10 ms·

Our current school system is moronic and this is not an exaggeration. It is the worst possible teaching system I could possibly imagine. Instead of trying to im

Our current school system is moronic and this is not an exaggeration. It is the worst possible teaching system I could possibly imagine. Instead of trying to improve the system it should be scrapped entirely. Here is what is wrong with the current system: - Grading is harmful. A pass should be 100%/A+. You should not be able to progress until you understand the subject matter 100% as future learning depends on you having a complete understanding of previous content. - Grouping students by the year they were born is harmful. Some students progress faster than others. By grouping students this way, some students are held back while others are dragged forward; not understanding vital content. - Grouping a student's progress for all subjects into a single metric is harmful. Eg. grade 1,2,3, etc. Every student will have a natural tendency to be good and bad at certain subjects. Maybe they are good and Physics but bad at English, or vise versa. By grouping a student's progress in all subjects into a single metric a student might be held back in the subjects they are good at or not understand vital content in the subjects they are bad at. Here is what I imagine a good education system would look like: - Students progress through subjects independently of their peers and the other subjects they are studying. - Subject assessment would happen at much smaller increments and students do not progress until they understand that content block 100%. - Students graduate school when they have reached a certain level of competency in all subjects. This could take an arbitrary amount of time. e.g. it might take one student 3 years but another 8. But once a student graduates they will be competent. P.S I used to run an company that developed learning management systems, so I have thought about this stuff a bit and developed a hatred for the current education system.

