Posts from Hop-hop. Auto-translated

Online learning is questionable. There is no motivation or social aspect.

What's so questionable about it? I like it more than sitting in a classroom and smelling someone's perfume.

Teach children to think, not to memorize, and structure the program accordingly.

Considering that even in many higher education institutions, people are taught not to understand information but to perform mindless tasks, the path in this direction is very long.
I will illustrate with an example. When I studied history, what was the main method of teaching? Students were required to write. When they came home, a student had to spend several hours rewriting information from a book (or books) into a notebook, creating a detailed outline. The same was done in lectures, even though the teachers read from books – essentially telling the same thing that you could read yourself, with the only difference being that you also had to manage to write it down. I will not argue that "writing" may be an effective way to memorize information, but:
- It doesn't suit everyone.
- With this approach, attention is paid to memorizing information (although I personally doubt its quality), but not to understanding.
For example, I had significant difficulties with preparing outlines – I write slowly, and my handwriting is very messy. And, in fact, I remember information better by reading and analyzing it at the same time. And what happens in such situations? Again, remembering the "homework" involving rewriting tons of information. When we came to class, we had to retell certain parts of the text. I, using my own method (which was convenient for me), created short plans (a list of what I should talk about) and, based on it, retold what was required of me from memory. In turn, my classmates (the group was almost entirely made up of girls) read the text from their notebooks. Imagine my surprise when they received top marks, and I remained with a B, simply because my outline was not neatly formatted. And I always wondered, why do people come to this educational institution? To memorize and understand information, or simply to train their hand for writing, because in the future, no one will work in the chosen specialty anyway?
In other words, the educational process focuses on a person's ability to clearly follow straightforward instructions (like a loader or a clerk, for example) rather than on problem-solving.
Perhaps the situation is not so bad in other fields (when I studied Japanese, there were no such problems, and the material was more specialized, although not without useless subjects).

