Options

Lowering the bar when it comes to school

1246

Posts

  • Options
    ZimmydoomZimmydoom Accept no substitutes Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    X3x3non wrote: »

    If they already know the material? No. They have the rest of their lives to learn how to tolerate "the grind," and as somebody who started washing dishes at like 14 I can tell you it doesn't take long to learn anyway.

    But the point is most everybody doesn't start washing dishes at 14 and by the time they get to 18 they are huge whining turds of douchebaggery. Like I said, the system must be tailored to best serve the most children possible. Also, how is anyone to know whether a child knows the material if they aren't doing their homework. It is my believe that unless you were taught so at home, most children will opt to NOT do the extra work unles they don't have to.

    Homework is by far the least effective method for charting a student's progress, if for no other reason than the fact that it's the most susceptible to cheating. This is the case even at the university level; I see it all the time.

    Homework is a reinforcement tool, not an evaluative one. That's what essays and exams are for.

    Zimmydoom on
    Better-than-birthday-sig!
    Gim wrote: »
    Zimmydoom, Zimmydoom
    Flew away in a balloon
    Had sex with polar bears
    While sitting in a reclining chair
    Now there are Zim-Bear hybrids
    Running around and clawing eyelids
    Watch out, a Zim-Bear is about to have sex with yooooooou!
  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    X3x3non wrote: »
    But the point is most everybody doesn't start washing dishes at 14 and by the time they get to 18 they are huge whining turds of douchebaggery.
    Stop being a shitty parent then. School isn't supposed to be raising your kids it's supposed to be giving them a useful education. Learning life hard doesn't take years of doing the same math problems over and over. Life doesn't require that. There is not a job where you write equations down over and over, get critiqued, then throw away the work.

    Quid on
  • Options
    X3x3nonX3x3non Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Maybe there is some misunderstanding. I am not saying that homework should be a huge part of one's grade but for a teenager there must be some extra incentive than just "doing this might some day somehow help me." Homework checks usually amounted to a "quiz grade" (aka a small grade) and you were allowed to drop your lowest grade.

    In my experience, if you had a genuine reason to not have something on time, most teachers could be reasoned with. They are only humans.
    Stop being a shitty parent then. School isn't supposed to be raising your kids it's supposed to be giving them a useful education. Learning life hard doesn't take years of doing the same math problems over and over. Life doesn't require that. There is not a job where you write equations down over and over, get critiqued, then throw away the work.

    Until you find a solution for people being shitty parents the school system will inadvertently have to try to teach stuents the detication they need to succeed. But by all means, if you can manage to have more mothers stay at home to raise their kids do so but until then there will always be some who do not get many positive impulses from their home.

    The cold fact is that there are a lot of kids that don't have much more than the school system to teach them some values. I am not saying it should be that way or that I am glad it is that way but that's just how it is.

    X3x3non on
  • Options
    BedigunzBedigunz Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    mcdermott wrote: »
    X3x3non wrote: »
    I'm pretty sure there's some irony to be had in somebody popping in to extol the virtues of homework in increasing attention span and being able to grind out things you're expected to do...

    ...without bothering to read the thread first.

    In my first post i was replying to the OP unless otherwise quoted. Must I read the entire thread before being allowed to post? I would expect someone with your apparent time constraints to be sympathetic to that.

    Leisure =/= work

    Yes, this is generally expected.

    And unlike filling out fifty algebra problems that I already know how to do, it serves a very clear purpose. See, it prevents you from saying something that has already been pointed out in-thread to be wrong...like you just did.
    Do you have a statistic on this or are you offering anecdotal evidence?

    Oh, totally anectdotal. Probably should have thrown a "some of" in front of "these same kids," because I didn't mean to imply all or even most. But yeah, they definitely existed.

    See thats the problem. A majority of posts are anecdotal and are near impossible to prove/disprove as fact. What worked in A's school won't necessarily work in B's.

    One thing that can be agreed upon is reptition is one of the more successful methods to learning (http://www.news-medical.net/?id=12074). The biggest variable is how much repitition a person needs before they learn.

    That's why I was okay with being assigned a bunch of math problems as "busy work". If I figured it out fast, the process became mechanical and I could do it without much thought and pretty fast.

    If I didn't learn it, then I had several problems to actually learn it.

    And if you look at the work ethic of most high schoolers, you sadly need to force them to work before they learn something, or they'll just give up in frustration/laziness. This is partially due to the fact that one is forced to attend high school.

    College is a student's choice, and they'll typically make an effort to do work and want to learn.

    And McDermott, I'm not personally attacking you in my posts, but like I said, most of the posts are anecdotal so its hard not to say "well in my situation..."

    Bedigunz on
    cdmAF00.png
    Coran Attack!
  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    That's a consequence not an incentive. You're saying that, essentially, if they don't learn something that "might some day somehow help them" they should be punished. Brilliant.

    Quid on
  • Options
    ZimmydoomZimmydoom Accept no substitutes Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    X3x3non wrote: »
    Maybe there is some misunderstanding. I am not saying that homework should be a huge part of one's grade but for a teenager there must be some extra incentive than just "doing this might some day somehow help me." Homework checks usually amounted to a "quiz grade" (aka a small grade) and you were allowed to drop your lowest grade.