cbd1984 12y ago
> Students progress through subjects independently of their peers and the other subjects they are studying. The usual objection to this is people's aversion to having children at vastly different levels of physical development in the same classroom. Personally, I don't know whether to buy that argument, but it sounds worth expanding upon. > Students graduate school when they have reached a certain level of competency in all subjects. This could take an arbitrary amount of time. e.g. it might take one student 3 years but another 8. But once a student graduates they will be competent. OK, but at age eighteen, physically preventing them from leaving is against the law, and will likely be punished. I'm only half-joking: At some point, the law recognizes people as full adults, and it is much more difficult to legally restrain an adult, even if they're reading at a fifth-grade level. Personally, I think the answer to that is more and better trade schools, and increased governmental public works programs, but such ideas went from being All-American in the 1930s to Socialism in the 1950s, and we're still not quite past that yet.
- jerf 12y ago
  "All-American in the 1930s to Socialism in the 1950s, and we're still not quite past that yet." Socialism was "All-American" in the 1930s. Then history happened and it garnered itself a rather nasty reputation, which it went to great, great effort to earn fair and square.
- voxic11 12y ago
  I don't think he is saying people should be forced into school if they don't graduate by 18. just that they can't graduate (get a diploma) until they actually learn all the material.
  - coenhyde 12y ago
    exactly
  - dagw 12y ago
    Isn't that true today? Surely you won't get your diploma unless you get minimum necessary grades on the necessary exams.
    - nshepperd 12y ago
      Sure, but unfortunately the minimum necessary grade is currently a 50% "just managed to cram in enough rote learning in the final week to scrape by" pass mark.
      - coldtea 12y ago
        50% and 100% obviously don't mean anything by themselves. You can have a minimum of 50% and still have kinds know 10 times more than what a minimum of 100% course has them. 50% of an advanced course is better than 100% of a course for idiots. It's all about the breadth and deepness of the material, not some arbitrary mark on it, like 50%.
- coenhyde 12y ago
  Your first point is a concern. Maybe there can be some kind of "social class time" where students spend time with kids their own age. Since they are learning more efficiently there is probably time for this :). Re your second point. It's just a graduation, no one is forced to stay in school.
zo1 12y ago
>"A pass should be 100%/A+. You should not be able to progress until you understand the subject matter 100% as future learning depends on you having a complete understanding of previous content." As much as I can see the value in that, it'll never fly. Because, as I'm sure you know, we live in a society of "equals". Therefore, the system you propose will violently shatter that illusion for the general public and mainstream collective-thought. And this will happen because you will very quickly see so many fail miserably and a few plowing through the material. Both due to innate general intelligence, affinity for particular skills/topics as well as plain old determination. We don't all have equal amounts of all, no matter how much we get told otherwise by individuals blaming externalities. And I'll just go ahead and add that I believe I'd be one of the many that would very quickly fail in such a system. At least, until I realized the seriousness of the situation and decided to sit my ass down and study with determination and not rely on any supposed inner ability/gift/talent.
- coenhyde 12y ago
  I addressed this in a comment above but i'll repeat some of it. What I am imagining is a system with a much more granular assessment model that can be done at the student's own pace, and retaken until they get 100%. If you failed an assessment, it's not a problem. You can spend the next 10min relearning the content and retaking the test. This way you actually learn the content that you didn't know, instead of just getting a grading and moving on.
  - com2kid 12y ago
    Your idea seems to be based on the fundamental assumption that the idea in school is to learn facts that can be tested easily. IMHO the idea of school is to teach students how to learn. Knowing when a certain battle happened isn't important, understanding how to view the world through the lens of history is. Knowing how to study the historical background of a culture or society should be what the student learns. Likewise, the goal of English class is not to memorize the parts of speech or memorize famous poems. Learning how to write prose, master communication with the written word, and coherently communicate their thoughts, loves, and desires upon paper, are the ideals towards which students should strive.
eli_gottlieb 12y ago
>- Grading is harmful. A pass should be 100%/A+. You should not be able to progress until you understand the subject matter 100% as future learning depends on you having a complete understanding of previous content. Expert practitioners with decades of experience will often still make one or two mistakes, a couple of "derps", if given a child's exam. This is a broadly good idea, but you need to allow some margin of error for the noisiness of real cognition.
- fixedd 12y ago
  Anecdote: My second grader's teacher sent home school work last week where she "corrected" his correct answer on a spelling test to something that wasn't even a word. She also accidentally a word in her little "good job" blurb at the top. People make mistakes.
- Qwertious 12y ago
  That line wasn't very clear, but I don't think it referred to the actual test/exam, just understanding the subject.
- coenhyde 12y ago
  This is true, but the assessments are very small (10min-30min of learning content assessed) that can retaken as many times as required until the student knows the content.
  - solistice 12y ago
    Whilst testing like that seems to be possible for granular facts and most likely is a great way to handle these, what about conceptual understanding? The only "surefire" way I've found to test that in myself is written condensing of the concept in a way that allows another person to understand the concept from my notes, or actually explaining the concept to another person. That doesn't scale to 20-30 people in a class though since validating that number of explanations is not easy. Random probing using application of the concept however encourages the cooking recipe approach. There's only a number n different types of problems you can generate, and by learning all of those is possible. They're easy to grade, but they don't guarantee full understanding. Then there's using compound problems, where you start mixing concepts. If a student understands say momentum and friction, they should be able to work out a problem involving both. And those are the bane of students who did not invest in conceptual understanding since the number of recipes to learn suddenly increases exponentially. First midterm of physics 101 usually leads to a number of exasperated "This wasn't covered in class". Yes it was, just not this specific recipe. Now the issue with this type of problems is they cover a number of concepts, and pinning down the culprint/s isn't exactly straightforward. I guess you could tackle this through deduction based on a number of pairings (say momentum&impulse,momentum&friction&whatnot...), but noise would mess with that process.
dagw 12y ago
