3 ms·

My point is there's a very valuable window at that age to permanently learn things. The window should be used to, for example, learn a ton of vocabulary in a fo

My point is there's a very valuable window at that age to permanently learn things. The window should be used to, for example, learn a ton of vocabulary in a foreign language. Or learn a bunch of arithmetic tables by heart, so you can do mental arithmetic without even thinking hard. To waste the window is silly. Learning such things as I mentioned isn't "parroting."

loup-vaillant 13y ago
I agree. I am thankful for my dull, rote learning of multiplication tables. I do maintain my reservation above however. Currently, schools are doing way too much rote learning, and do not teach the fundamentals of good thinking.
jerf 13y ago
I agree, but there needs to be some good selection. Memorizing multiplication tables will serve you for the rest of your life. (Especially since it doesn't even take all that much, there's a lot of symmetry and patterns in there.) Memorizing huge swathes of a foreign language is the only way to learn it. Memorizing state capitals is debatable. Memorizing who exports the most bananas is USELESS. In 30 years, it may not even be true anymore. Learning the basics of geology may be useful; learning intensive, college-geology-major details about mineral crystallization is a waste of precious time. What burns me is that there is so much good stuff in the world to learn, more than you could ever possibly learn, and they waste our time so frivolously. They sit your child down in front of the world's finest multi-course banquet ever conceived, then thoughtlessly stuff them full of dry crackers, because that's what the standards say we have to do. Augh. Such a waste.
- SiVal 13y ago
  I agree with you. Older minds analyze better than younger minds. They have more knowledge to bring to bear on a topic. Younger minds memorize better than older minds--repeated things make more of a lasting imprint. Both young and old need to do both, but the best results come from using this time-limited memorization advantage strategically, not haphazardly. Unfortunately, that's not what we do (in the US). Memorization is described by progressive educrats as "drill and kill". Instead of carefully analyzing what should be memorized to provide the most strategic leverage, they deprecate it almost entirely. Why put a lot of effort, they ask, into memorizing anything in the 21st Century? Multiplication tables? Everyone will have a calculator, they answer. Geography? Google! No, they insist, understanding is what matters: concepts, not facts, as if people reason better with facts stored at Google than with facts in their own heads. Then they rush students through too much material too quickly for serious analysis. Our minds have multiple modes of operation, and when we don't have time to figure things out, Plan B is to stop analyzing and just try to remember--use memory and metaknowledge about tests to pass. The writer's daughter was explicitly aware of that mode switch. So we end up with a "progressive" education industry denigrating memorization as a knuckle-dragging, traditional practice with the result that, instead of eliminating memorization itself, they just eliminate the "strategic" part.

loup-vaillant 13y ago

I agree. I am thankful for my dull, rote learning of multiplication tables. I do maintain my reservation above however. Currently, schools are doing way too much rote learning, and do not teach the fundamentals of good thinking.

jerf 13y ago

I agree, but there needs to be some good selection. Memorizing multiplication tables will serve you for the rest of your life. (Especially since it doesn't even take all that much, there's a lot of symmetry and patterns in there.) Memorizing huge swathes of a foreign language is the only way to learn it. Memorizing state capitals is debatable. Memorizing who exports the most bananas is USELESS. In 30 years, it may not even be true anymore. Learning the basics of geology may be useful; learning intensive, college-geology-major details about mineral crystallization is a waste of precious time. What burns me is that there is so much good stuff in the world to learn, more than you could ever possibly learn, and they waste our time so frivolously. They sit your child down in front of the world's finest multi-course banquet ever conceived, then thoughtlessly stuff them full of dry crackers, because that's what the standards say we have to do. Augh. Such a waste.

SiVal 13y ago
I agree with you. Older minds analyze better than younger minds. They have more knowledge to bring to bear on a topic. Younger minds memorize better than older minds--repeated things make more of a lasting imprint. Both young and old need to do both, but the best results come from using this time-limited memorization advantage strategically, not haphazardly. Unfortunately, that's not what we do (in the US). Memorization is described by progressive educrats as "drill and kill". Instead of carefully analyzing what should be memorized to provide the most strategic leverage, they deprecate it almost entirely. Why put a lot of effort, they ask, into memorizing anything in the 21st Century? Multiplication tables? Everyone will have a calculator, they answer. Geography? Google! No, they insist, understanding is what matters: concepts, not facts, as if people reason better with facts stored at Google than with facts in their own heads. Then they rush students through too much material too quickly for serious analysis. Our minds have multiple modes of operation, and when we don't have time to figure things out, Plan B is to stop analyzing and just try to remember--use memory and metaknowledge about tests to pass. The writer's daughter was explicitly aware of that mode switch. So we end up with a "progressive" education industry denigrating memorization as a knuckle-dragging, traditional practice with the result that, instead of eliminating memorization itself, they just eliminate the "strategic" part.