4 ms·

Self learning and self study is a skill poorly taught or not taught at all. There should be classes for that. This will reduces student's reliance on needing cl

by kiba 3y ago

Self learning and self study is a skill poorly taught or not taught at all. There should be classes for that. This will reduces student's reliance on needing classes to learn materials while at the same time allowing universities to focus on teaching those who needs help the most. That say, there should be (separate) remedial classes for students to acquire knowledge.

PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
I don't disagree, but how do you teach something that requires curiosity to the incurious? I don't think it's as simple as teaching techniques, there has to be motivation there.
- kiba 3y ago
  Curiosity is secondary to learning objectives such as being able to get a job, or simply getting a good grade. That would require restructuring our educational system and by extension our whole society. That's a tall order.
  - PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
    I don't think such escalation is necessary here. the incurious don't learn at the same rate as the curious, we can acknowledge that without making wild claims about how the whole of society needs to be torn down and rebuilt.
tristor 3y ago
I think there's a fundamental philosophical disagreement between people who have experience in advanced science and math subjects and those who are part of society at large. Society at large operates under a philosophy that /anyone/ can learn /anything/ with enough support systems, resources, and instruction in place. Those who have experience in advanced topics realize that there is very real intelligence & personality barrier of entry. If you don't have the intelligence and personality for these topics, the only way you will succeed is via pure grit, because the strongest motivations are intrinsic, not extrinsic. There is a reason there are so many people who claim to be programmers but can't do a FizzBuzz, because colleges manage to churn out thousands of graduates every year who don't have the intelligence and personality to be successful in a technical subject, but are doing it for the money only. Competence is not /only/ trained, it is training on top of talent (intelligence and personality). It requires an above average intelligence to be successful in advanced technical fields, and statistically speaking /most/ people do not have above average intelligence. Trying to solve this problem is likely incompatible with reality.
- kiba 3y ago
  I am not going to discount intelligence as somehow unimportant. After all I basically skated through grade school without having study skills. This bite me in the ass when I actually do need to use study skills. I believe most people are sufficiently intelligent to learn basically any skills and knowledge that they want. The question isn't if they can do it, it's why it's so hard for them to do it? Self learning can be taught. So is emotional self regulation. Those goes hand in hand to finish any projects that you may desire. Now why do college turns out graduates who can't program? It's probably that college isn't churning out programmers, but people who are taught computer science. That's why they can't do FizzBuzz. They lack skills in the fundamentals.
  - PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
    > Now why do college turns out graduates who can't program? It's probably that college isn't churning out programmers, but people who are taught computer science. That's why they can't do FizzBuzz. They lack skills in the fundamentals. The answer is that people study for the test and passing enough tests is all you need to graduate. There is a correlation between graduating and being able to program, but it's not a perfect correlation. > I believe most people are sufficiently intelligent to learn basically any skills and knowledge that they want. It's easy to see this is untrue. replace intelligence with physical ability and it quickly becomes obvious that not everyone is going to be a great boxer or a great basketball player. If you take away the requirement for success, then sure, anyone can do anything. But lets not take that requirement away as that makes your statement unuseful.
    - kiba 3y ago
      It's easy to see this is untrue. replace intelligence with physical ability and it quickly becomes obvious that not everyone is going to be a great boxer or a great basketball player. The standard is fuzzy by what you mean a 'great boxer' or a 'great basketball player'. I'll simply replied that with a fuzzy answer 'at least highly skilled'. I believe most people can potentially trained to run a marathon. By my standard, that's a high level feat. Now, most people aren't actually capable of running a marathon right now, but my point is that it can be achieved. Now you might see that as wildly optimistic, but as I explained, there are factors that prevents people from learning these skills, which can seem pessimistic. We are clearly not teaching in the most optimal fashion with the most optimal mindsets.
randomdata 3y ago
> Self learning and self study is a skill poorly taught or not taught at all. Stands to reason. Most jurisdictions restrict teaching positions to only those who have proven that they haven't figured out how to self-learn. If a self-learner has some desire to teach self-learning, there is little opportunity for them to do so without jumping through an array of pointless hoops that quickly diminish the desire. Which places on the onus on parents. Which is problematic as they may not understand self-learning themselves, and even those who do are apt to not consider that it is a skill to teach, seeing self-learning itself as something to self-learn.

