774 posts shown.
briskjackal5 said:Hey there! I was just sitting here thinking about everything we discussed earlier, and honestly, I feel like I have so much more to say about it all! It’s funny how things work out sometimes, isn't it? I guess I might be overthinking this, but I just can't help myself. I really wanted to jump back in and share some thoughts because I've been buzzing about this all morning! Anyway, hope you guys are having an absolutely wonderful day! kaže:
Of course it can! I mean, carpenters have been around for thousands of years, right? But those massive high schools that everyone seems to flock to nowadays? Honestly, they’re kind of a relatively recent invention, if you think about it.
Spot on. Totally true.
I mean, it just wasn't really doable back then, I guess... mostly because getting enough food was such a struggle, and honestly, we just didn't have any free time to breathe!
I mean, honestly, it feels like the sheer amount of info we’re all expected to know has just exploded lately, right? It’s kind of wild. Because everything is moving so fast, I guess there’s this much more intense pressure now to stay in school longer. Like, you can't just stop at a basic level anymore; there's such a huge need for more advanced degrees and extra schooling just to keep up with how much stuff there is to learn these days!
Back then, getting a decent education was... well, I guess you could say it was a total luxury. Just wasn't something everyone could just jump into, you know? It was definitely a privilege.
So, today’s election day, right? Everyone is out there casting their votes... I guess the whole "skip high school to just focus on learning how to sand wood" strategy isn't exactly winning many votes this year! Haha!
It could totally work. Honestly, it’s not even that crazy when you think about it—I mean, Americans aren't just some random number one for no reason, right? They actually have access to things that feels way closer to what we're looking for than anything else we've got.
And that actually played a huge part—like, a really massive part—in their success!So, when you say "mastered" it... I mean, are we talking about like, actually passing a math midterm in maybe twenty minutes? Or are we talking about developing this whole lifelong habit of using math in your daily life? I guess it depends on how you look at it! Maybe both? Haha!
Neither one, nor the other. I mean, honestly? Neither.
I mean, honestly? This whole example feels a bit half-baked to me. It’s just way too vague, and I feel like people are spinning way too many wild theories out of it for a topic like this. It's probably overthinking things, I guess!
I mean, I’m pretty sure that even if it’s been ages since someone sat through fifth grade, seventh grade, or even high school, they can still actually use what they learned. I guess it's just because you mentioned there aren't any cognitive limitations holding them back!
I think he might have totally missed the mark on those percentages... or maybe the whole sense of proportion? Or honestly, I guess even the geometry part seems a bit off to me!
And honestly, I think it’d be super helpful to get a good look at the coordinate system and all those different curves too! It might make things way clearer, I guess.
I mean, I really think he pulled it off! He totally nailed it, I guess.So, let’s do the math on this for a second. If a student spends, what, maybe two hours a week on math? So that’s like 2 hours times 54 weeks times 12 years of schooling. After all those twelve years of grinding away at math, what have they actually gained? I mean, they can tell you exactly how many gallons of Sherwin-Williams paint to buy to redo their apartment, or if the local grocer is trying to rip them off on the price of apples... but that's about it! Sure, they know the definition of a circle and how to solve a quadratic equation, but honestly, when was the last time a quadratic equation actually showed up in your daily life? Seriously, probably never!
I mean, let's be real here... most of that deep, theoretical stuff? It’s just not actually useful for the average person going about their daily life. I guess if you aren't working in a lab or something, you probably won't ever need half of it!
So, I guess what I’m trying to get at is... what's even the point behind all this? It feels like it's partly because, honestly, most people aren't really putting much actual knowledge into practice anyway. I mean, maybe that's just how it is, but it feels like a lot of effort for very little payoff! Whatever! I mean, honestly, anything at all! Just throw something my way and let's see where it goes!.
I mean, look, it’s not like it's strictly necessary. I wouldn't say it isn't useful—honestly, I think it could actually be pretty helpful for a lot of people—but, you know, it just isn't a total requirement. It's just one of those things!
Look, I mean, I actually laid out all those specific things he was studying, and it really seems like the material stuck with him. Plus, you were the one who pointed out those real-world applications yourself! Especially when it comes to math, it just makes sense.
I mean, I guess for all the other kinds of stuff out there, you probably won't even find nearly as many of them! Maybe they just aren't as common? Who knows! 😁
I mean, honestly? I think the smartest way to go about picking materials is to find that sweet spot—you know, finding a balance between what’s theoretically "unlikely to be used," general knowledge, and just straight-up practical application. Just because the "majority" of people aren't using something doesn't mean it's irrelevant on its own. It's definitely a factor to consider, sure, but it shouldn't be the only thing we look at. We really shouldn't just toss everything out just because it isn't widely used!
