this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2024
51 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37805 readers
131 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BlackLaZoR@fedia.io 48 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Stop relying on students to do their work in home. Most of people work from 9 to 5 yet education system expects teenagers to do overtime assignments. And noone even pays them for it.

[–] Eggyhead@fedia.io 32 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Students don’t learn by just going to class then doing nothing afterwards. Teachers give the tools, the kids need to practice them. Jesus I wish I could get paid for just going to school.

[–] hazelnoot@beehaw.org 30 points 4 months ago (1 children)

That's not entirely true. Practice is important, but homework actually has a negative impact on learning: https://hachyderm.io/@Impossible_PhD/112969358305278574

[–] Eggyhead@fedia.io 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Are you actually referencing a mastodon post made by one individual claiming to be a lifelong teacher as substantiated evidence to support your claim?

I’m also a lifelong teacher, and I think homework has its place.

  1. It allows teachers to assess a students progress and identify issues that individual might be struggling with.
  2. Teacher can modify the curriculum to improve common shortcoming appearing in homework results, in other words, hw can help the teacher help the students.
  3. HW allows more accurate grading, so you’re not just judged based on your tests, your attitude in class, and the teacher’s gut.
  4. As I mentioned, it’s practice for the student. Sure I could do math accurately if I really thought about it, but getting lots of practice in means it takes less time and I don’t look foolish at some point when it matters.

That said, I almost never assign hw in my own classes unless students need more time with a project than I am able to provide. That said, some student are never happy when I give them a score based solely on how much (or how little) they actually participate in class vs poke about on their phones.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Which is worse: bad citation or anecdotes with no citation?

AFAIK the actual research is somewhat unclear.

But my (former teacher) problems with "education" are a wider topic for another day.

[–] Eggyhead@fedia.io 6 points 4 months ago

Was your citation not just another anecdote with no citation?

[–] BlackLaZoR@fedia.io 19 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Students don’t learn by just going to class then doing nothing afterwards

Really? Then why are they going there in the first place???

And how do you get that juicy job experience allowing you to negotiate higher wage? You spend time on homework given you by your boss???

Jesus I wish I could get paid for just going to school.

Maybe you should be paid for passed exams and decent grades?

[–] Eggyhead@fedia.io 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I’ve always believed that fiscal responsibility and interpersonal skills should be taught in schools. Add online etiquette and context interpretation to that list as well.

Also, who’s going to pay you? You’re going to school so you can learn how to make money for yourself later. If you don’t do your schoolwork, you might end up making less than others who did because you’ll be less experienced with it.

[–] Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

That's something only a teacher would say. As someone who did all their school work and got a fancy engineering job, a lot of it was bogus busy work that 99% of us have completely forgotten.

You can't tell me that I needed two teachers having me comb through the book for words that weren't part of the index so that I could rewrite the word's textbook definition on a piece of paper verbatim on a weekly basis and that that was a good education experience.

You can't tell me my high school study hall where they'd give you something to do if you were bored and forbid you from sleeping or playing games unless the study hall monitor "liked you" was a good experience.

I mean my high school algebra teacher couldn't even remember the algebra lesson she'd taught every year for over a decade when I had her. If it was really a life skill or that important, she would've remembered.

In calculus they teach you the hard way to differentiate and then they're just like "ah but actually you can do it this way and that's how everyone does it."

Artificially raising the difficulty by forbidding formula sheets in math is also just stupid. If you can see the problem, recognize which formula to use, and use it, that should be enough.

We're just straight up wasting millions of hours of people's time with our education system that has very little merit in terms of long term results and retention and negatively affects both people that come out of it "passing with flying colors" and people that flunk out because of various home life circumstances, bad teachers, difficult with the material, or a lack of interest.

Students are miserable (suicide is at an all time high last I checked and I'm pretty confident it's not just about social media), administrators are miserable, teachers are miserable, and kids really don't learn all that much that stays with them into adulthood. We desperately try to shove way too much information into people's heads in a very dry and uncaptivating way. We need to throw the system out and figure out how to teach what matters and change/replace stuff that doesn't matter or make sense (e.g. we changed the spelling of various words in the past, why don't we fix them instead of teaching a bunch of ridiculous spellings that make no sense like facade, ghost, llama, etc).

[–] moomoomoo309@programming.dev 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

To the spelling point: The world, for the most part, has moved away from the grammarian tradition of the 19th and 20th century of having a handful of dictionary makers decide what English is proper and what isn't - the language evolves on its own, and if a misspelling becomes popular enough, it becomes a proper spelling. For example, facade is a french word, spelled façade, the accent under the C means it's pronounced like an S. We dropped it in English because we don't use accents in English, and now we spell it facade. It's a "misspelling", but you've probably never spelled it correctly. The language was never consistent to begin with, pretending you can fix spelling to make it so is a fool's errand.

[–] Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I disagree that it's a fools errand. Misspellings rarely become popular enough to become "proper" because we teach everyone the "proper" spelling and we have spell checkers on our computers that are used for virtually everything.

There's no method for the people speaking the English language to put pressure on a word that already exists because we've build up this infrastructure to "lock things in' and insist that "they've been this way so they must continue to be this way." The only way we get language evolution currently is via slang ... which is hardly a way to get a better language.

I know the history of facade, it's like many other words we've stolen from other languages that don't make a lick of sense in our alphabet. It's not an infinite list, it's fixable, but we need to change the mind share that "it has to be this way."

We made up official spellings, we can fix them, they're not an immutable law of nature.

[–] moomoomoo309@programming.dev 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The fool's errand is trying to make the language consistent, when it never has been, especially trying to do it via spelling. English isn't consistent. It's not supposed to be. It takes pieces from every other language and integrates them into English whether it makes sense to or not, leading to inconsistency. That inconsistency, I think, is by design. It makes the language more versatile than any other, a "good enough" medium of communication for everything, but usually not the best, which for communication, tends to be fine.

[–] Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The old "why try to do anything because it will never be perfect" argument never holds water.

[–] moomoomoo309@programming.dev 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

That's not at all the argument I'm making. My argument is that English's inconsistency is, at this point, the reason it is successful. By integrating everything into it, it has become a good enough medium of communication for almost everything. That would not have been possible unless the language eschewed consistency.

Really, a better argument against changing the spelling is the classic "standards" xkcd, where now you're just making another dialect of English where they spell words differently again, and now it needs to be adopted, fracturing the language further. Honestly, though? It doesn't matter. Fix the spelling if you want. English can take the fracturing. The changes might take, they might not, but I doubt it'll make the language more consistent overall, for every fix you put in, you'll have someone who disagrees and doesn't put it in, making your dialect more consistent, but the language overall less so, but it doesn't matter. English will continue to be inconsistent, and that's okay, that's why it works.

[–] Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg 1 points 4 months ago

By integrating everything into it, it has become a good enough medium of communication for almost everything.

Except that's not at all what we've done.

The only reason English dominates is because it's the dominant language of the world super powers following world war II. It's not because of some special design, principle, or properties.

English isn't just "make up whatever rules and put them wherever", particularly formal English which is what we're talking about in the context of education.

Really, a better argument against changing the spelling is the classic "standards" xkcd, where now you're just making another dialect of English where they spell words differently again, and now it needs to be adopted, fracturing the language further.

Language will evolve with or without direction. We have the structure in the form of schools to actually evolve it with direction in the name of making things more consistent and intuitive. We should use it, that's all.