A pass should be 100%/A+ That sounds ridiculous. No one understands their subject matter 100%. I mean take a question like "What where some of the root causes of the start of World War I". A perfectly reasonable question for a 14 years old to spend 30 minutes on in a history exam, but also one that they could spend the next 30 years of their life on and still not answer completely. The only way to expect 100% pass rates on exams is to write stupidly easy exams with pointless multiple choice like "What year was the battle of the Somme". A question which doesn't prove any understanding att all.
- coenhyde 12y ago
  It does sound ridiculous if you put that requirement in the context of the current education system. What I am imagining is a system with a much more granular assessment model that can be done at the student's own pace. So if a student fails to get 100%, they should spend the next 10min relearning the content and retaking the assessment.
  - dagw 12y ago
    Won't that simply lead to cycles of cram-reguretate-forget? Real understanding comes from seeing how that thing you learnt last year connects to that thing you learnt last week connects to that thing you learnt in that other class.
    - coenhyde 12y ago
      There would be reassessment of the same content many times in the following weeks/months/years.
      - dagw 12y ago
        This seems to imply giving purely multiple choice computer graded (and possibly even computer generated) tests. Otherwise each school would have to have a small army of teacher doing nothing be creating and marking hundreds of tests every week. I'm very much of the opinion these types of tests can only test a very small subset of knowledge and don't give very useful feedback. Going back to my original example, how would you usefully phrase something like "What where some of the root causes of the start of World War I" as a series of multiple choice questions? Given that the important part of the question is not to get the answer 'right', but to pick a handful possible causes and successfully argue for them. Even in something like math which is probably the subject best suited for multiple choice, it is still a poor option since seeing the steps the student choses to try to answer the question are often more important and more illuminating than whether or not they get the answer right.
mponw 12y ago
The school system is not moronic at all. It is _designed_ to preserve our society's status quo by conditioning students into gradually losing their "naive" ideals and any independent thought (check out Disciplined Minds by Jeff Schmidt). As you have already weakly implied, the kind of teaching you envision will only happen in alternative organizations.
alextgordon 12y ago
You should read this: http://www.supermemo.com/help/fi.htm http://www.supermemo.com/help/fi.htm Learning to 100% is a fallacy. It is more efficient to learn to about 90% - 95%. Future learning does not always depend on past learning. You don't need to have memorised the double angle formulas in order to start learning group theory. Really the whole problem of when/what to learn has been comprehensively solved by supermemo et al. The unsolved problems are in formulation of learning material.
- coenhyde 12y ago
  No, students should remember 90-95%. Of course it is impossible to retain 100%, this is not what I expect. Assessment would happen at a granular level and retaken as many times as required. If a student fails the assessment, they can relearn what they don't understand and retake the test when they are ready. If they forget the content then so be it, but they will reassessed many times in the future on the same content. I should also mention that the questions they receive each time they take the test would be slightly different with different answers.
learnstats2 12y ago
>- Subject assessment would happen at much smaller increments and students do not progress until they understand that content block 100%. I don't think this is a good idea at all. It sounds extremely discouraging. This system is lovely for people always at the top of the class, who get to thrive with exactly the knowledge and content they need (assuming they have stored it in long-term memory, rather than storing it just long enough to pass through the immediate barrier), but it's terrible for everyone else. You see this pattern already in compulsory education: 'I don't really get this topic' becomes 'I can't do this topic' becomes 'I can't do this subject' becomes 'Why would I bother?'. It's a lot of work for student and teacher to get back from this point, if they ever manage to. Your system encourages this, and so almost nobody will graduate your system in 8 years; anyone who faces such overwhelming blockades will naturally drop out rather than overcome them. I contend that your idea is worse than the existing system. One of the best ways to get a student to understand content they are completely stuck with is to introduce and apply it as part of a more advanced topic or more practical context, i.e. just move them on from the part they are stuck with and let them continue, coming back to earlier topics where relevant (and as a necessary reminder to the others). The existing system works well in this respect, at least.
- nshepperd 12y ago
  > I don't think this is a good idea at all. It sounds extremely discouraging. On the contrary, struggling to get everything done by next week and scraping by with a 55% pass mark is extremely discouraging. Being able to take as much time as you like to understand the content until you get it all 100% sounds much more encouraging to me. By way of anecdata, a researcher who had experimented with this approach in australian schools for teaching math came to my faculty and gave a seminar last year. He and his organization found that the students were, as predicted, vastly more encouraged by the mastery learning approach. Actual learning rates were also on average 2x as fast. > You see this pattern already in compulsory education: 'I don't really get this topic' becomes 'I can't do this topic' becomes 'I can't do this subject' becomes 'Why would I bother?'. Only because we are forced to progress without even trying to fix "I don't really get this topic".
  - 12y ago
dbecker 12y ago
Can you point to any evidence to support these opinions/claims? (I don't mean that to be snarky, but rather that I would find it more interesting and compelling)
- coenhyde 12y ago
  Only anecdotal evidence. I spent half a decade building Learning Content Systems for the assessment model I describe. But we used it to teach Certificate 3 in Carpentry and other building related trades. It worked VERY well. We won many national awards. But it is my belief that this assessment and learning model could be applied to most subjects. Checkout https://bluedogtraining.com.au/ https://bluedogtraining.com.au/ if you are interested learning more about what we did.
codingdave 12y ago
"developed a hatred for the current education system" You might want to take a step back and return to these thoughts once your hatred has subsided. I think you will then better be able to have an unbiased evaluation of the good and bad of multiple education options. Because right now you are going to far to a totally different extreme, which can be ripped apart just as well as our current model.
- coenhyde 12y ago
  It's pretty hard to appreciate and comprehend a completely new education system from a HN post. I don't mind it being "ripped apart", mostly because the concerns are legitimate and I omitted information to address those concerns in my original comment. If I addressed every issue initially it would have been a 100k word comment. EDIT: Also my hatred will not subside. It's been 3 years since I was in that business and my opinion isn't any less absolute. The current system is broken, very broken and it is crazy to me that we continue to support it. Even this thread is an example why change is difficult. An education system is very complex and new idea's are interpreted in the context of the current system, so it makes it very difficult to explain without writing a white paper. And ain't nobody got time for that.