    In my experience, if you had a genuine reason to not have something on time, most teachers could be reasoned with. They are only humans.

    Parent's job. Not teacher's. Definitely not government's.

    Quiz grades are for quizzes, which are actually a much more effective method of getting kids to do the reading. Most kids, when faced with reading and associated homework, will read the homework questions first, skim the materials for the relevant information, and fill in the assignment. They will not actually "read" the assignment, nor attempt any sort of critical thinking.

    Daily/weekly quizzes encourage the student to actually read, but only if homework is cut so they actually have the time/energy to do so.

    Zimmydoom on
    Better-than-birthday-sig!
    Gim wrote: »
    Zimmydoom, Zimmydoom
    Flew away in a balloon
    Had sex with polar bears
    While sitting in a reclining chair
    Now there are Zim-Bear hybrids
    Running around and clawing eyelids
    Watch out, a Zim-Bear is about to have sex with yooooooou!
  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Oh you better believe I did that. Still do too.

    Quid on
  • Options
    mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    X3x3non wrote: »

    If they already know the material? No. They have the rest of their lives to learn how to tolerate "the grind," and as somebody who started washing dishes at like 14 I can tell you it doesn't take long to learn anyway.

    But the point is most everybody doesn't start washing dishes at 14 and by the time they get to 18 they are huge whining turds of douchebaggery. Like I said, the system must be tailored to best serve the most children possible. Also, how is anyone to know whether a child knows the material if they aren't doing their homework. It is my believe that unless you were taught so at home, most children will opt to NOT do the extra work unles they don't have to.

    We can shoot back and forth all day with this since neither of us have any hard evidence, but I call bullshit on your claim on 3-4 hours of busy work a day for standard core classes.

    To the bolded: exams? in-class assignments? quizzes? As somebody else already replied (as as I had already mentioned in-thread...seriously, go read the fucking thread), homework is a horrible method of determining if somebody knows something, because a large portion of the kids at my school just cheated on some portion of it.

    "Hey, man, did you get that algebra homework done? Can I see it? Yeah, you can copy my history..."

    Yep, that's a fucking outstanding way of determining if they know the material.

    Did you even read my earlier suggestion? Probably not. Use exams/quizzes (or other in-class methods) to determine knowledge of material. If somebody wants to take advantage of a test re-take policy or other accomodations to try and improve their grade (because test anxiety is a very real thing, which thankfully I don't have), then ask to see their homework to ensure they're putting in the effort. Give students an incentive to do the work if they need it, but don't punish those that don't do it if they don't.

    And yeah, you didn't go to my school. Yes, homework was generally upwards of half the grade, and yes teachers were generally expected to assign more than a half-hour of homework a night...which, for six classes, means 3-4 hours. But fuck, even assuming it's only two hours a night (and surely you can believe that), it's still bullshit and a waste of time from my life I will never get back if I already know the material.
    Parent's job. Not teacher's. Definitely not government's.

    Quiz grades are for quizzes, which are actually a much more effective method of getting kids to do the reading. Most kids, when faced with reading and associated homework, will read the homework questions first, skim the materials for the relevant information, and fill in the assignment. They will not actually "read" the assignment, nor attempt any sort of critical thinking.

    Daily/weekly quizzes encourage the student to actually read, but only if homework is cut so they actually have the time/energy to do so.

    Pretty much.
    Stop being a shitty parent then. School isn't supposed to be raising your kids it's supposed to be giving them a useful education. Learning life hard doesn't take years of doing the same math problems over and over. Life doesn't require that. There is not a job where you write equations down over and over, get critiqued, then throw away the work.

    Exactly. Doing work for work's sake without compensation or creating at least theoretical value for another party is pretty much unique to school. And based from my college experience, it's largely unique to high school. But obviously I've only experienced one major in one college. But definitely limited to school. Unless somebody can name me another job that this is an aspect of.

    Hell, even when we spent countless hours polishing a garbage can in basic training for the Army, we had a shinier trash can to show for it.

    mcdermott on
  • Options
    X3x3nonX3x3non Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Quid wrote: »
    That's a consequence not an incentive. You're saying that, essentially, if they don't learn something that "might some day somehow help them" they should be punished. Brilliant.

    But believe it or not I have now come to the conclusion that all that seemingly meaningless stuff actually DID help me in the end. Even what many here call "boring pointless memorization" is a big part of at least my higher education. I have just finished medical school and the number of facts that one has to memorize is astounding. "How much of pharmaceutical X when, where and how." I believe even plain memorization is important in all fields to some extend. In every job you need some crystalline knowledge that you have at some point pounded into your brain. Not all knowledge comes easy through "learning by doing" or by "just getting the big concept."
    And yeah, you didn't go to my school. Yes, homework was generally upwards of half the grade, and yes teachers were generally expected to assign more than a half-hour of homework a night...which, for six classes, means 3-4 hours. But fuck, even assuming it's only two hours a night (and surely you can believe that), it's still bullshit and a waste of time from my life I will never get back if I already know the material.

