Now I'm not saying jump in and try to swim a mile if you cannot swim one single stroke. But I am saying that the fun of learning is trying to 'figure it out' on our own.
Think back to a time you really enjoyed learning something. I bet there was some element of chance and pushing yourself beyond your comfort zone involved.
School, unfortunately, doesn't do a great job of pushing kids or allowing them to experiment to see what they are 'really' capable of. Instead, we keep all kids on the same page or the same unit or the same assignment. Unfortunately, the 'real world' doesn't always work like that.
Do we really want out kids to be prepared for their future by a system that hasnt changed for a hundred years? No, we don't. School systems have to be willing to change with the generation or the world will end up going no where. Very awesome video.
This is definitely true, I mean the world is constantly changing, and schools tell us about these new exciting jobs for the changing day but they don't prepare us for them.
Agreed. We are being prepped for jobs that don't even exist anymore when you think about it. And by the time we're out of college, there will probably be new jobs that don't exist now. Like Cassi said, school systems have to be willing to change with the generation.
A time when I really enjoyed learning something was when I started my first job. I had no idea what to expect, and definitely didn't have a clue as to what it was really going to be like. I was completely outside my comfort zone, and that made the learning experience all the more exiting.
I think it is more important that we teach kids in school how to connect things to real world issues. What Richardson said about us being taught the same things as our parents and grandparents is, sadly enough, true. It should be completely different, though. Our parents and grandparents were in school at a different time then we are, and therefore had different issues going on in the world then we do today. Therefore, why on earth should we be expected to learn the same things as they did?
To add to Miranda's comment I want to say that when our gradparents and parents were in school the type pf connections they needed to make were so much more different than the ones needed to be made today. In the future who knows what type of connections will need to be made, or under what circumstances. We might be communicating with ET people light years away. We cannot impiment old ways to a completly new system- it requires new thinking.
The part, though, that gets tough is that adaption is not something that can be taught very easily. I can understand why people would be weary to change their ways. It's going to need a huge movement to change the way the entire system works. I believe that adaption should be taught. It is the how where we run into problems.
I totally agree with you Bailey. I wish the stem would change so that we could be prepped more readily for the real world and real jobs. But like you said, that would require a huge change in the system, and we are definitely creatures of habit.
I think though Kirsten, people can change if you get enough support. Also, doesn't your point of "real world" and "real jobs" help you get trapped in the factory system.
What I like is the self-taught learning aspect that he introduces, because honestly I have experienced this. For example this summer I taught myself the parts of the brain because it was something I wanted to learn and that I was passionate about. I learned so much by doing this type of learning myself than I did by sitting in a classroom.
I agree with Dra. I also like self-taught learning, but sadly, we hardly ever get to experience it. The only time that stands out to me is when I was in chemistry last year. We did labs practically every day, and Mr. H would make us do it ourselves. He could have easily just done the experiment at the front of the room and made us take notes, but he didn't. He made us do it, and speaking for myself, I learned a whole lot more than I would have by just sitting at the table. If only only teachers would learn by his example . . .
Yeah, I agree. A system in which we are mostly self-taught and came to school to ask any questions we had or get some personal help with any problems we might have sounds very efficient.
Self taught learning can be a very good resouce or way to go about an education. Obviously we do not want our doctors self-teaching themself though. There has to be some sort of structure for certain professions. Maybe self-teaching doesn't have to be used to teach a whole subject or area, but maybe just a tiny part of it.
I agree. Self taught learning would be very efficient I believe because it is us being the teachers instead of us listening to someone talk about it, or give us worksheets, or have us copy down notes off of a boring keynote. If you were learning about the brain, you could go on the app store and find many apps about the brain. You could have an app that shows you a 3D image with all different colors so you can see all the different parts. There is so much out there that can help us and we aren't taking advantage of any of it.