cbd1984 12y ago

> Students progress through subjects independently of their peers and the other subjects they are studying. The usual objection to this is people's aversion to having children at vastly different levels of physical development in the same classroom. Personally, I don't know whether to buy that argument, but it sounds worth expanding upon. > Students graduate school when they have reached a certain level of competency in all subjects. This could take an arbitrary amount of time. e.g. it might take one student 3 years but another 8. But once a student graduates they will be competent. OK, but at age eighteen, physically preventing them from leaving is against the law, and will likely be punished. I'm only half-joking: At some point, the law recognizes people as full adults, and it is much more difficult to legally restrain an adult, even if they're reading at a fifth-grade level. Personally, I think the answer to that is more and better trade schools, and increased governmental public works programs, but such ideas went from being All-American in the 1930s to Socialism in the 1950s, and we're still not quite past that yet.

jerf 12y ago
"All-American in the 1930s to Socialism in the 1950s, and we're still not quite past that yet." Socialism was "All-American" in the 1930s. Then history happened and it garnered itself a rather nasty reputation, which it went to great, great effort to earn fair and square.
voxic11 12y ago
I don't think he is saying people should be forced into school if they don't graduate by 18. just that they can't graduate (get a diploma) until they actually learn all the material.
- coenhyde 12y ago
  exactly
- dagw 12y ago
  Isn't that true today? Surely you won't get your diploma unless you get minimum necessary grades on the necessary exams.
  - nshepperd 12y ago
    Sure, but unfortunately the minimum necessary grade is currently a 50% "just managed to cram in enough rote learning in the final week to scrape by" pass mark.
    - coldtea 12y ago
      50% and 100% obviously don't mean anything by themselves. You can have a minimum of 50% and still have kinds know 10 times more than what a minimum of 100% course has them. 50% of an advanced course is better than 100% of a course for idiots. It's all about the breadth and deepness of the material, not some arbitrary mark on it, like 50%.
coenhyde 12y ago
Your first point is a concern. Maybe there can be some kind of "social class time" where students spend time with kids their own age. Since they are learning more efficiently there is probably time for this :). Re your second point. It's just a graduation, no one is forced to stay in school.

zo1 12y ago

>"A pass should be 100%/A+. You should not be able to progress until you understand the subject matter 100% as future learning depends on you having a complete understanding of previous content." As much as I can see the value in that, it'll never fly. Because, as I'm sure you know, we live in a society of "equals". Therefore, the system you propose will violently shatter that illusion for the general public and mainstream collective-thought. And this will happen because you will very quickly see so many fail miserably and a few plowing through the material. Both due to innate general intelligence, affinity for particular skills/topics as well as plain old determination. We don't all have equal amounts of all, no matter how much we get told otherwise by individuals blaming externalities. And I'll just go ahead and add that I believe I'd be one of the many that would very quickly fail in such a system. At least, until I realized the seriousness of the situation and decided to sit my ass down and study with determination and not rely on any supposed inner ability/gift/talent.

coenhyde 12y ago
I addressed this in a comment above but i'll repeat some of it. What I am imagining is a system with a much more granular assessment model that can be done at the student's own pace, and retaken until they get 100%. If you failed an assessment, it's not a problem. You can spend the next 10min relearning the content and retaking the test. This way you actually learn the content that you didn't know, instead of just getting a grading and moving on.
- com2kid 12y ago
  Your idea seems to be based on the fundamental assumption that the idea in school is to learn facts that can be tested easily. IMHO the idea of school is to teach students how to learn. Knowing when a certain battle happened isn't important, understanding how to view the world through the lens of history is. Knowing how to study the historical background of a culture or society should be what the student learns. Likewise, the goal of English class is not to memorize the parts of speech or memorize famous poems. Learning how to write prose, master communication with the written word, and coherently communicate their thoughts, loves, and desires upon paper, are the ideals towards which students should strive.