    I don't know what you expect me to say other than "sorry you went to a shitty school."

    X3x3non on
  • Options
    mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    X3x3non wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    That's a consequence not an incentive. You're saying that, essentially, if they don't learn something that "might some day somehow help them" they should be punished. Brilliant.

    But believe it or not I have now come to the conclusion that all that seemingly meaningless stuff actually DID help me in the end. Even what many here call "boring pointless memorization" is a big part of at least my higher education. I have just finished medical school and the number of facts that one has to memorize is astounding. "How much of pharmaceutical X when, where and how." I believe even plain memorization is important in all fields to some extend. In every job you need some crystalline knowledge that you have at some point pounded into your brain. Not all knowledge comes easy through "learning by doing" or by "just getting the big concept."

    Wow, Mr. "we need to shoot for the average, not the outliers" is using the kind of memorization required for fucking medical school to justify the level of busywork required in regular-ed high school curricula.

    I'd suggest that the number of disadvantaged kids in my situation or similar is probably about the same as the number of people who will become doctors.

    And yeah, your "required to some extent in every field" thing? Not really. At least nothing that requires the kind of repetition that we did in high school. In fact, in nearly all my classes, we're allowed at last a page or two of notes for exams...because our teachers don't believe in memorizing equations because "in the real world you can just look shit up."

    Life is open book. Not everybody will be making life-or-death decisions in an ER.
    I don't know what you expect me to say other than "sorry you went to a shitty school."

    Um, this isn't just about my school...I stipulated that what I said I still hold true even for only two hours a night of homework, which is almost definitely the average for high schools in this nation, for regular-ed students. Do you dispute that?

    mcdermott on
  • Options
    YarYar Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    CygnusZ wrote: »
    Speaker wrote: »
    Yar wrote: »
    I agree with Wil Wright that civilization has completely failed to realize that playing and learning are biologically designed to be the same thing.

    We have convinced ourselves they are opposites. This is wrong. Think how much kids woudl leanr if school was taught entirely via video games. Good ones, taht were age-appropriate and fun.

    I remember bringing that up in an education thread a few years ago.

    It was almost totally rejected by the forum and I was subjected to a wave of Doom jokes.

    They were right to do so. Look, I'm not sure if you've ever actually seen a real forum on game design, but the fact is that video games are popular because they present easy challenges that anybody can finish through reptitive tasks with a limited interface. Education on the other hand is supposed to encourage you to look at a derth of resources to complete tasks which can be difficult and infinite in their possibilities. Furthermore, education is more like real life than a video games. Just like in real life, even if you do what you're supposed to things might not go so well because people have different innate strengths and weaknesses.

    For the rest of your bitching about homework, maybe you should consider that life isn't just about doing the shit you want to when you want to. Being irresponsible and not doing required coursework, even if you feel it's worthless and boring, doesn't make you any less irresponsible. Iit certainly doesn't change the cold hard reality that you're not doing the work that is expected of you. If it's such a burden, why aren't you dealing with the problem directly by taking the time to meet with your teachers? For that matter, why not take the slighest bit of effort and try seeing the value and benefit of doing the homework?

    What I think it comes down to is that most people are irresponsible, and they will choose not to do anything even slightly unpleaseant if given the chance.
    I'm not sure how much wronger you could be. I'm not supposing something insipid here.

    The entire purpose of fun and play is to train for needed skills. That's why we always want to play sports and pretend hunting and pretend war and easy-bake oven and cooking and grilling and stuff. That's all my kids ever want to play.

    I think with a little creativity we could turn this innate capacity into whatever we wanted. I taught myself hexadecimal just so I could hack my Hero's Quest (qfg1) saved game files when I was like 10. Just for kicks I loaded the VGA version up recently and was able to do the same trick in seconds, 20-something years later. Imagine all the useful things someone might have tricked me into learning when I was 10 if it meant I could buff my stats in an RPG.

    The point is that I taught myself something that, by itself, would be exceedingly difficult and dry for a 10-year-old, but since I saw it as a creative way around grinding and as a possibility to make a fun game even more fun, I devoured it.

    Yar on
  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    X3x3non wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    That's a consequence not an incentive. You're saying that, essentially, if they don't learn something that "might some day somehow help them" they should be punished. Brilliant.

    But believe it or not I have now come to the conclusion that all that seemingly meaningless stuff actually DID help me in the end. Even what many here call "boring pointless memorization" is a big part of at least my higher education. I have just finished medical school and the number of facts that one has to memorize is astounding. "How much of pharmaceutical X when, where and how." I believe even plain memorization is important in all fields to some extend. In every job you need some crystalline knowledge that you have at some point pounded into your brain. Not all knowledge comes easy through "learning by doing" or by "just getting the big concept."
    Yes. And I memorized stuff in class on occasion. Memorization is not some drastically difficult skill that can only be learned during high school. It also doesn't take years of practice to develop decent study habits. It takes a few days tops. People didn't always spend years doing rota math problems before going on to do whatever job they did. I'm glad you think it helped you. Explain why everyone else needs it.

