in the education scene.

em-bee 5y ago
i believe this correlation is more accidental than planned. i doubt that there is anyone who can claim to know exactly how much schooling in your native language is necessary before you can successfully pass a statistics class. i believe the reverse is true. taking a statistics class will advance your language skills, because you learn a lot more by application than by theory. and there is no reason that these language skills need to be learned in isolation before you can apply them. so maybe this slows down your learning for a bit, but even that is hardly provable because of different learning speeds of each student which likely vary far more than than the variation that language classes or the lack thereof would introduce. actually, the whole concept of classes for your native language doesn't make sense in this context. learning your native language permeates everything. you learn language in every class, be it math, biology, sports or whatever. a dedicated native language class at best fills in gaps such as learning grammar, linguistics and literature. but it is not, and should not be a prerequisite to learning anything else. the situation is a bit different when the language being used to teach is not your native language. a certain foundation in the language is necessary before you can follow classes, so a number of language classes are a prerequisite in that case
- jackson1442 5y ago
  Contrary to popular opinion, I actually found my English classes incredibly useful— all the way through English Comp for my University Core curriculum. They were less about learning grammar and whatnot (though they did teach to write more eloquently at the higher levels) and more about digesting information and thinking critically. People love to wave English around as the most useless class of them all, but when taught correctly it’s really the most important. It influences how we consume media, how we write, and how we communicate with one another. All of those skills are incredibly important in all other classes and I think having a concentrated environment to learn them is valuable.
  - em-bee 5y ago
    oh, i didn't mean to devalue native language classes in general. apart from the issue that the value of any class depends on how it is taught, i merely wanted to criticize the suggested dependency to other classes. case in point, digesting information and thinking critically are things that should be taught in all classes. i actually find it problematic if a teacher expects that it is some other teachers job to teach any skills that are necessary in their own class. this is just an unnecessary division of learning, when, as i believe, integrated learning should be more effective. this culminates in the concept of project based learning where the whole concept of subject classes disappears and is replaced with interdisciplinary projects that cover all skills necessary to complete a project.
  - xboxnolifes 5y ago
    > ...but when taught correctly it’s really the most important. I think this is the most important point in most discussions about education. I feel that everyone I know has had classes or professors that they either really disliked or really liked, but I also feel that there is a strong chance that many of the cases were not due to them not simply enjoying the subject matter, but instead the content being taught poorly. No matter how well we optimize the selection and ordering of classes, it is of no use if the content is not taught well. For what it's worth, I thought all of my English learning was pretty atrocious.
    - jackson1442 5y ago
      I think part of the problem is that we don't tell people why they're in school learning things. I certainly thought my English classes were useless not even two years ago. I'm sure you've heard the classic "when am I ever going to need to know about Hamlet in the real world?" School, at least beyond elementary education, isn't about knowing all the arbitrary points that you learn. It about learning to learn. The problem, however, is that you can't simply teach people how to learn, so the content you cover in classes is simply a proxy for the real "meat" of education. Some might argue that you can apply this by teaching only classes in a student's focus area, but I argue that being exposed to historical information, statistics, math, computer science, biology, etc. has made me a much more well-rounded human and I possess the skills necessary to understand just about any concept presented at a sub-journal level. That's a skill I've noticed not many have, and it has proven incredibly valuable.
hosh 5y ago
There are school systems that does that — Alaska, for example. It was already impractical to get everyone growing up in the boonies to get to one place. Kids learn at their own pace, but you need to complete the required courses for graduation. Graduation can come earlier … or later. (And then, there are the really radical departures — Unschooling, for example).
- plutonorm 5y ago
  If you had given me an internet connection and freedom from school I would have taught myself. As I continue to do. One of my kids is the same. He doesn’t need school and shouldn’t have to go, as he grows older it will only hold him back.
  - hosh 5y ago
    I take you are responding to the “unschool” thing. What I was thinking of still have people acting as resources, and a curated learning environment. Maybe I was using the wrong term there.

