Why Schools Don’t Educate (1990) • Hacker News Board

Re: Why Schools Don’t Educate (1990)

#41

Post by zozbot234 » Mon, Sep 12, 2022, 9:03 PM UTC

hintymad wrote: post #38

> "just let the kids learn by themselves" This has been the central theme of progressive education movement in the US. IIRC, Jo Boaler has been advocating that kids could discover most of the maths by exploring and learning by themselves. I fundamentally disagree with this belief, though. It took thousands of years for our greatest minds to simplify our maths to its current incarnation. Discovering "everything" by my…

The unstated subtext in that theme is that some kids are not going to teach themselves the entire school curriculum (with plenty of help along the way from their literate, well-educated parents), but that's OK because they can always go work flipping burgers, or something. This is very much along the lines of the historically urbanized and socially elitist variety of "progressive" thought that gave us things like mass eugenics and enforced racial segregation in the early- and mid-20th century.

Re: Why Schools Don’t Educate (1990)

#42

Post by giantg2 » Mon, Sep 12, 2022, 9:04 PM UTC

There seem to be some good points in here. I'm not sure I agree with all of them, but the conclusion that family is important to learning seems to be true in my experience. Many parents get so hung up on the "best" schools they ignore their own possible contributions. Eg work 50-80 hours a week, never teach their kids anything, and complain when the school or after school activity is doing something "wrong" because their kid isn't a star.

Unfortunately home schooling isn't an option for most, even if it is possibly one of the best options within the current system (atleast education wise, not for the conformity).

"Our teenage-suicide rate is the highest in the world — and suicidal kids are rich kids for the most part, not poor. In Manhattan, 70 percent of all new marriages last less than five years."

These are very interesting and maybe I'll do some more research on these.

Re: Why Schools Don’t Educate (1990)

#43

Post by calculatte » Mon, Sep 12, 2022, 9:05 PM UTC

thebooktocome wrote: post #37

Test0129 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Here we are 25 years after Gatto gave this speech, our society has not "disintegrated" yet It really depends on how you define disintegrated. What he mentioned has manifested over the last 30 years. Slowly, and quietly. Now, it has come to a head. The lunatics actively arguing parents should have no place in schooling, the obsession of children with transient media figures, the state of school bells determining the…

This is a laundry list of vices every generation has faulted the youth of the next generation for falling prey to.

When has the government in previous generations officially called concerned parents "domestic terrorists" for voicing their opinions at public meetings?

You don't get to wave off everything at whim when there are real concerns out there. A large percentage of the population would disagree with you that "disintegration" is not happening.

Re: Why Schools Don’t Educate (1990)

#44

Post by giantg2 » Mon, Sep 12, 2022, 9:10 PM UTC

nus07 wrote: post #40

hintymad wrote: post #38

> "just let the kids learn by themselves" This has been the central theme of progressive education movement in the US. IIRC, Jo Boaler has been advocating that kids could discover most of the maths by exploring and learning by themselves. I fundamentally disagree with this belief, though. It took thousands of years for our greatest minds to simplify our maths to its current incarnation. Discovering "everything" by my…

Totally agree. Which countries are dominating STEM education? Israel, Russia, China , India and a few others which have strict schedules, competition and discipline. Looking at the failing US model I am starting to believe that finding your path and self motivation may work for 5% while leading the other 95% to slacking , cheap entertainment and failure.

Discipline is dead here (US). Very few people have discipline as adults, so the kids don't learn it either. Society doesn't value it, so it generally doest pay off.

I used to show up early to work, took my responsibilities seriously, and not take shortcuts. Guess what? I get paid the same either way, so what's the point? We're "fat and happy", so something would have to change culturally.

Re: Why Schools Don’t Educate (1990)

#45

Post by vkou » Mon, Sep 12, 2022, 9:10 PM UTC

hitpointdrew wrote: post #25

fiftyfifty wrote: post #23

I just don't think I can agree with Gatto's main premise that schools aren't educating students or that a formal education serves no purpose in the modern world. We have seen world wide that schools are THE most effective tool for lifting people out of poverty. We also see that the countries with the best schools are dominating the world economy. There are also plenty of counter examples we can find: entire countries…

> We have seen world wide that schools are THE most effective tool for lifting people out of poverty. This is false. Schooling has had nothing to do with it, capitalism is what has lifted the most people out of poverty, not schooling.

> capitalism is what has lifted the most people out of poverty

This is false. Access to cheap energy, in the form of fossil fuels is what has lifted the most people out of poverty, not capitalism.

Without burning through millions of years of oil and coal in the span of a few centuries, we'd all still be farming and eating mud, regardless of which economic system were in play.

Remove capitalism, and industrialized society will still limp along, in a relatively prosperous manner compared to centuries past.

Remove access to cheap energy, and it will collapse overnight, with misery and death on a scale the world has never seen.

Re: Why Schools Don’t Educate (1990)

#46

Post by fiziks_hckr » Mon, Sep 12, 2022, 9:11 PM UTC

hourago wrote: post #4

> But our society is disintegrating, and in such a society, the only successful people are self-reliant, confident, and individualistic — because the community life that protects the dependent and the weak is dead. Too many people has apocalyptic views of the world. And to push for individualistic behavior when you think that your society is disintegrating seems to just accelerate any problems that may exists. 30 yea…

I've taught in schools from all corners of San Francisco, and can't agree more with majority of what was said in this article, except maybe the money part*, I'll leave a footnote for this.