    Quid on
  • Options
    FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    edited September 2008
    I would also argue that a lot of the rote memorization in medical school is unnecessary, as for example (using your example of drugs and dosages) (a) many of the drugs and dosages you've memorized will be supplanted during your career, and (b) all of that information is at your fingertips anyway with a decent PDR. If the thesis is "rote memorization in school is unnecessary as it does not prepare you for productive work," then the argument "rote memorization in high school is necessary because you have rote memorization in higher levels of school, too" is not a counterargument.

    But that's going to lead us down an avenue of reasoning rife with sunk cost fallacies and choice-supportive biases.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • Options
    X3x3nonX3x3non Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Ok I guess this all comes down to us having had different experiences with the school system. I feel I got a tremendous amount out of it and it helped me a lot in preparing me for college and things to come.

    It all comes down to you saying "Nu huh" and me replying "Yuh huh." For example:
    And yeah, your "required to some extent in every field" thing? Not really.

    Yes really. Economics, history, any natural science, engineering. Anyways you get what I mean with this being pointless.

    X3x3non on
  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    X3x3non wrote: »
    Yes really. Economics, history, any natural science, engineering. Anyways you get what I mean with this being pointless.
    Um, the engineer just said the exact opposite. And my school uses rota memorization solely for the sake of memorizing vocabulary words and even then sparingly.

    Edit: Also, it's great that it was nice for you. That doesn't mean it should be a requirement for everyone else.

    Quid on
  • Options
    mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Quid wrote: »
    Yes. And I memorized stuff in class on occasion. Memorization is not some drastically difficult skill that can only be learned during high school. It also doesn't take years of practice to develop decent study habits. It takes a few days tops. People didn't always spend years doing rota math problems before going on to do whatever job they did. I'm glad you think it helped you. Explain why everyone else needs it.

    That's an important word, too, because you're talking about policies that apply to pretty much every single student.

    Whether they're going to be doctors or not, whether they're going to college or not.

    But again, this gets back into the question of whether high school is there to teach knowledge, work, or both...and if it's both, whether the 30+ hours a week spent in class is more or less sufficient to cover the "work" component.

    And hell, I'm not even arguing against all homework. Just the repetitive and pointless (if you already know the material) variety. At least against grading it.
    Yes really. Economics, history, any natural science, engineering. Anyways you get what I mean with this being pointless.

    I'm a senior in Electrical Engineering. I haven't had to do nearly the level of rote memorization or repetition exercises that I did in high school. Again, have you read the thread? I've already said all this. 99% of my homework only takes as long as it takes you to learn the material. It's usually something like six problems in an entire week. If you already know how to do it, it takes like a half hour for the entire week.

    If you don't? More like four hours.

    Because it's not pointless repetitive busywork. We pretty much never do more than one problem of the same type. You want more practice? The book is full of problems...do them. Yes, my professors have told us this.

    EDIT: After three years of school, and including this semester, I can count on one hand the number of classes that required the kind of "busywork" that was done in high school. Three of them were freshman classes.

    EDIT: And two were with the same teacher, come to think of it...and everybody pretty much agreed she sucked, largely because her class felt like a high school class.

    mcdermott on
  • Options
    X3x3nonX3x3non Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Well like I said this debate is becoming pointless because it is all based on our personal experiences with the system with very little facts to back anything up. You are going to continue to tell me that it was never of use to you and I will continue to tell you that it was great for me. Let's talk about a different aspect of this.

    X3x3non on
  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    X3x3non wrote: »
    Well like I said this debate is becoming pointless because it is all based on our personal experiences with the system with very little facts to back anything up. You are going to continue to tell me that it was never of use to you and I will continue to tell you that it was great for me. Let's talk about a different aspect of this.
    We're saying it shouldn't be required for everyone since it's clearly not helping everyone and wasting their time. We're not saying kids that need it shouldn't do it, we're saying the ones that don't shouldn't have to. That's been our stance the entire time but you're somehow unable to read the thread and see that. You claimed it was necessary for everyone.

    Quid on
  • Options
    mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    X3x3non wrote: »
    Well like I said this debate is becoming pointless because it is all based on our personal experiences with the system with very little facts to back anything up. You are going to continue to tell me that it was never of use to you and I will continue to tell you that it was great for me. Let's talk about a different aspect of this.

    You're just mad because at the moment it's like 4:1 and for the thread the ratio is at least like 2:1. I think when a majority disagree with you, and are able to shoot down any logical or quasi-logical arguments you attempt to make to defend the current policies, that suggests something.

    You know, like when you suggested that homework was a good way to determine if kids learned the material. Factually wrong. Or suggested that there was no way to get kids to do extra work if they need it without requiring it to be collected. Also factually wrong. Plus you still haven't responded to the fact that there exists no job where work is simply done for work's sake, without direct compensation and/or without creating fairly direct value for society. Or if such a job exists, that it employs like twelve people nationwide.

    EDIT: Basically, you're the only one whose entire argument amounts to "homework was totally awesome for me."

    mcdermott on
  • Options
    X3x3nonX3x3non Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Of course it is not going to help everyone, no system ever will. I also still fail to see how it is "clearly wasting their time" because all that has been presented as evidence are personal experiences. I am taking the utilitarian approach of endorsing a system that is best for the largest number of subjects.

    mcdermott, as someone in a position of higher learning as you, you should know that a sample of like 6 people on a discussion forum is hardly enough hard evidence to base an argument on.