em-bee 5y ago

i believe this correlation is more accidental than planned. i doubt that there is anyone who can claim to know exactly how much schooling in your native language is necessary before you can successfully pass a statistics class. i believe the reverse is true. taking a statistics class will advance your language skills, because you learn a lot more by application than by theory. and there is no reason that these language skills need to be learned in isolation before you can apply them. so maybe this slows down your learning for a bit, but even that is hardly provable because of different learning speeds of each student which likely vary far more than than the variation that language classes or the lack thereof would introduce. actually, the whole concept of classes for your native language doesn't make sense in this context. learning your native language permeates everything. you learn language in every class, be it math, biology, sports or whatever. a dedicated native language class at best fills in gaps such as learning grammar, linguistics and literature. but it is not, and should not be a prerequisite to learning anything else. the situation is a bit different when the language being used to teach is not your native language. a certain foundation in the language is necessary before you can follow classes, so a number of language classes are a prerequisite in that case

jackson1442 5y ago
Contrary to popular opinion, I actually found my English classes incredibly useful— all the way through English Comp for my University Core curriculum. They were less about learning grammar and whatnot (though they did teach to write more eloquently at the higher levels) and more about digesting information and thinking critically. People love to wave English around as the most useless class of them all, but when taught correctly it’s really the most important. It influences how we consume media, how we write, and how we communicate with one another. All of those skills are incredibly important in all other classes and I think having a concentrated environment to learn them is valuable.
- em-bee 5y ago
  oh, i didn't mean to devalue native language classes in general. apart from the issue that the value of any class depends on how it is taught, i merely wanted to criticize the suggested dependency to other classes. case in point, digesting information and thinking critically are things that should be taught in all classes. i actually find it problematic if a teacher expects that it is some other teachers job to teach any skills that are necessary in their own class. this is just an unnecessary division of learning, when, as i believe, integrated learning should be more effective. this culminates in the concept of project based learning where the whole concept of subject classes disappears and is replaced with interdisciplinary projects that cover all skills necessary to complete a project.
- xboxnolifes 5y ago
  > ...but when taught correctly it’s really the most important. I think this is the most important point in most discussions about education. I feel that everyone I know has had classes or professors that they either really disliked or really liked, but I also feel that there is a strong chance that many of the cases were not due to them not simply enjoying the subject matter, but instead the content being taught poorly. No matter how well we optimize the selection and ordering of classes, it is of no use if the content is not taught well. For what it's worth, I thought all of my English learning was pretty atrocious.
  - jackson1442 5y ago
    I think part of the problem is that we don't tell people why they're in school learning things. I certainly thought my English classes were useless not even two years ago. I'm sure you've heard the classic "when am I ever going to need to know about Hamlet in the real world?" School, at least beyond elementary education, isn't about knowing all the arbitrary points that you learn. It about learning to learn. The problem, however, is that you can't simply teach people how to learn, so the content you cover in classes is simply a proxy for the real "meat" of education. Some might argue that you can apply this by teaching only classes in a student's focus area, but I argue that being exposed to historical information, statistics, math, computer science, biology, etc. has made me a much more well-rounded human and I possess the skills necessary to understand just about any concept presented at a sub-journal level. That's a skill I've noticed not many have, and it has proven incredibly valuable.

hosh 5y ago

There are school systems that does that — Alaska, for example. It was already impractical to get everyone growing up in the boonies to get to one place. Kids learn at their own pace, but you need to complete the required courses for graduation. Graduation can come earlier … or later. (And then, there are the really radical departures — Unschooling, for example).

plutonorm 5y ago
If you had given me an internet connection and freedom from school I would have taught myself. As I continue to do. One of my kids is the same. He doesn’t need school and shouldn’t have to go, as he grows older it will only hold him back.
- hosh 5y ago
  I take you are responding to the “unschool” thing. What I was thinking of still have people acting as resources, and a curated learning environment. Maybe I was using the wrong term there.