Isn't it amazing how hard we all will work OUTSIDE of school to learn something that is personally relevant to us (whether it be putting together a fantasy football team, mastering Guitar Hero or Just Dance (I set the high score for Jin Go La Ba), reading a book, or setting up a hunting stand). Yet when we cover a skill in school, somehow it becomes un-engaging and work?
I like when he says that our parents are sitting in the same desks we are, reading the same books, forgetting the same answers that they did. It is almost true, but not entirely. I know for a fact that my parents didn't go to school and have to learn half of the things I have to learn. Students are required to know so much in order to be on top. That is what I call education inflation. However, he is correct in saying school has turned into test prep. It should change to be more of a deep inquiry and solving real world problems. If we don't, we will never be able to maintain the same standard of living as we do today.
With what Dra said, self-taught learning has helped me a lot as well. Just like driving the combine. My dad puts me in, and says " Don't f*#k anything up." You have to adapt to the situation and its easiest if you love what you're doing.
I completely agree with this. I learn a ton when I do things myself, (Science fair for example). However, in schools it shouldn't be entirely self taught because the teachers should be able to convey it better than me just poking around in it by myself. Its sad when my days are more worth my time when I stay home from school then when I am in school. If I can learn more in the 8 hours I would have at home in a day if I wasn't in school, than I can learn actually in school, its pretty sad for the school system. Schools need to find a way to give us more than Kahn Academy or reading books at home can. Also, I shouldn't be able to learn a class straight out of a textbook because if I can do that, what do I need a teacher for?
I agree 100% with the quote he ended with, saying how learners inherit the world, while the learned are just beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists. It seems just about everything in this world has changed. We have to be constantly learning. This ties into school systems. Many things have changed, whether it be businesses, factories, etc., so why not school systems? We still have the same system, but why? We're a part of a changing world, and we need to adapt to it instead of being stubborn and sticking to the old ways.
I think this kind of sounds like the track system that a lot of schools in Europe employ. From a young age you're sorted into groups depending on your aptitude for certain subjects. And I know that there are some big flexibility problems with that system but maybe if they sorted kids into the groups they most enjoyed, instead of by their test scores, it might work better.
The Europe system seems effective that way. If you clump groups of students who are good at math, and put a massive math problem in front of them, together they will be able to solve it. Besides, groups of people in subjects they enjoy doesn't always work out. E.g. I love classic art, but if you have me try to paint a painting, it would end up with stick figures.
I love this video, especially the part in the beginning where he is talking about his daughter, and Mark Klassen. I love how he shows that these two examples are making there own curriculum around themselves. With Mark it is so cool to see a guy out there who is doing exactly what I am doing, although he is into cinimatography and I am into photography. However, we both use a blog to connect to other people and learn more about our different fields of art.
I feel like blogs could be very helpful with education, since they will allow teachers to share different teaching methods, and how they design their curriculum.
Tess's piano teacher took her learning something "she wasn't ready for" as a negative thing. Tess went out of her way to learn a piece that she enjoyed. Even though she didn't learn it traditionally, she could play it like a champ in the end. Older generations are uncomfortable with younger ones being able to do what they learned to do, much more efficiently. To learn things more quickly and interactively will get us to retain what we learn and enable us to learn more and excel in what we have known to do.
I agree. If we want to learn something, we will teach ourselves. This definitely intimidates other generations because it effectively makes them useless. That's why education should be changed, we don't want to eliminate teachers, we want to change what they're doing.
I think that when we enjoy something, or are even simply determined to do it, we will find a way to get it done. And there are so many ways to get help, or figure it out that don't actually require "help", such as the internet. Or like with this example, she sets her mind to do something way beyond her skill level, yet achieves it because she wanted to! The fact that we are not following in the past generation's footsteps scares them. Yet this is where we're headed.
I love The example of Tess, because I have done the exact same thing. I decides I wanted to learn how to play a song on the piano, or one weekend I sat down with my guitar & learned a few new songs. We have unlimited knowledge and teachers at our fingertips! We can learn anything we want, yet we are forces to sit through school, which "fundamentally hasn't changed in 125 years." Our world has changed so much in 125 years, why hasn't our school system? We still judge intelligence by the same tests and standards set a hundred years ago! The same tests and standards, going back to Linchpin, are preparing us for factory jobs that don't really exist anymore. We have so much access and yet our creativity is being taught out of us.