eli_gottlieb 12y ago

>- Grading is harmful. A pass should be 100%/A+. You should not be able to progress until you understand the subject matter 100% as future learning depends on you having a complete understanding of previous content. Expert practitioners with decades of experience will often still make one or two mistakes, a couple of "derps", if given a child's exam. This is a broadly good idea, but you need to allow some margin of error for the noisiness of real cognition.

fixedd 12y ago
Anecdote: My second grader's teacher sent home school work last week where she "corrected" his correct answer on a spelling test to something that wasn't even a word. She also accidentally a word in her little "good job" blurb at the top. People make mistakes.
Qwertious 12y ago
That line wasn't very clear, but I don't think it referred to the actual test/exam, just understanding the subject.
coenhyde 12y ago
This is true, but the assessments are very small (10min-30min of learning content assessed) that can retaken as many times as required until the student knows the content.
- solistice 12y ago
  Whilst testing like that seems to be possible for granular facts and most likely is a great way to handle these, what about conceptual understanding? The only "surefire" way I've found to test that in myself is written condensing of the concept in a way that allows another person to understand the concept from my notes, or actually explaining the concept to another person. That doesn't scale to 20-30 people in a class though since validating that number of explanations is not easy. Random probing using application of the concept however encourages the cooking recipe approach. There's only a number n different types of problems you can generate, and by learning all of those is possible. They're easy to grade, but they don't guarantee full understanding. Then there's using compound problems, where you start mixing concepts. If a student understands say momentum and friction, they should be able to work out a problem involving both. And those are the bane of students who did not invest in conceptual understanding since the number of recipes to learn suddenly increases exponentially. First midterm of physics 101 usually leads to a number of exasperated "This wasn't covered in class". Yes it was, just not this specific recipe. Now the issue with this type of problems is they cover a number of concepts, and pinning down the culprint/s isn't exactly straightforward. I guess you could tackle this through deduction based on a number of pairings (say momentum&impulse,momentum&friction&whatnot...), but noise would mess with that process.

dagw 12y ago

A pass should be 100%/A+ That sounds ridiculous. No one understands their subject matter 100%. I mean take a question like "What where some of the root causes of the start of World War I". A perfectly reasonable question for a 14 years old to spend 30 minutes on in a history exam, but also one that they could spend the next 30 years of their life on and still not answer completely. The only way to expect 100% pass rates on exams is to write stupidly easy exams with pointless multiple choice like "What year was the battle of the Somme". A question which doesn't prove any understanding att all.

coenhyde 12y ago
It does sound ridiculous if you put that requirement in the context of the current education system. What I am imagining is a system with a much more granular assessment model that can be done at the student's own pace. So if a student fails to get 100%, they should spend the next 10min relearning the content and retaking the assessment.
- dagw 12y ago
  Won't that simply lead to cycles of cram-reguretate-forget? Real understanding comes from seeing how that thing you learnt last year connects to that thing you learnt last week connects to that thing you learnt in that other class.
  - coenhyde 12y ago
    There would be reassessment of the same content many times in the following weeks/months/years.
    - dagw 12y ago
      This seems to imply giving purely multiple choice computer graded (and possibly even computer generated) tests. Otherwise each school would have to have a small army of teacher doing nothing be creating and marking hundreds of tests every week. I'm very much of the opinion these types of tests can only test a very small subset of knowledge and don't give very useful feedback. Going back to my original example, how would you usefully phrase something like "What where some of the root causes of the start of World War I" as a series of multiple choice questions? Given that the important part of the question is not to get the answer 'right', but to pick a handful possible causes and successfully argue for them. Even in something like math which is probably the subject best suited for multiple choice, it is still a poor option since seeing the steps the student choses to try to answer the question are often more important and more illuminating than whether or not they get the answer right.

mponw 12y ago

The school system is not moronic at all. It is _designed_ to preserve our society's status quo by conditioning students into gradually losing their "naive" ideals and any independent thought (check out Disciplined Minds by Jeff Schmidt). As you have already weakly implied, the kind of teaching you envision will only happen in alternative organizations.