I still wake up in a cold sweat when I remember my music teacher. Mostly because of her, I have such a cool and unpretentious attitude towards music in general.
But, generally, I didn't have any problems with teachers at school, knock on wood. And the boys didn't bother anyone much, mostly just the substitute teachers or in music or computer science. But for some reason, now I have mostly negative memories of 95% of my classmates and teachers, although I wasn't exactly being BULLIED (they teased me, of course, one unpleasant girl constantly bothered me with all sorts of nasty things, but overall, it was more of a neutral attitude).
Russian language and literature - excellent. In literature, you could draw, we usually sat quietly, the teacher would start talking about something, and everyone would listen, sometimes she would engage in educational activities, she was our class teacher. I loved her at school.
Mathematics - the headmistress taught it. Strict. She treated me well, but she didn't really like my friend and constantly gave her C's. Another, even stricter, woman sometimes substituted for her, and I almost got into a fight with her once (I'm not exaggerating!), and then she greeted me until the end of school. I was bored with her, she explained new topics unclearly, she liked to spend half the lesson at the blackboard explaining to some smart student why 2+2=4, and I would finish solving the problems and just sit there drawing.
History and social studies - it was great with the first teacher. No, I didn't like it when she started complaining that everything was bad and everyone was an idiot, but I didn't really listen to her, I just did what I always did. If I had few good grades, I would read a paragraph before the lesson and during the lesson, I would say something smart, luckily she asked questions randomly, and I could somehow manage to get by. In high school, a new teacher came, who also worked part-time, and complained even more about how everyone was an idiot, and we were all degenerates. In class, we would take tests that he read aloud (!), and he would deduct a point from the grade for each mistake (I still remember how he sat me down in front of him so I wouldn't help others, and I raised my hand behind my back and pointed to the numbers of the answers). But he liked to talk, and sometimes we could draw, although the class was well-visible.
Biology - she asked questions at the blackboard, she liked to walk around the class, it was difficult to draw, but she explained clearly and gave grades fairly.
Chemistry - everyone except me and a couple of other people dropped out of the first teacher's class because we were lucky and we managed to become friends with her. At first, we didn't get along, she liked to pick on me, and I clearly annoyed her, although I don't know why, I behaved as usual, and even tried to make a good impression. I didn't like how she taught the lessons, some of the quite easy topics took the smartest students three or four times to understand (I'm judging by myself), she gave 95% of the class failing grades on the first test because the formatting was wrong, then she finally explained how to format it, and when she gave me a failing grade again, even though the formatting was correct, I couldn't take it anymore and told her everything I thought at the first opportunity, almost shoving the test in her face. Yes, we became friends after that incident, you guessed it. Then, unfortunately, she died (despite my complaints, I felt sorry for her), and for the remaining half a year, we had a random teacher who explained well, showed interesting films, and I helped my friend improve her grade because the new teacher didn't notice and didn't stop me from sitting next to her.
Geography and economics - I have mixed impressions, in geography, we mostly answered questions at the blackboard, drew outline maps, and memorized the names of capitals, it was a bit boring and monotonous. I only started to understand economics towards the end of the year when I finally read the textbook, and I got along more or less well with her.
Art and life safety - it was more or less adequate, taught by some deputy director, a strict, Nordic woman. In life safety, we wrote short lectures, but I was fine with it, I could draw.
Music - I have no words for the first teacher, only emotions, and they are not polite. The second one was good, she also taught art history, it was relaxed and quite interesting.
Art history - after the first good teacher, some glamorous man taught it, and I don't remember much about it. By that time, I had already studied 95% of the course in art school in a similar subject, so I just sat there, daydreamed, and was bored.
English - it was a bit strange, but okay, I still learned English by watching 26 seasons of classic "Doctor Who" with subtitles. The teacher tried to explain something to us, quite clearly, and even had us listen a couple of times, but mostly she complained that the program didn't include listening comprehension and that everything was hopeless.
Physical education - it's the only subject in which I have a C on my certificate. And that's only for the ninth grade, because in the eleventh grade, they just gave up on me and added the necessary number of A's, and the teacher also changed. Here, I don't know, it depends on the teacher or whether I'm just that unathletic, but the lessons were a quiet horror, you couldn't even draw. I just did something for show, I couldn't do anything, I couldn't run or jump, I hated ball games, and if I was left as an extra player and sat on the bench, that was the best lesson of my life, I could even hide somewhere behind the equipment or make a house out of mats.
Technology - 10/10, I recommend it. I enjoy doing crafts, but at home, there are always more interesting things to do, so I don't sew or knit, although I could. And in class, there's not much to do, you just need to sew, knit, or embroider, plus the theory of housekeeping and women's crafts is an interesting topic for me. If I weren't such a lazy person with a love for Skyrim and websites with jokes, I would probably sit and sew all sorts of cool things for myself.
Physics - the teachers changed periodically, but it was okay, although I never really liked it, but I respected it a lot. I started to understand the subject closer to university, and I started to like it, but now 95% of the formulas and laws are incomprehensible again. I especially liked the experiments, I remember when my friend got sick, and I was the only one who assembled the electrical circuit, it was the best physics lesson of my life.

I recommend more practice and interesting films in class, it's a cool topic, and the kids won't be too much of a nuisance, and the teacher can relax a bit.

Let me illustrate with an example. When I was studying history, what was the main method of teaching? Students were required to write. When they came home, a student had to spend several hours rewriting information from a book (or books) into a notebook, creating a detailed outline. The same was done during lectures, even though the professors read from books – essentially telling you the same thing you could read yourself, with the only difference being that you also had to keep up with writing it down. I won't argue that "writing" can be an effective way to memorize information, but:
- It doesn't work for everyone.
- This approach focuses on memorizing information (although I personally doubt its quality), but not on understanding.
For example, I had significant difficulties with creating outlines – I write slowly, and my handwriting is very messy. And, frankly, I remember information better by reading and analyzing it at the same time. And what happens in such situations? Again, remembering the "homework" involving rewriting tons of information. When we came to class, we had to retell certain parts of the text. I, using my own method (which was convenient for me), created short plans (a list of what I should talk about) and, based on that, retold what was required of me from memory. In turn, my classmates (the group was almost entirely made up of girls) read the text from their notebooks. Imagine my surprise when they received top marks, while I only got a "4" (a good grade, but not the best), simply because my outline was not neatly formatted. And I always wondered, why do people come to this educational institution? To memorize and understand information, or just to practice handwriting, because in the end, no one will go on to work in that field anyway?

