Interesting NY Times article on higher education: "What you really need to know"

[Halcyon]

Thought others might find this article interesting; it's about what the writer (Larry Summers, former head of Harvard) believes will be important skills for future college and grad students.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/22/education/edlife/the-21st-century-education.html

[Sara R]

A rebuttal to one of his claims: Why Students Have to Memorize Things by the kitchen table math blog.

[dangermom]

I thought it was almost total nonsense. :) But then I spend a lot of time on the ktm blog Sara just linked to.

[Bang!Zoom!]

Eh. I'm half and half.

 

I'd agree on the points of being able to handle with dexterity multiple/different streams of technology in some analtical fields, and having the skills to work with a global e-society as a benefit in some professions; I understand why 60 people would be in the que of interviewing for a banking profession. "Must play nice with all and be an ambassador of our view at all times."

 

I sensed a huge contradiction when he said "students learn better from lecture from video feeds." Not a fan of that idea at all, especially not in the field of history, that's pretty revolting.

[athena1277]

A rebuttal to one of his claims: Why Students Have to Memorize Things by the kitchen table math blog.

 

Excellent article! Makes me wonder if the lack of memorization is a very large part of what is lacking in our current education system.

[Bang!Zoom!]

Kitchen Table Math is a great blog, I read it often also.

[justamouse]

Further proof that I will be happy in my little canoe, steadily rowing my family upstream.

[Kalmia]

He's certainly not cutting edge, all his ideas are from the progressive education period that began back in the late 1960s!

[justamouse]

He's certainly not cutting edge, all his ideas are from the progressive education period that began back in the late 1960s!

:iagree:

And they've just been so spectacular our kids are the most well educated in the world.

 

/sarcasm

[Onceuponatime]

Interesting. I think Summers needs to remember that past results don't guarantee future performance in a dynamic environment. We are not on Trantor and social science hasn't developed to Harry Seldon's level. Using Summers' rationale, women will never be included, because analysis of past data shows they just can't do the job as effectively as the good ol' boys.

 

We certainly haven't developed social science to Harry Seldon's level, just reading some of Malcolm Gladwell's books will tell you that. But otherwise, I disagree. I think we are on Trantor.

 

This proves it: "We are not rational calculating machines but collections of modules, each programmed to be adroit at a particular set of tasks."

 

Blech.

[Haiku]

Considering the glaring punctuation error in the first sentence, I don't hold much hope for the rest of the article.

 

Tara

[Beth in SW WA]

Thought others might find this article interesting; it's about what the writer (Larry Summers, former head of Harvard) believes will be important skills for future college and grad students.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/22/education/edlife/the-21st-century-education.html

 

Thanks for sharing. This quote is interesting:

But in a world where the entire Library of Congress will soon be accessible on a mobile device with search procedures that are vastly better than any card catalog, factual mastery will become less and less important.

 

:iagree: with him. I don't want my high school kids spending precious school day hours (where I am paying $$ the bill) memorizing facts & figures. I want them doing what they are doing -- which is discussing, analyzing, problem-solving, discovering and assimilating their new knowledge into the knowledge already present in their growing minds. They both are doing research on various topics for big presentations/papers. They need to know how to find & research via technology and books. They don't need to have memorized the info from grammar-stage memory work. Their energy is best spent elsewhere.

 

Dd is working on her National History Day project on the French Revolution. We live in a great day & age to research info with the internet at our fingertips. Her history teacher said her paper was 'extraordinary' and looked through every bibliography reference online to confirm that she wrote it in her own words.

Edited January 24, 2012 by Beth in SW WA
typo

[Beth in SW WA]

A rebuttal to one of his claims: Why Students Have to Memorize Things by the kitchen table math blog.

 

I disagree with her statement:

I repeat:

 

You can't think about something on Google.

 

She is idealistic in her views. Students don't have a working knowledge of new topics. Hence, the term research.

Edited January 24, 2012 by Beth in SW WA

[Haiku]

But in a world where the entire Library of Congress will soon be accessible on a mobile device with search procedures that are vastly better than any card catalog, factual mastery will become less and less important.

 

Baloney. If you don't know the facts, you can't use them. Trying to find, understand, and use the facts all at the same time is inefficient. Having a solid grounding in the facts allows you to focus on using them in a higher order.

 

Tara

[Beth in SW WA]

Baloney. If you don't know the facts, you can't use them. Trying to find, understand, and use the facts all at the same time is inefficient. Having a solid grounding in the facts allows you to focus on using them in a higher order.

 

Tara

 

:confused:

I respectfully disagree based on a conversation at our dinner table last night. Dd14 spent 30 minutes telling us about what she has learned from the eight (overdue) books on her bedroom desk -- and hours and hours of internet research. Eight books about the French Revolution. How would she know that material yet -- as a 14 year old? She has to assimilate the new facts and present them in a coherent, thoughtful way. It's called research.

 

Grammar-stage memory work is a myth -- in many, but not all cases. If you don't use the facts you lose them. So spend your time wisely.

 

(Yes, I am experiencing a paradigm-shift.) :tongue_smilie:

[Sharon H in IL]

It seems to fall prey to the 'we have Real Information About Education Now' fallacy. As if learning is a technology that becomes ever more evolved. As if flexible thinking has only been invented recently.

 

Sigh. I really expected better of Summers.

[Haiku]

Grammar-stage memory work is a myth -- in many, but not all cases.

 

I disagree with this. I see my younger kids gaining so much from things they see and hear and read when we have previously gone over the "grammar," the basic facts, about the subject. Instead of hearing a new word or concept and having to ask what it is, they can relate it to what they already know, working the information into their already existing knowledge.

 

In contrast, my dd17, who was raised in an orphanage overseas, lacks much of the general background knowledge that most kids her age have, as well as huge amounts of academic material that kids might get exposed to in American grammar schools. She definitely suffers for it, regardless of the ubiquity of Google. Things just don't make sense to her because she has no way to start organizing the new material.

 

Tara

[butterflymommy]

The "collaboration" section made me think of this scene from The IT Crowd:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGFGD5pj03M

[wapiti]

hmmm.... I'll take a look. On another note, today I noticed a new Rusczyk article linked from AoPS' FB page last week that you (Halcyon) might like, about learning to solve hard problems. Some of the ideas there could be applied to other courses. (maybe it's more relevant to the recent threads on the other board.)

[Halcyon]

A rebuttal to one of his claims: Why Students Have to Memorize Things by the kitchen table math blog.

 

 

Going to read this tonight. Thank you.