You need more technology in the classroom, it can help kids find out what they might want as a career, because there are endless possibilities. But technology inside of the classroom would be useless unless students taken upon themselves to try and learn with it.
I believe that schools will take a while to reform. If you listen to his points on education, you notice that he focuses on standardized testing. In order to reform schools, we need a new standard. You cannot abolish the standard, because you wouldn't know who is struggling and who is not. He mentions the same system that Seth Godin does. What does that mean? It means that two people see the same problem and want to change it.
I agree. You can't completely get rid of standardized testing. There needs to be away to compare people to know who is best ready to advance. I do believe however that it needs to be reformed so that maybe its not fill in the blank and multiple choice, but instead a problem where you have to think and present a solution. If the solution is plausible and maybe flawed but not inconceivable, you pass. For example, maybe the AP Physics test could be a word problem that wants you to create a bridge. In your design and schematics you would have to calculate everything on that bridge from the torque on the supports to the bridges weight capacity. When you are done, if you had accurately understood the physics concepts, you would be able to show every possible force being applied to that bridge and how to best react to it. If you could not show 60% of the forces accurately you wouldn't pass. The best part about it is there could be hundreds of different possible bridge designs you could create and you would still be right. Testing needs to make you think, not make you guess.
I definitely agree with Amit's point. We need a NEW standard of education. Although they're more-than-likely needed, standards don't have to be what we traditionally consider as standards. Standards don't have to be tests. Instead of having kids take a physics final, maybe we allow them to create a Rube Goldberg machine and explain how each step of their machine is applied physics. The teacher is able to see if kids understand the concept without harpering their creative abilities.
"In times of change, learners inherit the earth, while the learned find themselves beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists." This quote really makes me think of science fairs. Going to ISEF and I-SWEEEP I found that almost all of these students were people that were trying to adapt to a changing world. Many times I talk to people and say, "Well why don't you join science fair?" And I almost always get the same response, "It's to much work." Well, if we are not prepared to go out, create, learn on our own, and to learn a better world, our race won't survive the century.
I find it really inspiring that Mark learned everything he knows about videotaping from online. He watched videos of other peoples work and took note of what they were doing. We can all learn so much from the internet! If we had more computers in classrooms and let set us free to do like a project on something we love, I feel that everyone would put 100% into their project because it is about something they enjoy and have a lot of passion for it.
I like the ideas the speaker was talking about. It would be such a good idea to connect teachers salaries to the test scores of their kids. Who wouldn't want a higher salary? The teachers that aren't the best, would start to actually teacher and the students scores would definitely raise. Also, firing all the bad teachers is a given. Why would you want to keep a teacher that doesn't teach or thinks they are teaching but really isn't helping us at all.
I don't think teachers should be paid according to how well their students do on standardized tests. Basing a person's income on how well their students test just kinda seems like a plan for disaster. I feel like teachers would only be focused on creating good test takers rather than able and critically thinking students. The students would be pro at filling in bubbles, but they wouldn't know how to do basic problem sloving skills that are needed in real life. Kids aren't going to be filling bubbles for th rest of their life. I don't think teachers should be fired right away if kids don't do well on tests. It might be something that should be looked into, but that shouldn't be the only basis for termination. The teacher's teaching method, material, and involvement should be considered as well.
"Oh, she's not ready for that."
ReplyDeleteSad. When are we really ready for anything?
Now I'm not saying jump in and try to swim a mile if you cannot swim one single stroke. But I am saying that the fun of learning is trying to 'figure it out' on our own.
Think back to a time you really enjoyed learning something. I bet there was some element of chance and pushing yourself beyond your comfort zone involved.