One day when I was volunteering at one of these schools, a student came up to me showing a picture of a robot how cool it was. When I mentioned that it was relatively easy to build, he got super stoked, told his friends and before you know it, we had a class of 8 students pursuing their own interest, learning CS/Breadboarding/Electrical-Circuits, all student driven, building cardboard-box arduino-based robots afterschool.**

These student led classes were majority black students and pushed forward most by black students. Everything was honestly instantly working great, and at the end of every class my students made to promise not to forget to show up to the next session (I don't recall missing a session, I believe this was out attachment for the course).

Self-driven learning is a thing, and all we have to do is give kids grounds to explore -- in this case to create designs from from their own imagination (ey, isn't that why we're hackers here : D? We can all relate).

* Small class sizes help (or student:teacher ratio of 6:1 ideally). This is the ratio (lower works too) that really works, and I've seen only at really rich schools (see Branson/UHS/Lick Wilmerding) and programs based on it. I've seen this emulated to great success in Summerbridge SF, and too at a summerschool I helped start in the bay area based on project-based/student-led learning, access to technology, and most importantly these small class sizes that enables hosting these free-learning classes.

**Again money is important, materials costs for this class were supported by my concurrent 4 jobs, doing mainly part-time engineering work for startups, electrical-engineering curriculum development for a summer-schools, as well as tutoring.

Re: Why Schools Don’t Educate (1990)

#47

Post by glennvtx » Mon, Sep 12, 2022, 9:11 PM UTC

hintymad wrote: post #38

> "just let the kids learn by themselves" This has been the central theme of progressive education movement in the US. IIRC, Jo Boaler has been advocating that kids could discover most of the maths by exploring and learning by themselves. I fundamentally disagree with this belief, though. It took thousands of years for our greatest minds to simplify our maths to its current incarnation. Discovering "everything" by my…

He means to explore these subjects by themselves, i.e. drawing upon the current body of knowledge. This technique works very well, i educate 3 children at home, and more or less their own interests guide their learning, only occasionally do i feel the need to put them onto the path of a specific subject.

Re: Why Schools Don’t Educate (1990)

#48

Post by yonaguska » Mon, Sep 12, 2022, 9:12 PM UTC

hintymad wrote: post #38

> "just let the kids learn by themselves" This has been the central theme of progressive education movement in the US. IIRC, Jo Boaler has been advocating that kids could discover most of the maths by exploring and learning by themselves. I fundamentally disagree with this belief, though. It took thousands of years for our greatest minds to simplify our maths to its current incarnation. Discovering "everything" by my…

I disagree, the most productive moments in my math education were spent "discovering" patterns while trying to solve problems, having been given just enough tools to attempt the problem. Credit to Szeszlér Dávid goes to those formative experiences. The next lesson, after we spent time "discovering" and likely failing, we would be given the last tool we needed to solve the problem. That discovery process cemented the lessons and understanding.

I still believe that there is also value in rote memorization and practice, as you simply can't recognize patterns unless you have the fundamentals upon which those patterns are based, mastered. Only then can you start abstracting complexity away mentally, and then do effective "discovery" of new concepts.

I didn't encounter this teaching method until college, but I don't see why it can't be applied at an earlier age. One of my earliest memories was when I "discovered" that 2 + 2 = 4. I distinctly remember the moment where the concept of addition and subtraction clicked for me, and it didn't happen in a classroom. I was playing by myself and counting my fingers out on the front lawn.

http://www.cs.bme.hu/~szeszler/

Re: Why Schools Don’t Educate (1990)

#49

Post by ravi-delia » Mon, Sep 12, 2022, 9:12 PM UTC

nus07 wrote: post #40

hintymad wrote: post #38

> "just let the kids learn by themselves" This has been the central theme of progressive education movement in the US. IIRC, Jo Boaler has been advocating that kids could discover most of the maths by exploring and learning by themselves. I fundamentally disagree with this belief, though. It took thousands of years for our greatest minds to simplify our maths to its current incarnation. Discovering "everything" by my…

Totally agree. Which countries are dominating STEM education? Israel, Russia, China , India and a few others which have strict schedules, competition and discipline. Looking at the failing US model I am starting to believe that finding your path and self motivation may work for 5% while leading the other 95% to slacking , cheap entertainment and failure.

Which countries are dominating STEM research? You know, the part that is actually useful instead of just coersive? America, by a long shot.

Re: Why Schools Don’t Educate (1990)

#50

Post by fiftyfifty » Mon, Sep 12, 2022, 9:12 PM UTC

zozbot234 wrote: post #28

fiftyfifty wrote: post #23

I just don't think I can agree with Gatto's main premise that schools aren't educating students or that a formal education serves no purpose in the modern world. We have seen world wide that schools are THE most effective tool for lifting people out of poverty. We also see that the countries with the best schools are dominating the world economy. There are also plenty of counter examples we can find: entire countries…

Gatto is specifically discussing public K-12 education in the U.S. And it's absolutely correct to describe that as a dismal failure, compared to other developed countries. Especially so when you look at outcomes for the most vulnerable sub-groups, which should arguably be the highest priority given that their family and social milieus cannot pick up the slack to anything near the same extent.

Education varies significantly from state to state in the US, even district to district in many areas. Some states compare very well internationally, like Massachusetts, which would be ranked as high as 4th by some international measurements, if it was its own country. We consistently see in the US where regions with better public schools have much better economic outcomes, and lower rates of poverty, crime, drug abuse, and suicide. There are plenty of alternative outcomes to look at in the US as well: high school drop outs for example which on average have a much lower lifetime earning potential, and higher rates of drug abuse, suicide and incarceration.