    Also you offer no evidence what so ever to what you claim is "factually" wrong. I have not seen any hard numbers in this entire thread.

    I am just trying to talk about this issue with you dudes, but I don't understand why you are getting to butthurt over it.

    I am as much basing my argument on"homework was totally awesome for me." as you are basing it on "Wahhhh the school system failed me miserably because they made me do too much work." (which I still claim is more a problem of your school rather than the system.)


    Last ninja edit: I am over yonder here in Euro land so it is getting very late. I might pop in here in the morning if you are BURNING UP on hearing a reply.

    X3x3non on
  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    X3x3non wrote: »
    Of course it is not going to help everyone, no system ever will. I also still fail to see how it is "clearly wasting their time" because all that has been presented as evidence are personal experiences. I am taking the utilitarian approach of endorsing a system that is best for the largest number of subjects.
    So have we. You've simply refused to accept that such a system could treat students differently. Some are helped because of homework. Wonderful, encourage them so they keep doing it. Don't declare it's now required for everyone to do because it helped them.

    Quid on
  • Options
    X3x3nonX3x3non Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Quid wrote: »
    X3x3non wrote: »
    Of course it is not going to help everyone, no system ever will. I also still fail to see how it is "clearly wasting their time" because all that has been presented as evidence are personal experiences. I am taking the utilitarian approach of endorsing a system that is best for the largest number of subjects.
    So have we. You've simply refused to accept that such a system could treat students differently. Some are helped because of homework. Wonderful, encourage them so they keep doing it. Don't declare it's now required for everyone to do because it helped them.

    Nononononon ragragragrgagragragrgagr. I don't want to implement some new system now as you claim I do, but I think the current system is better than the proposed one in the OP.

    X3x3non on
  • Options
    mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    X3x3non wrote: »
    Also you offer no evidence what so ever to what you claim is "factually" wrong. I have not seen any hard numbers in this entire thread.

    That doesn't require numbers, man. "Homework is a poor indicator of mastery of material because, due to the fact that students complete it outside the teacher's presence, it's more prone to cheating than in-class material or exams."

    That's a fact, and no statistics are required to "back it up." Just reading comprehension. Though I can go find statistics on the number of students who admit to cheating on homework...I've seen them before, it's a pretty high number. But I don't need to, because it's not necessary to back up that fact anyway. It's pretty logically sound all on its own.
    I am as much basing my argument on"homework was totally awesome for me." as you are basing it on "Wahhhh the school system failed me miserably because they made me do too much work." (which I still claim is more a problem of your school rather than the system.)

    Man, my school is the system. At least part of it. How the fuck are you not making that connection? My school may well be an outlier, but I think it's reasonable to suggest that policies might be needed to prevent such outliers from being a problem. Besides which, from people I've talked to here and elsewhere, I get the impression that my school was not terribly unique anyway.



    Oh, and fun conclusion that I just came to. The fact that homework is a poor indicator of material mastery due to it being prone to cheating? That works for "teaching work ethic" as well...since, you know, if you're just copying it you're not really doing the work either. So what lesson does homework really teach at that point? That what you achieve through hard work somebody else may just get through cheating?

    Which, I suppose, is true out in the real world. But I don't know if I'm fond of the idea of spending my tax dollars to teach it to my kids, nor having them required* to learn it at that age and without at least maybe earning some money in the process.


    * - Required for the majority of kids for whom homeschooling is not an option, and even more so if we accept the idea that a GED or dropping out are hardly feasible options for many kids, and probably suboptimal solutions to this particularly anyway.

    X3x3non wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    X3x3non wrote: »
    Of course it is not going to help everyone, no system ever will. I also still fail to see how it is "clearly wasting their time" because all that has been presented as evidence are personal experiences. I am taking the utilitarian approach of endorsing a system that is best for the largest number of subjects.
    So have we. You've simply refused to accept that such a system could treat students differently. Some are helped because of homework. Wonderful, encourage them so they keep doing it. Don't declare it's now required for everyone to do because it helped them.

    Nononononon ragragragrgagragragrgagr. I don't want to implement some new system now as you claim I do, but I think the current system is better than the proposed one in the OP.

    Um...the system he's saying you support is the current system, sparky. It just got declared at some point in the past, at least at a vast majority of schools.

    mcdermott on
  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Perhaps in school you should have spent more time on critical reading/thinking rather than rota memorization.

    Quid on
  • Options
    mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Quid wrote: »
    Perhaps in school you should have spent more time on critical reading/thinking rather than rota memorization.

    Burn.

    mcdermott on
  • Options
    glithertglithert Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Quid wrote: »
    Perhaps in school you should have spent more time on critical reading/thinking rather than rota memorization.

    Dayum

    glithert on
  • Options
    TrowizillaTrowizilla Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    X3x3non wrote: »
    And yeah, your "required to some extent in every field" thing? Not really.

    Yes really. Economics, history, any natural science, engineering. Anyways you get what I mean with this being pointless.