School, unfortunately, doesn't do a great job of pushing kids or allowing them to experiment to see what they are 'really' capable of. Instead, we keep all kids on the same page or the same unit or the same assignment. Unfortunately, the 'real world' doesn't always work like that.
Do we really want out kids to be prepared for their future by a system that hasnt changed for a hundred years? No, we don't. School systems have to be willing to change with the generation or the world will end up going no where. Very awesome video.
ReplyDeleteThis is definitely true, I mean the world is constantly changing, and schools tell us about these new exciting jobs for the changing day but they don't prepare us for them.
DeleteAgreed. We are being prepped for jobs that don't even exist anymore when you think about it. And by the time we're out of college, there will probably be new jobs that don't exist now. Like Cassi said, school systems have to be willing to change with the generation.
DeleteA time when I really enjoyed learning something was when I started my first job. I had no idea what to expect, and definitely didn't have a clue as to what it was really going to be like. I was completely outside my comfort zone, and that made the learning experience all the more exiting.
ReplyDeleteI think it is more important that we teach kids in school how to connect things to real world issues. What Richardson said about us being taught the same things as our parents and grandparents is, sadly enough, true. It should be completely different, though. Our parents and grandparents were in school at a different time then we are, and therefore had different issues going on in the world then we do today. Therefore, why on earth should we be expected to learn the same things as they did?
I love what Cassi and Miranda said, we are still in the survival of the fittest mode we need to be adaptable thats the most important thing.
DeleteTo add to Miranda's comment I want to say that when our gradparents and parents were in school the type pf connections they needed to make were so much more different than the ones needed to be made today. In the future who knows what type of connections will need to be made, or under what circumstances. We might be communicating with ET people light years away. We cannot impiment old ways to a completly new system- it requires new thinking.
DeleteI agree with Miranda, we need to teach kids how to adapt, if anything.
ReplyDeleteThe part, though, that gets tough is that adaption is not something that can be taught very easily. I can understand why people would be weary to change their ways. It's going to need a huge movement to change the way the entire system works. I believe that adaption should be taught. It is the how where we run into problems.
DeleteI totally agree with you Bailey. I wish the stem would change so that we could be prepped more readily for the real world and real jobs. But like you said, that would require a huge change in the system, and we are definitely creatures of habit.
DeleteI think though Kirsten, people can change if you get enough support. Also, doesn't your point of "real world" and "real jobs" help you get trapped in the factory system.
DeleteWhat I like is the self-taught learning aspect that he introduces, because honestly I have experienced this. For example this summer I taught myself the parts of the brain because it was something I wanted to learn and that I was passionate about. I learned so much by doing this type of learning myself than I did by sitting in a classroom.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Dra. I also like self-taught learning, but sadly, we hardly ever get to experience it. The only time that stands out to me is when I was in chemistry last year. We did labs practically every day, and Mr. H would make us do it ourselves. He could have easily just done the experiment at the front of the room and made us take notes, but he didn't. He made us do it, and speaking for myself, I learned a whole lot more than I would have by just sitting at the table. If only only teachers would learn by his example . . .
DeleteYeah, I agree. A system in which we are mostly self-taught and came to school to ask any questions we had or get some personal help with any problems we might have sounds very efficient.
DeleteSelf taught learning can be a very good resouce or way to go about an education. Obviously we do not want our doctors self-teaching themself though. There has to be some sort of structure for certain professions. Maybe self-teaching doesn't have to be used to teach a whole subject or area, but maybe just a tiny part of it.
DeleteI agree. Self taught learning would be very efficient I believe because it is us being the teachers instead of us listening to someone talk about it, or give us worksheets, or have us copy down notes off of a boring keynote. If you were learning about the brain, you could go on the app store and find many apps about the brain. You could have an app that shows you a 3D image with all different colors so you can see all the different parts. There is so much out there that can help us and we aren't taking advantage of any of it.