Yeah, rote learning also annoyed me. But there are things that you just need to memorize. Basic formulas, laws, etc., especially in abstract and exact sciences. And only then can you break everything down and analyze it.
The same thing happened in history when the old teacher retired, and they couldn't find a replacement. There was a student teacher who made us rewrite the textbook. True, she asked questions orally, and it seemed like she didn't really check the outlines, but I understand her – she was a young girl, not much older than us, and she needed to find a way to keep the group of lazy adults occupied; they wouldn't have listened to her anyway.
But the history tables with the first teacher were a nightmare. I'm not a neat person; I formatted them poorly, extracting only the main facts from the paragraph, and everything fit into a few lines. I got a "3" (an average grade), while those who rewrote the entire paragraph in neat handwriting got a "5" (a top grade). But then I got my revenge on them during the oral exam.

Physical education is the only subject in which I have a "4" in my certificate.

The rest are all "5"s, I suppose?

What's so questionable about it? I like it more than sitting in a lecture hall and smelling someone's perfume.

Well, you like it. And, since it's an "auditorium," it might be a viable option for universities.
But try explaining to a small child that they need to sit and listen to a boring guy on an educational website instead of doing something else... Although, if the learning is done via Skype and the teacher has only a few students, so they can give each student individual attention... Well, maybe it will work.

However, there are things that simply need to be memorized. Basic formulas, laws, and so on, especially in abstract and exact sciences. And only then can you break everything down and understand it.

In 98% of cases in exact sciences, everything can be derived. 2% are some empirical formulas in physics (initially empirical, let's say), but even they can be explained to some extent. It's better to do it that way.

I was warned that I would have to simply memorize economics, but that wasn't the case; I understood it quite well. However, I had problems with physics. I couldn't seem to organize everything in my head. Preparatory courses helped a little, but I still had to memorize rows of formulas. I didn't fully understand some of the more complex processes, although, of course, it didn't come to the point of "along this axis, the cosine of phi flows forward as the cosine." But in general, yes, half of the definitions in physics are just memorized formulas. The problem is that there are a lot of formulas and letters; I only remember the three laws of Newton and Ohm's law now.

There are things that you just need to memorize. Basic formulas, laws, etc., especially in abstract and exact sciences.

He probably memorized too much...:D:D:D

Online learning is questionable. There is no motivation or social aspect. In my humble opinion, it is only suitable for various non-essential courses when the initiative comes from the students (they choose themselves). Although I cannot assert anything, I have no facts, only assumptions.

As for school, I also mostly rely on assumptions; it's clear that it's more applicable to higher education.
But I don't see any problems with the social aspect – for particularly sociable people, there are group forums – why not create the same for classes?
But with motivation, yes, I don't know what to do. Even I don't always have enough motivation, although I choose the courses myself and choose the ones I need. That is, I am interested in the result, but... What can be said about children then. I don't even know what can be done here.

Added 17 minutes ago

the theory of housekeeping

:eek: I think I missed something in school.
And I also know that in some schools, they practiced changing groups: for half a year, girls learned to cook (as if some of them didn't know how yet) and sew, and boys studied a lathe and other things... And then they switched – boys studied tailoring and sewing, girls – lathe work.
I'm still upset that we didn't have that.

Added 5 minutes ago

I'll tell you with an example. When I studied history, what was the main method of teaching? Students were required to write. When they came home, a student had to spend several hours rewriting information from a book (books) into a notebook, making a detailed summary.

Ah, yes. For me, history is primarily associated with the scribes of historical manuscripts in monasteries.
Apparently, you were being trained to become such a specialist

In eleventh grade, while I was homeschooled: the English teacher never showed up at my house (although he was required to do so and received a bonus for it), but he gave me a failing grade in my report card.

I should have complained about it. If the principal hadn't helped, the department of education would have. They would have given everyone a hard time for something like that.

I understood a long time ago where such teachers come from. Not a single (or almost none) self-respecting person would go to school while "scum" is in charge. So they fill the gaps with whoever they can find...