    No, not really. I never had a class that required rote memorization. It's pretty much useless in my major, English. Even in the required math classes, we learned the formulas by finding out why they were what they were, and then why you used them the way you did. Psychology, same thing; ditto with biology.

    My history major friend on the subject:
    "Rote memorization? Not too much. Used to be an issue, but by that I mean 'like 10-15 years ago'. Now we focus a lot more on the 'these things happened. Why' aspect. Generally when they do show up, it's stuff like 'When did fucking numbers come about, cocksucker' and I am all 'Like 3000 BC cuntnugget' rather than 'when did George III admit he was a crazy cokehead' 'Sept 12 1801' or something."

    Trowizilla on
  • Options
    glithertglithert Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    I never got rote memorization. Sure, it must be handy to never have to look stuff up, but it takes time that you should spending trying to understand the concepts behind whatever. You can't look up understanding the material.

    glithert on
  • Options
    Phoenix-DPhoenix-D Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Well, there is generally some basic material you need to memorize, but I've always found that gets locked into your brain by doing the material anyway.

    Phoenix-D on
  • Options
    The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited September 2008
    glithert wrote: »
    I never got rote memorization. Sure, it must be handy to never have to look stuff up, but it takes time that you should spending trying to understand the concepts behind whatever. You can't look up understanding the material.

    The more stuff you've got locked in your head, the more connections you can make between datapoints. Memory is relevant to learning, and I mean real understanding here. Its good training for your brain, makes everything else easier.

    The Cat on
    tmsig.jpg
  • Options
    glithertglithert Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Of course, I should probably mention that I have a savant like ability to memorize things
    sort of

    glithert on
  • Options
    ZimmydoomZimmydoom Accept no substitutes Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    glithert wrote: »
    Of course, I should probably mention that I have a savant like ability to memorize things
    sort of

    If your memory is so great then what did I have for breakfast this morning?

    Zimmydoom on
    Better-than-birthday-sig!
    Gim wrote: »
    Zimmydoom, Zimmydoom
    Flew away in a balloon
    Had sex with polar bears
    While sitting in a reclining chair
    Now there are Zim-Bear hybrids
    Running around and clawing eyelids
    Watch out, a Zim-Bear is about to have sex with yooooooou!
  • Options
    glithertglithert Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    dicks
    I mean uh Wheaties
    Breakfast of champions and all that

    glithert on
  • Options
    CygnusZCygnusZ Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    mcdermott,

    I'm not saying that you shouldn't question the validity of homework, or even the way that teacher's conduct classes. However, in this thread I was already talking with a student who felt that writing a paper on the Crucible was "busy work". I think that the fact of the matter is that teenagers do not possess the same sort of judgement that adults and college students do. For the most part they simply aren't capable of learning on their own in high school. I was a poor math student in high school, and doing all that repetition helped me alot. On the other hand I was a great history student, so while the assignments were boring I still had an obligation to do them. You have to accept that the homework assignments are for the whole class, and not every is going to get the full benefit. A teacher can't make it optional either, because then nobody will do it.

    Quid,

    In my legal, business and government work experience I have never witnessed somebody getting praised for going against the grain to fix an effiency. The workplace is about culture, politics and looking good on paper. Doing things you aren't good at is good for you, because it builds your ability to concentrate and overcome obstacles.

    Yar,

    The point is that people play video games for instant gratification. Yeah, you learned how to do something, but will you have the attention span it takes to go to the library, do a few hours of reasearch and write a 6 page paper? It's fine to enjoy education, but it's also important to put up with the stuff that isn't enjoyable. I'd also argue that it'd be very foolish to offer students too much instant gratification. Your example makes me laugh a little though, since I did the same thing :)

    On rote memorization --

    First of all, if you're going to be learning language at all this is an absolutely essential skill. You're not going to learn to speak German, French or Japanese at a semi-native level unless you're willing to spend time memorizing words. Besides that though, remembering details helps us to understand the larger picture and enables us to create intelligent arguments to defend our viewpoints. At least, my opinion is that it's impossible to have a really good understanding of the big picture unless you understand the details and vice-versa.

    CygnusZ on
  • Options
    glithertglithert Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    I put the paper in there because I don't think the teacher is actually reading them, my argument being that I get A's on them with no effort whatsoever.
    So unless you're going to claim that I'm an amazing author

    glithert on
  • Options
    CygnusZCygnusZ Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    glithert wrote: »
    I put the paper in there because I don't think the teacher is actually reading them, my argument being that I get A's on them with no effort whatsoever.
    So unless you're going to claim that I'm an amazing author

    Does everybody in your class get A's? In college I dealt with kids who couldn't write simple papers at all.

    CygnusZ on
  • Options
    mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    CygnusZ wrote: »
    mcdermott,

    I'm not saying that you shouldn't question the validity of homework, or even the way that teacher's conduct classes. However, in this thread I was already talking with a student who felt that writing a paper on the Crucible was "busy work". I think that the fact of the matter is that teenagers do not possess the same sort of judgement that adults and college students do. For the most part they simply aren't capable of learning on their own in high school. I was a poor math student in high school, and doing all that repetition helped me alot. On the other hand I was a great history student, so while the assignments were boring I still had an obligation to do them. You have to accept that the homework assignments are for the whole class, and not every is going to get the full benefit. A teacher can't make it optional either, because then nobody will do it.