DeleteIsn't it amazing how hard we all will work OUTSIDE of school to learn something that is personally relevant to us (whether it be putting together a fantasy football team, mastering Guitar Hero or Just Dance (I set the high score for Jin Go La Ba), reading a book, or setting up a hunting stand). Yet when we cover a skill in school, somehow it becomes un-engaging and work?
DeleteI like when he says that our parents are sitting in the same desks we are, reading the same books, forgetting the same answers that they did. It is almost true, but not entirely. I know for a fact that my parents didn't go to school and have to learn half of the things I have to learn. Students are required to know so much in order to be on top. That is what I call education inflation. However, he is correct in saying school has turned into test prep. It should change to be more of a deep inquiry and solving real world problems. If we don't, we will never be able to maintain the same standard of living as we do today.
ReplyDeleteWith what Dra said, self-taught learning has helped me a lot as well. Just like driving the combine. My dad puts me in, and says " Don't f*#k anything up." You have to adapt to the situation and its easiest if you love what you're doing.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with this. I learn a ton when I do things myself, (Science fair for example). However, in schools it shouldn't be entirely self taught because the teachers should be able to convey it better than me just poking around in it by myself. Its sad when my days are more worth my time when I stay home from school then when I am in school. If I can learn more in the 8 hours I would have at home in a day if I wasn't in school, than I can learn actually in school, its pretty sad for the school system. Schools need to find a way to give us more than Kahn Academy or reading books at home can. Also, I shouldn't be able to learn a class straight out of a textbook because if I can do that, what do I need a teacher for?
DeleteI agree 100% with the quote he ended with, saying how learners inherit the world, while the learned are just beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists. It seems just about everything in this world has changed. We have to be constantly learning. This ties into school systems. Many things have changed, whether it be businesses, factories, etc., so why not school systems? We still have the same system, but why? We're a part of a changing world, and we need to adapt to it instead of being stubborn and sticking to the old ways.
ReplyDeleteI think this kind of sounds like the track system that a lot of schools in Europe employ. From a young age you're sorted into groups depending on your aptitude for certain subjects. And I know that there are some big flexibility problems with that system but maybe if they sorted kids into the groups they most enjoyed, instead of by their test scores, it might work better.
ReplyDeleteThe Europe system seems effective that way. If you clump groups of students who are good at math, and put a massive math problem in front of them, together they will be able to solve it. Besides, groups of people in subjects they enjoy doesn't always work out. E.g. I love classic art, but if you have me try to paint a painting, it would end up with stick figures.
DeleteI love this video, especially the part in the beginning where he is talking about his daughter, and Mark Klassen. I love how he shows that these two examples are making there own curriculum around themselves. With Mark it is so cool to see a guy out there who is doing exactly what I am doing, although he is into cinimatography and I am into photography. However, we both use a blog to connect to other people and learn more about our different fields of art.
ReplyDeleteI feel like blogs could be very helpful with education, since they will allow teachers to share different teaching methods, and how they design their curriculum.
DeleteTess's piano teacher took her learning something "she wasn't ready for" as a negative thing. Tess went out of her way to learn a piece that she enjoyed. Even though she didn't learn it traditionally, she could play it like a champ in the end. Older generations are uncomfortable with younger ones being able to do what they learned to do, much more efficiently. To learn things more quickly and interactively will get us to retain what we learn and enable us to learn more and excel in what we have known to do.
ReplyDeleteI agree. If we want to learn something, we will teach ourselves. This definitely intimidates other generations because it effectively makes them useless. That's why education should be changed, we don't want to eliminate teachers, we want to change what they're doing.
DeleteI think that when we enjoy something, or are even simply determined to do it, we will find a way to get it done. And there are so many ways to get help, or figure it out that don't actually require "help", such as the internet. Or like with this example, she sets her mind to do something way beyond her skill level, yet achieves it because she wanted to! The fact that we are not following in the past generation's footsteps scares them. Yet this is where we're headed.