I mean, I don't know, maybe it's just me, but I really feel like it’s a bad move to raise a bunch of total idiots who decide they want to be carpenters back in fifth grade and then just... never grow out of it intellectually? Like, they just grab a hammer at twelve years old and that’s basically it for them. It feels a bit much, I guess!
And I mean, it’s not just about avoiding pure stupidity—society isn't built solely on its ability to turn a profit or manufacture stuff, you know? It has this whole culture behind it that goes way deeper than just economics.
Plus, as an society, we really want to nurture those people who can actually tackle the super complex stuff. And honestly, I think it’ll be pretty tough to make that happen if they don't even get through, say, our standard American middle school math curriculum.
Even the harder high school stuff. 😁
I guess those would just be the starting points for any real discussion about what we should be doing in schools.
And looking at it that way, I feel like the net effect of math classes for that individual was actually totally positive. Maybe your take on their aversion to it—or how much it messed things up for them—is a bit exaggerated or just off base? I mean, if we want to actually move forward as a country, we really ought to look at these net effects for society as a whole, rather than just focusing on one specific person.
Otherwise, the stuff that’s going to be more useful in everyday life—whether through social interaction or just general living—can actually be picked up through reading literature. Since we're already talking about it! 😁They have an even bigger hatred for math now, more resistance whenever they try to grasp anything mathematical, and way less motivation to learn it than if they had never studied it at all.
And you think that's a net positive result? Wow, okay then.
No, that’s not really a "result" at all. That's just your perspective, which I think is partly right, partly a bit superficial, and partly just plain wrong. 😁How much school math do you actually use in daily life? BTW, how are you applying knowledge of logarithms, limits, or the volume of a pyramid?
I chose to go to a prep school by my own choice. And honestly, none of that stuff I learned bothers me at all. I never once thought, "Man, I wish I knew that!" after graduating, though I do find myself thinking—relatively often, I guess 😁—"I wish I could remember this part better!"
If I were in certain college programs, I'd probably still be using everything I learned. For all sorts of subjects, from biology and art to math.
The fact that I didn't pick some of them was just my call.
If I hadn't gone through that education, I wouldn't have even had the choice to begin with; if we didn't have access to that kind of schooling, nobody in the US would be able to keep up with what comes next, specifically with the examples you mentioned. We'd basically have to shut down all the STEM colleges. 😁
Besides, I really feel like math develops abstract thinking and just exercises the brain in so many different ways all on its own.
And I guess the same goes for language, too.
-briskjackal5
Linda Price5 said:Do you honestly believe an eighteen-year-old with genuine drive and focus wouldn't be able to master high school level math within a single year, even if they started from scratch?
Christian Wilson28 said:Look, teenagers love them—I loved them too. It’s pure teenage angst fuel, honestly.
Salinger is fine since he's actually readable. Flaubert was pretty big back in the day, and things like Nora or the Russians were accepted in a "whatever" kind of way, I guess.
It’s sad to say, but the biggest issue with our American school reading lists is all those old classics about settlers and pioneers.
And the plays? They're often taught so poorly—it wasn't until college that I actually figured out how to read Shakespeare without wanting to die. But hey, better late than never.
Linda Price5 said:Seriously, if someone told you, "this portion of your job is no longer being compensated," would you still be just as eager—or perhaps even less willing—to perform those duties?Do you honestly think people would read classic literature more often if they had to pay per title and then proportionally based on how many pages they actually turned?😁
No, I believe we are living in 2019, and we should be exploring educational models that are far more relevant to life in the 21st century and more efficient than what we have now. The goal should be that after eight or twelve years, more people possess a broader toolkit to facilitate a higher quality of life, whatever that definition may be for the individual.
There is certainly still room for literature, mathematics, grammar, philosophy, and chemistry, but not within this idiotic "rote-memorize-repeat-forget" framework that is currently so highly valued.
Listen, for instance, to an episode of unknown's unknown, compare it to an average hour of history class, and tell me honestly who comes out on top.there, it's not like we haven't tried that. maybe suddenly everyone would start hysterically worshiping Camus, Sartre, and Kafka.🎉
Neither of us is hysterically enamored with the most tedious aspects of our jobs, but we receive something in return (money).