    First, I'd agree that the occasional paper probably does not qualify as "busy work." Thought The Crucible sucks ass. But I digress.

    Second, I think I've pointed out at least one method by which a teacher can encourage students who do need practice to do homework, while allowing those who don't need practice (or can accurately judge how much they need) to do less. Require students to show completed homework as part of a test re-take policy or help outside of class, to show that they've done all the assigned practice work.

    That way students who don't need practice can skip it (assuming they're acing all their other in-class work, or happy with the grades they're getting) while students that perhaps need the practice have a clear incentive to do it (want to improve that C to a B? show me the homework first).

    Seems like this is the most beneficial to all parties involved, and achieves a favorable outcome (everybody, in theory, learns the material).

    The only possible drawbacks I can see are either A) that it allows lower-performing students to supplement work for knowledge (already present in current system), or B) allows students who already have a grasp of the material to get the same grades as "harder working" students...which is only an issue if you place some intrinsic value on completing the "practice" homework.

    Which, obviously, I don't. I see no intrinsic value whatsoever on "complete problems 1-40" or "fill out this outline" assignments. They're a waste of time, and because students can easily cheat it's not like they reliably gauge either mastery of material or dedication to work anyway.


    tl;dr: I've already suggested an alternative to the bolded, is there some reason it's unworkable?

    EDIT: Noting that my alternative is not some crackpot idea off the top of my head, but an actual policy instituted by one of my actual high school teachers. Though admittedly in a different district from the "olol homework should be upwards of half the students' grades" district.

    EDIT: Also, I think it's important to note that I have in no way taken a stance against all homework...though I don't favor strict deadlines because I think they fail to take into account students with extraordinary circumstances (like mine). But homework is not, in general, the devil. But if my kid brings home a "complete problems 1 through 40" assignment that's being graded (even just on completion), I'm probably going to have a talk with the teacher asking exactly what that assignment is meant to gauge that makes it worthy of inclusion in my kid's grade. Including the aforementioned "does not measure mastery or work due to cheating" argument.

    mcdermott on
  • Options
    glithertglithert Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    CygnusZ wrote: »
    glithert wrote: »
    I put the paper in there because I don't think the teacher is actually reading them, my argument being that I get A's on them with no effort whatsoever.
    So unless you're going to claim that I'm an amazing author

    Does everybody in your class get A's? In college I dealt with kids who couldn't write simple papers at all.

    Well...How am I supposed to know that? I do know that most of my peers are pretty dumb, but they aren't failing most of their classes, so

    glithert on
  • Options
    CygnusZCygnusZ Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    mcdermott wrote: »
    CygnusZ wrote: »
    mcdermott,

    I'm not saying that you shouldn't question the validity of homework, or even the way that teacher's conduct classes. However, in this thread I was already talking with a student who felt that writing a paper on the Crucible was "busy work". I think that the fact of the matter is that teenagers do not possess the same sort of judgement that adults and college students do. For the most part they simply aren't capable of learning on their own in high school. I was a poor math student in high school, and doing all that repetition helped me alot. On the other hand I was a great history student, so while the assignments were boring I still had an obligation to do them. You have to accept that the homework assignments are for the whole class, and not every is going to get the full benefit. A teacher can't make it optional either, because then nobody will do it.

    First, I'd agree that the occasional paper probably does not qualify as "busy work." Thought The Crucible sucks ass. But I digress.

    Second, I think I've pointed out at least one method by which a teacher can encourage students who do need practice to do homework, while allowing those who don't need practice (or can accurately judge how much they need) to do less. Require students to show completed homework as part of a test re-take policy or help outside of class, to show that they've done all the assigned practice work.

    That way students who don't need practice can skip it (assuming they're acing all their other in-class work, or happy with the grades they're getting) while students that perhaps need the practice have a clear incentive to do it (want to improve that C to a B? show me the homework first).

    Seems like this is the most beneficial to all parties involved, and achieves a favorable outcome (everybody, in theory, learns the material).

    The only possible drawbacks I can see are either A) that it allows lower-performing students to supplement work for knowledge (already present in current system), or B) allows students who already have a grasp of the material to get the same grades as "harder working" students...which is only an issue if you place some intrinsic value on completing the "practice" homework.

    Which, obviously, I don't. I see no intrinsic value whatsoever on "complete problems 1-40" or "fill out this outline" assignments. They're a waste of time, and because students can easily cheat it's not like they reliably gauge either mastery of material or dedication to work anyway.


    tl;dr: I've already suggested an alternative to the bolded, is there some reason it's unworkable?

    EDIT: Also, I think it's important to note that I have in no way taken a stance against all homework...though I don't favor strict deadlines because I think they fail to take into account students with extraordinary circumstances (like mine). But homework is not, in general, the devil. But if my kid brings home a "complete problems 1 through 40" assignment that's being graded (even just on completion), I'm probably going to have a talk with the teacher asking exactly what that assignment is meant to gauge that makes it worthy of inclusion in my kid's grade. Including the aforementioned "does not measure mastery or work due to cheating" argument.