DeleteI love The example of Tess, because I have done the exact same thing. I decides I wanted to learn how to play a song on the piano, or one weekend I sat down with my guitar & learned a few new songs. We have unlimited knowledge and teachers at our fingertips! We can learn anything we want, yet we are forces to sit through school, which "fundamentally hasn't changed in 125 years." Our world has changed so much in 125 years, why hasn't our school system? We still judge intelligence by the same tests and standards set a hundred years ago! The same tests and standards, going back to Linchpin, are preparing us for factory jobs that don't really exist anymore. We have so much access and yet our creativity is being taught out of us.
ReplyDeleteAgreed! We need to adapt to the changes going on around us. We can't be stuck in our old ways any more of how the school system works.
DeleteYou need more technology in the classroom, it can help kids find out what they might want as a career, because there are endless possibilities. But technology inside of the classroom would be useless unless students taken upon themselves to try and learn with it.
ReplyDeleteI believe that schools will take a while to reform. If you listen to his points on education, you notice that he focuses on standardized testing. In order to reform schools, we need a new standard. You cannot abolish the standard, because you wouldn't know who is struggling and who is not.
ReplyDeleteHe mentions the same system that Seth Godin does. What does that mean? It means that two people see the same problem and want to change it.
I agree. You can't completely get rid of standardized testing. There needs to be away to compare people to know who is best ready to advance. I do believe however that it needs to be reformed so that maybe its not fill in the blank and multiple choice, but instead a problem where you have to think and present a solution. If the solution is plausible and maybe flawed but not inconceivable, you pass. For example, maybe the AP Physics test could be a word problem that wants you to create a bridge. In your design and schematics you would have to calculate everything on that bridge from the torque on the supports to the bridges weight capacity. When you are done, if you had accurately understood the physics concepts, you would be able to show every possible force being applied to that bridge and how to best react to it. If you could not show 60% of the forces accurately you wouldn't pass. The best part about it is there could be hundreds of different possible bridge designs you could create and you would still be right. Testing needs to make you think, not make you guess.
DeleteI definitely agree with Amit's point. We need a NEW standard of education. Although they're more-than-likely needed, standards don't have to be what we traditionally consider as standards. Standards don't have to be tests. Instead of having kids take a physics final, maybe we allow them to create a Rube Goldberg machine and explain how each step of their machine is applied physics. The teacher is able to see if kids understand the concept without harpering their creative abilities.
Delete"In times of change, learners inherit the earth, while the learned find themselves beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists." This quote really makes me think of science fairs. Going to ISEF and I-SWEEEP I found that almost all of these students were people that were trying to adapt to a changing world. Many times I talk to people and say, "Well why don't you join science fair?" And I almost always get the same response, "It's to much work." Well, if we are not prepared to go out, create, learn on our own, and to learn a better world, our race won't survive the century.
ReplyDeleteI find it really inspiring that Mark learned everything he knows about videotaping from online. He watched videos of other peoples work and took note of what they were doing. We can all learn so much from the internet! If we had more computers in classrooms and let set us free to do like a project on something we love, I feel that everyone would put 100% into their project because it is about something they enjoy and have a lot of passion for it.
ReplyDeleteI like the ideas the speaker was talking about. It would be such a good idea to connect teachers salaries to the test scores of their kids. Who wouldn't want a higher salary? The teachers that aren't the best, would start to actually teacher and the students scores would definitely raise. Also, firing all the bad teachers is a given. Why would you want to keep a teacher that doesn't teach or thinks they are teaching but really isn't helping us at all.
ReplyDeleteI don't think teachers should be paid according to how well their students do on standardized tests. Basing a person's income on how well their students test just kinda seems like a plan for disaster. I feel like teachers would only be focused on creating good test takers rather than able and critically thinking students. The students would be pro at filling in bubbles, but they wouldn't know how to do basic problem sloving skills that are needed in real life. Kids aren't going to be filling bubbles for th rest of their life. I don't think teachers should be fired right away if kids don't do well on tests. It might be something that should be looked into, but that shouldn't be the only basis for termination. The teacher's teaching method, material, and involvement should be considered as well.
Delete