If a student isn't attending school to actually educate themselves but merely to acquire a diploma, I don't see the issue if they decide to purchase one. 😁
| No, I think it's 2019, and we should probably be looking at ways to educate people that actually make sense for life in the 21st century—ways that are more effective than what we have now—so that after eight or twelve years, more people actually have the tools to live better lives, whatever that means to them. There's definitely still room for literature, math, grammar, philosophy, and chemistry, but maybe not in this mindless "cram-memorize-vomit-forget" way that seems to be so popular lately. |
Linda Price5 said:It’s an absolute grind, but at least there’s a paycheck at the end of it. Even if the job itself was soul-crushing—like spending your life sewing baby clothes or something equally tedious—it would at least be compensated. 😁
Linda Price5 said:So, why is everyone forced into the exact same curriculum? It makes zero sense. Why should an aspiring mechanic or a carpenter be stuck reading classic literature or copying down essays just to avoid failing out of school? Why is anyone required to sit through a high-level calculus lecture when they have absolutely no intention of ever using it? If someone actually develops a genuine interest in a subject later in life, they can easily pick up a book, sign up for a specialized certification course, or simply hire a private tutor. The current system is fundamentally inefficient.Sometimes, you just have to stop overthinking, cut through the nonsense, and handle things with a certain level of blunt indifference. You deal with it, you move past it, and you don't look back.
Of course they could be done, but one has to ask: what exactly would be the motivation for doing them?
Even today, I find myself grinding through tasks that are utterly mindless and entirely beneath my interests. I do it simply because I know exactly what my hourly rate is for such drudgery. If I spend my afternoon disinterestedly scanning through some dusty old Hemingway manuscript or performing the soul-crushing task of balancing accounts deep into the red, I’m not getting paid a dime. Money only flows when the clock is running on billable work.
If we are still seeing the fallout in the form of a general decline in reading habits, a growing disdain for the literary classics, or a widespread allergy to mathematics, then the bottom line is clear: the net result is a failure.
I recall an instance during a standardized testing session where a student sat there, completely blanking on a basic math problem intended for elementary schoolers. It wasn't a matter of cognitive deficiency or a lack of innate mathematical talent; if that individual had never stepped foot in a math classroom in their life, they likely would have solved it without a second thought. Instead, the only takeaway from years of schooling was the crushing conviction that math is an insurmountable mountain and that they simply aren't "math people." That is the cumulative, disastrous result of spending several hours a week in a classroom for twelve consecutive years. It’s nothing short of a systemic failure.For me, that was a genuine hurdle. And I’m not talking specifically about deciphering archaic American literature; I mean the broader challenge of reading books in a foreign language. It didn't matter if the material was riveting or incredibly dull, or whether it was a massive tome or a slim volume—the struggle remained the same.
Every single experience has served as a lesson, helping me expand my vocabulary and familiarize myself with just about everything under the sun. Some of that knowledge proves more useful today than others, but I certainly don't feel cheated for having spent hours hunched over books with a dictionary by my side. On the contrary, it was worth every second.
I find myself reaching for a dictionary quite frequently, but if the constant interruptions start to derail my flow, I simply pack it in. There’s no point in struggling through it. That’s exactly why I don't bother reading anything in Greek.
That is precisely why I tend to ignore footnotes and endnotes—with the notable exception of Terry Pratchett’s. To any author or editor out there listening: if your idea of good pacing is interrupting my flow thirteen times per page, you might as well go jump in a lake. Do you want me to actually read your book, or are you just trying to force me to read your damn footnotes?
Linda Price5 said:There you have it. If you had spent your time sewing designer clothes or listening to podcasts instead of grinding through science classes, you might actually have some cash in your pocket by eighteen.
To me, this kind of thing feels like a massive waste—of time, electricity, fuel, and taxpayer dollars. It’s honestly pathetic.
If an education isn't actually teaching you anything and is just burning through your life, what's even the point?
Anthony Ward6 said:True, but I guess there’s a massive difference between stumbling upon a few foreign terms and dealing with a book overflowing with them, where you can barely follow the plot because the reading experience isn't fluid at all. It just makes you frustrated and on edge while trying to get through it.
Personally, that hasn't stopped me from reading in general, but it hasn't exactly pushed me toward more complex works either. I think I just learned how to better navigate things and manipulate my professor so she’d believe I actually read the material.
Now, I’m sure Fishing and Fishing Complaints is a beautiful and significant work, but it seems exhausting as hell, and it never occurred to me to read it back then, let alone now. I don't really feel like I've missed out by never having read it; knowing the author, the era, and the gist of the plot is enough for me.
In that sense, Linda Price5 is right because required reading should serve a purpose, and I don't see the point in forcing kids to struggle through Fishing when they’re just going to grab a study guide and aim for a C or a B, which is what most of us did back in high school. I don't buy the "it's mandatory" excuse—if nobody actually reads it, why force it onto the syllabus?
Linda Price5 said:It isn’t just my own experience to consider. Most of the adults I know who have developed a genuine appetite for reading—and I don’t just mean mindless pulp fiction—generally shared a mutual disdain for required school reading assignments. They rarely felt those mandatory texts provided any actual value to their lives.
To me, this looks like a systemic failure.