    Your solution kind of defeats the point of homework. The general idea behind homework is that the student practices the material with which they're uncomfortable. Under your model, all of the students would simply not to any homework until AFTER the test has been given. To go a bit further, while some kids may be able to get A's on a test without doing any homework, I'm almost certain that most kids derive some educational benefit from doing mind-numbing repetitive math problems (at least, I did). I think your solution would end up encouraging underperformance, and kids deliberately trying to just barely pass exams. While it's not ideal to force the cream of the class to do all the annoying "busy work", it is perferable for 80-95 percent of the class to actually do the homework on time so that the areas the students are having difficult in can be discussed in class (especially with math).

    EDIT: What I'm trying to say is that by making ALL students do the homework provides the greatest utility, since in any given class my students will benefit from doing it. Allowing students NOT to do homework if they pass tests would enourage students to aim low. This system is only for math, right?

    Homework is counted because it does show the effort of the student, the same reason that participation is graded. The reason that grades are distorted this way is that a certain number of students are actually quite intelligent and know the material, but tend to have poor test-taking skills. Evaluating the student not on the basis of one type of activity, but several, tends to give a better picture of the actual ability of the student. It's an application of multiple intelligences. But, honestly speaking, a student that doesn't do well on tests probably doesn't participate in class or do their homework. Aside from math, it's really hard to get away with cheating without the teacher knowing.

    CygnusZ on
  • Options
    mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    CygnusZ wrote: »
    Your solution kind of defeats the point of homework. The general idea behind homework is that the student practices the material with which they're uncomfortable. Under your model, all of the students would simply not to any homework until AFTER the test has been given. To go a bit further, while some kids may be able to get A's on a test without doing any homework, I'm almost certain that most kids derive some educational benefit from doing mind-numbing repetitive math problems (at least, I did). I think your solution would end up encouraging underperformance, and kids deliberately trying to just barely pass exams. While it's not ideal to force the cream of the class to do all the annoying "busy work", it is perferable for 80-95 percent of the class to actually do the homework on time so that the areas the students are having difficult in can be discussed in class (especially with math).

    Well, for starters you'd have to have some kind of penalty for utilizing the test retake policy. I'm more a fan of the "average of the two" idea, or possibly a "one letter grade down from the higher or the average, whichever is higher" policy.

    And I'll accept your "most kids" policies as soon as you give me a personal alternative if I can show that I am definitely not most kids. Whether it's being exempt from homework, or an alternative school...whatever. But if I can score 95% or higher on all the exams, without doing any of the homework, there's no way I should be getting a 'D.' Sorry.

    Yes, this was actually the case with me. In fact, in one class where my grade (due to lack of doing homework and ditching class) was so low that I could not mathematically pass despite having solid A's on all exams, the teacher offered to simply give me a 'B' if I missed no more than one question on the final (which, I think, was like a 95% or 96%). Of course, I managed this easily.

    ITT we learn that mainstream American high schools apparently have no real way to deal with gifted kids. Sure, there were AP and/or honors classes available...but those usually meant even more work (in raw hours), which doesn't exactly fit in with my "working a real job" aspect. So maybe our school just fails to deal with economically disadvantaged gifted kids. My only other real option was a GED, but like I said that's not exactly an optimal solution.
    Homework is counted because it does show the effort of the student, the same reason that participation is graded. The reason that grades are distorted this way is that a certain number of students are actually quite intelligent and know the material, but tend to have poor test-taking skills. Evaluating the student not on the basis of one type of activity, but several, tends to give a better picture of the actual ability of the student. It's an application of multiple intelligences. But, honestly speaking, a student that doesn't do well on tests probably doesn't participate in class or do their homework. Aside from math, it's really hard to get away with cheating without the teacher knowing.

    Wow, I don't know what kind of history and science classes you had in high school, but the kind of homework we had in those classes was laughably easy to cheat on. At least in the regular-ed classes I was in. And, in fact, a lot of students did just that.

    EDIT: And at least one other poster was talking about his history homework consisting of Xerox worksheets to be filled out...those are hard to cheat on? I don't think so. You know, just in case you wanted to try the "your high school was just different route" like other posters have.
    Homework is counted because it does show the effort of the student, the same reason that participation is graded. The reason that grades are distorted this way is that a certain number of students are actually quite intelligent and know the material, but tend to have poor test-taking skills. Evaluating the student not on the basis of one type of activity, but several, tends to give a better picture of the actual ability of the student. It's an application of multiple intelligences. But, honestly speaking, a student that doesn't do well on tests probably doesn't participate in class or do their homework. Aside from math, it's really hard to get away with cheating without the teacher knowing.

    In my experience graded homework was not an application of multiple intelligences, but rather a way for stupid-ass kids to buff-up their grades. But again, I'll admit that grade inflation at my school may have been worse than normal. But I ran into far too many kids with A's in US History who could not name four presidents if their lives depended on it to come to any other conclusion. These kids got A's through a combination of cramming and grinding out (or copying) all the busywork assigned.

    mcdermott on
Sign In or Register to comment.