alextgordon 12y ago

You should read this: http://www.supermemo.com/help/fi.htm http://www.supermemo.com/help/fi.htm Learning to 100% is a fallacy. It is more efficient to learn to about 90% - 95%. Future learning does not always depend on past learning. You don't need to have memorised the double angle formulas in order to start learning group theory. Really the whole problem of when/what to learn has been comprehensively solved by supermemo et al. The unsolved problems are in formulation of learning material.

coenhyde 12y ago
No, students should remember 90-95%. Of course it is impossible to retain 100%, this is not what I expect. Assessment would happen at a granular level and retaken as many times as required. If a student fails the assessment, they can relearn what they don't understand and retake the test when they are ready. If they forget the content then so be it, but they will reassessed many times in the future on the same content. I should also mention that the questions they receive each time they take the test would be slightly different with different answers.

learnstats2 12y ago

>- Subject assessment would happen at much smaller increments and students do not progress until they understand that content block 100%. I don't think this is a good idea at all. It sounds extremely discouraging. This system is lovely for people always at the top of the class, who get to thrive with exactly the knowledge and content they need (assuming they have stored it in long-term memory, rather than storing it just long enough to pass through the immediate barrier), but it's terrible for everyone else. You see this pattern already in compulsory education: 'I don't really get this topic' becomes 'I can't do this topic' becomes 'I can't do this subject' becomes 'Why would I bother?'. It's a lot of work for student and teacher to get back from this point, if they ever manage to. Your system encourages this, and so almost nobody will graduate your system in 8 years; anyone who faces such overwhelming blockades will naturally drop out rather than overcome them. I contend that your idea is worse than the existing system. One of the best ways to get a student to understand content they are completely stuck with is to introduce and apply it as part of a more advanced topic or more practical context, i.e. just move them on from the part they are stuck with and let them continue, coming back to earlier topics where relevant (and as a necessary reminder to the others). The existing system works well in this respect, at least.

nshepperd 12y ago
> I don't think this is a good idea at all. It sounds extremely discouraging. On the contrary, struggling to get everything done by next week and scraping by with a 55% pass mark is extremely discouraging. Being able to take as much time as you like to understand the content until you get it all 100% sounds much more encouraging to me. By way of anecdata, a researcher who had experimented with this approach in australian schools for teaching math came to my faculty and gave a seminar last year. He and his organization found that the students were, as predicted, vastly more encouraged by the mastery learning approach. Actual learning rates were also on average 2x as fast. > You see this pattern already in compulsory education: 'I don't really get this topic' becomes 'I can't do this topic' becomes 'I can't do this subject' becomes 'Why would I bother?'. Only because we are forced to progress without even trying to fix "I don't really get this topic".
- 12y ago

dbecker 12y ago

Can you point to any evidence to support these opinions/claims? (I don't mean that to be snarky, but rather that I would find it more interesting and compelling)

coenhyde 12y ago
Only anecdotal evidence. I spent half a decade building Learning Content Systems for the assessment model I describe. But we used it to teach Certificate 3 in Carpentry and other building related trades. It worked VERY well. We won many national awards. But it is my belief that this assessment and learning model could be applied to most subjects. Checkout https://bluedogtraining.com.au/ https://bluedogtraining.com.au/ if you are interested learning more about what we did.

codingdave 12y ago

"developed a hatred for the current education system" You might want to take a step back and return to these thoughts once your hatred has subsided. I think you will then better be able to have an unbiased evaluation of the good and bad of multiple education options. Because right now you are going to far to a totally different extreme, which can be ripped apart just as well as our current model.

coenhyde 12y ago
It's pretty hard to appreciate and comprehend a completely new education system from a HN post. I don't mind it being "ripped apart", mostly because the concerns are legitimate and I omitted information to address those concerns in my original comment. If I addressed every issue initially it would have been a 100k word comment. EDIT: Also my hatred will not subside. It's been 3 years since I was in that business and my opinion isn't any less absolute. The current system is broken, very broken and it is crazy to me that we continue to support it. Even this thread is an example why change is difficult. An education system is very complex and new idea's are interpreted in the context of the current system, so it makes it very difficult to explain without writing a white paper. And ain't nobody got time for that.