A good teacher will have excellent results even in a class with mentally challenged children and teenagers. The problem is that not everyone is good at dealing with schoolchildren, and our smart principals prefer mediocre teachers who get by with good grades through cheating and flattery to qualified workers. And such characters really have no place in school, because at the first sign of difficulty, they give up and start complaining about all sorts of nonsense, instead of teaching children.

Well, in general, I THINK that the low popularity of the profession is largely due to the low salary and the general unwillingness to engage in such activities (in addition to the social aspect, there are other factors).

As funny as it may seem, in our Russia, teachers can earn quite good money, plus a decent social package, and you can retire comfortably at the age of forty-five if you work as a teacher for 20 years. There are many benefits and perks, but there is also a lot of hassle with various professional development courses, inspections, and other nonsense that sometimes simply discourages people from working. And I won't even mention the rare cases of abnormal students and their even more inadequate parents; you don't just want to work with them, you want to tell them to go to hell. But you have to control yourself and show wonders of diplomacy and tactics.

a) Schoolchildren bully each other during breaks and after lessons.
b) During lessons, they interfere with each other by throwing/spitting paper or poking each other in the back with something, such as a compass.
c) They interfere with the teacher in every way if the teacher does not have enough "character".
d) A significant number of teachers do not know how or do not want to teach.
f) Individual differences between students are not taken into account at all, and it is impossible to do so given the above.

Everything here is true.

e) The school curriculum itself is outdated and not optimized; the priority is placed on instilling patriotism rather than raising the average level of education in the country.

Well, in Russia now, they are trying to radically change everything. The Federal State Educational Standards and other nonsense; now there are more requirements. Plus, they want to achieve initiative among schoolchildren, which would encourage them to seek out most of the knowledge on their own, so that it would be easier and better for smart children to study at the institute, and ordinary children would go to technical schools after the ninth grade. The problem is that it is not so easy to implement this with self-study (try to make the average student in the lower grades engage in self-education in almost the entire school curriculum), and because of this, they risk ruining the lives of many capable but lazy children.

By the way, I enjoyed studying for a Special Psychologist at the institute. Yes, there was a lot of writing and theory required. For example, I hated everything related to anatomy. No matter how much I read and listened, I still didn't understand anything, and when they gave me a C on the exam just because I couldn't draw the diagrams from memory (and I can't draw, especially anatomical parts, and my schematic-correct drawings somehow don't appeal to anyone), I realized that I would never deal with anatomy again, and it's better to get a C for doing nothing than to strain myself and get a D, just for laughs, and then retake it for a C, because "we don't give good grades for retakes, even if you get an A."
But almost all the psychological disciplines went well for me. Especially those where we only wrote down the main points that we needed to rely on in case of anything, and we perceived the rest of the material by ear.
And I really like it in graduate school. Now, almost all the teachers just give lectures, in which we only write down some important points, and most of the information is perceived by ear, and most importantly, students are given the opportunity to have a full-fledged dialogue with the teacher on the topic, which also helps to consolidate knowledge if you participate in it. And the seminars are interesting because instead of reading from a notebook/paper, they ask us to think and share our point of view on various issues, supporting these knowledge with various facts. Of course, I don't know what will happen on the tests and exams; they will probably make us suffer in every way.

I hated everything related to anatomy.

Really? And for me, it was one of my favorite subjects in school. Partly because I read Efremov's "The Razor's Edge" around that time, but also because of the biology teacher, who believed that we could read the textbook ourselves and gave us a lot of extra and interesting material in class.
I even wanted to go to medical school after high school. :)

I had a great anatomy class. We weren't forced to memorize the names of hundreds of human bones, like in other schools. The teacher focused on logic, that is, how, what, and why things are structured the way they are, and why they couldn't be otherwise. Overall, it was great.
P.S. I'm talking about anatomy in school, of course; in university, I had different subjects.

Imagine that. That was one of my favorite subjects in school. Partly because of Efremov's "The Razor's Edge" which I read around that time, but also partly because of the biology teacher, who believed we could read the textbook ourselves and gave us a lot of extra and interesting material during class.
I even wanted to apply to med school after graduation.