by kiba 3y ago

PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago

I don't disagree, but how do you teach something that requires curiosity to the incurious? I don't think it's as simple as teaching techniques, there has to be motivation there.

kiba 3y ago
Curiosity is secondary to learning objectives such as being able to get a job, or simply getting a good grade. That would require restructuring our educational system and by extension our whole society. That's a tall order.
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
  I don't think such escalation is necessary here. the incurious don't learn at the same rate as the curious, we can acknowledge that without making wild claims about how the whole of society needs to be torn down and rebuilt.

tristor 3y ago

I think there's a fundamental philosophical disagreement between people who have experience in advanced science and math subjects and those who are part of society at large. Society at large operates under a philosophy that /anyone/ can learn /anything/ with enough support systems, resources, and instruction in place. Those who have experience in advanced topics realize that there is very real intelligence & personality barrier of entry. If you don't have the intelligence and personality for these topics, the only way you will succeed is via pure grit, because the strongest motivations are intrinsic, not extrinsic. There is a reason there are so many people who claim to be programmers but can't do a FizzBuzz, because colleges manage to churn out thousands of graduates every year who don't have the intelligence and personality to be successful in a technical subject, but are doing it for the money only. Competence is not /only/ trained, it is training on top of talent (intelligence and personality). It requires an above average intelligence to be successful in advanced technical fields, and statistically speaking /most/ people do not have above average intelligence. Trying to solve this problem is likely incompatible with reality.

kiba 3y ago
I am not going to discount intelligence as somehow unimportant. After all I basically skated through grade school without having study skills. This bite me in the ass when I actually do need to use study skills. I believe most people are sufficiently intelligent to learn basically any skills and knowledge that they want. The question isn't if they can do it, it's why it's so hard for them to do it? Self learning can be taught. So is emotional self regulation. Those goes hand in hand to finish any projects that you may desire. Now why do college turns out graduates who can't program? It's probably that college isn't churning out programmers, but people who are taught computer science. That's why they can't do FizzBuzz. They lack skills in the fundamentals.
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
  > Now why do college turns out graduates who can't program? It's probably that college isn't churning out programmers, but people who are taught computer science. That's why they can't do FizzBuzz. They lack skills in the fundamentals. The answer is that people study for the test and passing enough tests is all you need to graduate. There is a correlation between graduating and being able to program, but it's not a perfect correlation. > I believe most people are sufficiently intelligent to learn basically any skills and knowledge that they want. It's easy to see this is untrue. replace intelligence with physical ability and it quickly becomes obvious that not everyone is going to be a great boxer or a great basketball player. If you take away the requirement for success, then sure, anyone can do anything. But lets not take that requirement away as that makes your statement unuseful.
  - kiba 3y ago
    It's easy to see this is untrue. replace intelligence with physical ability and it quickly becomes obvious that not everyone is going to be a great boxer or a great basketball player. The standard is fuzzy by what you mean a 'great boxer' or a 'great basketball player'. I'll simply replied that with a fuzzy answer 'at least highly skilled'. I believe most people can potentially trained to run a marathon. By my standard, that's a high level feat. Now, most people aren't actually capable of running a marathon right now, but my point is that it can be achieved. Now you might see that as wildly optimistic, but as I explained, there are factors that prevents people from learning these skills, which can seem pessimistic. We are clearly not teaching in the most optimal fashion with the most optimal mindsets.

randomdata 3y ago

> Self learning and self study is a skill poorly taught or not taught at all. Stands to reason. Most jurisdictions restrict teaching positions to only those who have proven that they haven't figured out how to self-learn. If a self-learner has some desire to teach self-learning, there is little opportunity for them to do so without jumping through an array of pointless hoops that quickly diminish the desire. Which places on the onus on parents. Which is problematic as they may not understand self-learning themselves, and even those who do are apt to not consider that it is a skill to teach, seeing self-learning itself as something to self-learn.