Linda Price5 said:You seem to think I ever claimed Dostoevsky was trash just because you breezed through your high school reading list and concluded the literary canon isn't all that miraculous. 😢
And sure, go ahead—try explaining that logic to someone who spent their childhood throwing tantrums because being allowed to borrow just two books was "not enough" for a weekend. That’s how they'll handle the realization that their entire world collapsed once they finally finished their required school readings. 😁
Linda Price5 said:Reading between the lines, I'm getting the impression that people think Shakespeare is absolute garbage just because he's a fantasy figure.
Linda Price5 said:It’s quite elegant to simply admit "I don't have an argument." Intellectual honesty is a rare commodity these days.😁
| I guess I might have missed it. A quote? |
Do you actually have an idea what’s going on here, and if so, could you maybe walk me through it?
Honestly, you’ve really let me down by bringing up angry parents so much in this thread, almost as if you're trying to blame their outbursts on someone else just to justify being inflexible. I'd suggest sending any disgruntled parent straight to the Department of Education where these regulations were drafted and then just leave it at that.
Well, I mean, it isn't exactly a historical canon or anything, so it doesn't really follow any specific era, Larry Walker24, maybe you should check the clock once in a while.
why isn't this on the required reading list—that "kids from the train station zoo" thing
I think my brain is actually starting to ache from trying to follow your logic, if you can even call it that.
I mean, why are they even tasked with teaching literature, urbantinker8, when they clearly lack the basic capacity for it since they probably didn't even bother reading the books at home?
I suppose I should probably mention that I’ve been thinking quite a bit about how much certain things change over time, though I can never quite pin down why it feels so significant when it happens. It’s funny, really, how we get caught up in these little cycles. I was sitting there the other day—just staring out at the street in Chicago, I guess—thinking about how everything seems to move so fast now, yet some things feel like they haven't budged an inch since I was a kid. Maybe it's just me being overly contemplative, or maybe there's actually something to it. Anyway, I don't mean to ramble on forever, but I felt like sharing that thought, if anyone cares to listen. kaže:
Good grief, please don't embarrass yourself like that. 😁
I wonder who exactly is the one currently pounding on the faculty lounge door in a total fury over those decapitated heads and severed breasts found in the literature curriculum. 😁 I guess I was just sitting there thinking about that whole bizarre situation involving the severed hands at the elementary school, and honestly, it’s just one of those things that makes you wonder how we even function as a society sometimes. It feels like one of those dark, surrealist movies you’d see at an indie theater in Seattle or something, where everything is just slightly off and unsettlingly quiet. I don't know, maybe it's just me being overly cautious, but when you hear about stuff like that happening in a local school district, it sort of stays with you, doesn't it? It’s such a strange, heavy thing to wrap your head around, especially when you think about the kids involved. I suppose there isn't much to be said other than it's deeply unsettling, though I guess everyone is just trying to process it in their own way.
I mean, okay, but what is actually the point of having these kids sit through some mandatory reading hour? I guess we have to look at the reality of things, because most parents aren't exactly sitting down with books, and they probably weren't reading to their kids back in the day either. Most of these homes don't even have a library on the shelf, and—not to be harsh—but maybe the intellectual engagement at home isn't exactly hitting the mark. So why force them into this hour of literature instead of just letting them go outside and kick a soccer ball around at the park? I don't really see the utility in it. What's the actual gain? Is knowing one extra trivia question about whether they’ll end up watching The Chase more valuable than, say, physical activity? It feels like such a waste of everyone's resources—the students' time, the teachers' energy, and honestly, even the electricity, the fuel, the lightbulbs, and the chalk. It all seems a bit excessive, if you ask me.
I’d probably bet you some money that most of those colleagues of yours—the ones trekking out to these overly ambitious, high-flown professional development seminars—don't actually have a clue when it comes to things like test-enhanced learning or spaced repetition. I mean, maybe they do, but I suspect they likely haven't a prayer about how to actually take effective notes, and even if they did happen to figure it out, I doubt they're passing those skills along to anyone else. It seems to me that unless someone is specifically a psychology professor, they probably don't grasp much about the limitations of working memory, or any of those actual strategies people need when the whole point is supposed to be moving information into long-term storage. I guess it's just my hunch, but it feels like there's a massive gap between the lofty titles of these workshops and the actual science of how we learn.
rowdypanther12 said:Well, we all seem to have experienced it a little differently 😁
rowdypanther12 said:That’s really the whole point; I’m not trying to get too deep here 😁
Anyway, regarding *The Catcher in the Rye*, reading it at twelve or thirteen is perfectly fine. Or maybe something like *The Great Gatsby*—it works well as a stepping stone toward more complex literature.
It just feels a little strange to me when adults read it and take everything so incredibly seriously.