Biology was boring in school. The teacher had discipline problems, so nobody studied. Although overall, the lady was very nice, practically radiating beams of kindness.
In university, anatomy was also taught quite inadequately. The teacher for age-related anatomy didn't give a damn about anything and barely showed up for her classes, constantly canceling them, etc. Then she threw a 7-question test at us and it was just a matter of luck (I got a 4 there, the version turned out not to be too difficult, but a friend of mine got questions about fish and plants, which almost made her blow a fuse).
But neurophysiology and the anatomy of pathology of the organs of hearing, vision, and speech were absolute hell. In pathology, we only covered the structure of the organs, and the teacher generally said there were no textbooks for our discipline (there actually are, lol), that only lectures and labs would be on the exam, and that she would grade everything according to the tests where we drew organs from memory (this is where I failed; I just couldn't reproduce them exactly how she wanted, even though all the diagrams were correct because I had memorized the general layout of the various organs). In the end, she packed the exam tickets with such stuff that only half of it corresponded to the lectures and the textbook. She randomly decided to shove the rest of the nonsense in there herself and said we had "self-education," so we were supposed to guess that we should study those questions during the semester. Because of her, many people lost their chance at a red diploma.
And neurophysiology was just pure hell and doom. First, the teacher went on a binge, claiming she was sick, but in reality, she just disappeared with a bottle of white wine, while the dispatchers, the department, and the dean's office were looking for her everywhere. At the end of the semester, she came to her senses and came to lead classes with a raspy voice (everyone joked later that she probably caught tonsillitis from the cold vodka). In the end, she started assigning grades randomly to whoever. First, we took a test, which she graded who-knows-how. In the end, she'd turn a blind eye to mistakes for some and give them a 4-5, while for others, she'd actually subtract points for correct answers because they had wrong ones elsewhere (my test was written for a 4, but she got it into her head to subtract points for mistakes, just for lulz). Eventually, I went to her for the exam, where she intentionally tried to fail me; she didn't even credit a correct drawing, saying they look different, but she wasn't going to draw or prove anything to me (even though that was the only time my memory-drawing matched the textbook!). Plus, while she was grilling me, she made a few remarks to some idiot who was blatantly cheating (lol, she gave her a 4 afterwards). In the end, after twenty to thirty minutes of my continuous answering of all questions, I deflated and couldn't answer the simplest and most important thing: "WHAT IS A NEURON" (damn it, I know what it is, but at that moment my memory failed me, and my brain wanted to flip the desk onto the teacher and kill her). And to her question about what I expected from her, I replied that I'd just like to get a fucking 3 and go home already; she said I wanted too much and that I should learn how to give blowjobs to teachers. In the end, she slapped me with a 2, and I spent the entire summer break cramming that moronic discipline. In September, she gave us "debtors" a new test that didn't correspond to the questions in the tickets, and almost everyone failed it (only one person cheated). She started calling by last name, and the first one she got was the "star" of our group (a clinical case right there...); she mumbled some nonsense for the most basic questions, and while I was screaming "FOR GOD'S SAKE JUST LET ME ANSWER, I KNOW THIS MATERIAL!!111" — the teacher lost it and told us all exactly what she thought of us. Then she dealt with two more fools who couldn't answer anything. When it was my turn, she just looked and said: "Get out of here, you'll retake it again" — I already started a scandal, saying that since she listened to those idiots, she should at least let me answer. In the end, I answered her about conditioned and unconditioned reflexes (those were actually two different questions, but I told her everything about them in detail and how this knowledge would be useful in the teaching profession and in mine), then I started telling her in detail about memory, and by the time I'd lost track of time and was tired of answering her questions (it was already getting dark, although the retake started at almost 2, and I was going to a birthday party), she said that no matter how much I excelled, she still wouldn't give me more than a 3. I stopped giving a damn and reflexively shoved my grade book in her face.
By the way, since then, every time I see that creepy lady, I send her beams of hatred, which I really hope she feels. Although I have a feeling that with her alcoholism, she's forgotten who I am, because she looks at me with eternal bewilderment.

It reminded me of my electrical engineering professor who wanted to make me retake the exam because I tried to bribe him with 300 UAH for a good grade...