4 ms·

I agree ... in college you don't have to do 1, 2 or 3. The ability to do them is however a necessary skill (e.g. "I was (generally) allowed to eat, use my lapt

by smoyer 12y ago

I agree ... in college you don't have to do 1, 2 or 3. The ability to do them is however a necessary skill (e.g. "I was (generally) allowed to eat, use my laptop as I saw fit." - but if you browsed the Internet during the entire class period, you'd have completely missed the presented materials). So college classes don't force students into these behaviors like high-school classes often do, but the ability to self-regulate those same behaviors are needed for success.

calibraxis 12y ago
The reasoning goes on. Colleges make people endure boredom & obedience in preparation for future jobs. People should at least be allowed to decide whether some school should waste years of their lives for these (depressing) benefits. Failing that, this reasoning should be made crystal clear.
ObviousScience 12y ago
Sorry for the late reply, but I think the difference of being able to regulate my level of attention, ie, browsing the internet when the lecture is particularly dragging, being able to look things up when I get confused, etc actually make it easier to focus on the large majority of the lecture. By being able to take quick mental breaks, and not having to expend full focus when, eg, the professor is belaboring the part of it that I already know because other students did bad on the quiz, for instance, actually makes it easier to stay fresh and focused during the other parts of the class. Self-regulation, even if you end up doing mostly the same thing, is substantially different from being forced to do it continually, at least in terms of the mental strain it places on me. I always got much more out of long lectures where my attention sort of wandered in and out, and was punctuated by a mixture of doodles, thinking about other things, and sharply focusing on the key points and arguments. Let's not pretend every word out of a professor's mouth is golden, and the students are going to be seriously disadvantaged if they miss a few here and there. Part of the disservice we're doing to high school students is that we're not actually teaching them to self-regulate in a useful way: we're teaching them to do all or nothing.

by smoyer 12y ago

calibraxis 12y ago

The reasoning goes on. Colleges make people endure boredom & obedience in preparation for future jobs. People should at least be allowed to decide whether some school should waste years of their lives for these (depressing) benefits. Failing that, this reasoning should be made crystal clear.

ObviousScience 12y ago

Sorry for the late reply, but I think the difference of being able to regulate my level of attention, ie, browsing the internet when the lecture is particularly dragging, being able to look things up when I get confused, etc actually make it easier to focus on the large majority of the lecture. By being able to take quick mental breaks, and not having to expend full focus when, eg, the professor is belaboring the part of it that I already know because other students did bad on the quiz, for instance, actually makes it easier to stay fresh and focused during the other parts of the class. Self-regulation, even if you end up doing mostly the same thing, is substantially different from being forced to do it continually, at least in terms of the mental strain it places on me. I always got much more out of long lectures where my attention sort of wandered in and out, and was punctuated by a mixture of doodles, thinking about other things, and sharply focusing on the key points and arguments. Let's not pretend every word out of a professor's mouth is golden, and the students are going to be seriously disadvantaged if they miss a few here and there. Part of the disservice we're doing to high school students is that we're not actually teaching them to self-regulate in a useful way: we're teaching them to do all or nothing.