What Should Teachers Teach?

[vegetariantaxidermy]

as I say: I never wrote or hinted at anything he's attributin' to me

That's what I find. In discussions with "Age," you have to keep saying, "I said nothing at all like what you are saying I said." And "Age" doesn't even listen to that, and just rattles off more hyperbole, more misrepresentation and more abuse...It vexes the soul and drains the mind of will to live.

Hmm. Pot calling kettle black here... And yes, tiring someone out with pointless 'questions' that they have answered multiple times and ignoring their counterarguments is a form of abuse.

[Iwannaplato]

What a load of crap. How can children 'choose' what to learn if they haven't learnt anything in the first place?

I've worked in daycares even and those kids have already learned things. They have interests and curiosity and want skills.

If they can't read or write adequately?

I included that in my list.

They CHOOSE what to learn AFTER they have been given the TOOLS to choose.

they can certainly get much better at it.

AFTER they have discovered what they enjoy and are good at.

They already enjoy a lot of things. And yes, part of the job of adults including teachers is to expose them to more thngs.

Expecting children to choose what they learn is putting a ridiculous amount of responsibility and pressure on their shoulders, responsibility that they aren't equipped for.

Well, again I gave them basic skills as part of the curriculum. And the teechers will have the power, obviously to expose them to subjects. The amazing thing is, the kids do want to learn things and when we force them, as much as we tend to, the lose their own motors.

As for letting school teahcers teach only 'what they are interested in', well it doesn't need any explanation from me to show how nonsensical that is.

It's be bizarre to have them teach things they are not interested in. What great role modeling. But these are not mutually exclusive cateogies: their interests, children's interests. And anyone interested in working with elementary school children SHOULD be generalists and curioius about a lot of subjects, or they have the wrong job. And once we get higher up, the teacher who is hired to teach English damn well better be interested in that language and literature, etc. They need to meet eachother as best they can. Right now most pegagogy works off of an assuption that the kids must be forced in general and the teachers' interests are moot. Great, you have a room full of people living for people not in the room.

That kind of fucked up 'thinking' is what is destroying the education system.

You'd have to find very special, not mainstream programs or a few private schools that run ANYTHING at all like I am suggesting. So blaming the current problems on these ideas shows an almost completely absent knowledge of what does happen in schools on your part.

And your sense of what children are like seemed extremely confused also. Further I am not suggesting the teachers stand there and wait for curriculum proposals from students - well, maybe by high school. But the idea is to expose them to things, find their interests, which unless they suffer from certain kinds of autism is ALWAYS extremely broad, unless their home life or earlier teachers crushed the life out of their interest or confidence in learning.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

What a load of crap. How can children 'choose' what to learn if they haven't learnt anything in the first place?

I've worked in daycares even and those kids have already learned things. They have interests and curiosity and want skills.

If they can't read or write adequately?

I included that in my list.

They CHOOSE what to learn AFTER they have been given the TOOLS to choose.

they can certainly get much better at it.

AFTER they have discovered what they enjoy and are good at.

They already enjoy a lot of things. And yes, part of the job of adults including teachers is to expose them to more thngs.

Expecting children to choose what they learn is putting a ridiculous amount of responsibility and pressure on their shoulders, responsibility that they aren't equipped for.

Well, again I gave them basic skills as part of the curriculum. And the teechers will have the power, obviously to expose them to subjects. The amazing thing is, the kids do want to learn things and when we force them, as much as we tend to, the lose their own motors.

As for letting school teahcers teach only 'what they are interested in', well it doesn't need any explanation from me to show how nonsensical that is.

It's be bizarre to have them teach things they are not interested in. What great role modeling. But these are not mutually exclusive cateogies: their interests, children's interests. And anyone interested in working with elementary school children SHOULD be generalists and curioius about a lot of subjects, or they have the wrong job. And once we get higher up, the teacher who is hired to teach English damn well better be interested in that language and literature, etc. They need to meet eachother as best they can. Right now most pegagogy works off of an assuption that the kids must be forced in general and the teachers' interests are moot. Great, you have a room full of people living for people not in the room.

That kind of fucked up 'thinking' is what is destroying the education system.

You'd have to find very special, not mainstream programs or a few private schools that run ANYTHING at all like I am suggesting. So blaming the current problems on these ideas shows an almost completely absent knowledge of what does happen in schools on your part.

And your sense of what children are like seemed extremely confused also. Further I am not suggesting the teachers stand there and wait for curriculum proposals from students - well, maybe by high school. But the idea is to expose them to things, find their interests, which unless they suffer from certain kinds of autism is ALWAYS extremely broad, unless their home life or earlier teachers crushed the life out of their interest or confidence in learning.

Oh wow, you've 'worked in daycares' and that enabled you to discover that toddlers and babies are 'curious and learn things'. Extraordinary

I tend not to bother with posts that are set out like this. I've found that they are generally posted by annoying nincompoops and aren't worth the stress of reading them.

[Iwannaplato]

Oh wow, you've 'worked in daycares' and that enabled you to discover that toddlers and babies are 'curious and learn things'. Extraordinary

I tend not to bother with posts that are set out like this. I've found that they are generally posted by annoying nincompoops and aren't worth the stress of reading them.

Youmean posts written by people who do not seem to understand the context of what they are responding to and who make no points of substance but insult other people? Posts like that you usually don't bother with? I can understand that reaction. I tend to make fun of those kind of posts.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Oh wow, you've 'worked in daycares' and that enabled you to discover that toddlers and babies are 'curious and learn things'. Extraordinary

I tend not to bother with posts that are set out like this. I've found that they are generally posted by annoying nincompoops and aren't worth the stress of reading them.

Youmean posts written by people who do not seem to understand the context of what they are responding to and who make no points of substance but insult other people? Posts like that you usually don't bother with? I can understand that reaction. I tend to make fun of those kind of posts.

No, posts that are broken into 'bites', without the names of who's written what. It's just bloody annoying.
Btw, does the word 'children' not exist in the kingdom of yank? It's always the horrible 'kids'.

[Gary Childress]

In answer to the question, "what should teachers teach", I think when it comes to primary education, they should teach the basics, reading, writing, arithmetic, and science as well as civics (how to be a good citizen of a democracy), and life skills such as home economics. Also teaching art and culture classes seems important to me, including comparative religion and philosophy.

In high school, they should also be exposed to a variety of courses that correspond to various common vocations, such as shop classes and classes on how to repair things.

When it comes to college or university education, I think the focus should be on letting students choose their education paths based on what interests them.

[Iwannaplato]

No, posts that are broken into 'bites', without the names of who's written what. It's just bloody annoying.

Ah, you didn't understand that I was responding to one post by vegetariantaxidery (as seen in the first bite where vegetariantaxidery is cited) and all the rest of the bites are from the first post. That''s fairly common is some forums. I apologize for not knowing the culture. I assume that vegetatirntaxidermy will recognize his own writing.
But here's why I do it that way: it shows clearly what I am responding to in the post I am responding to. Terrible of me. I see the proper approach is to not respond to any points made, insult the poster and talk about irrelevant things. My father, who was born and raised in London - see I can bring up tangents also - had a different approach from yours to philosophical discussions. But, when in Rome, and all that. He'll be surprised to find out what passes for British these days. I think he even on occasion tolerates the word 'kids'. He must be holding back such rage.

vegetariantexidermy also wrote: Btw, does the word 'children' not exist in the kingdom of yank? It's always the horrible 'kids'.

I think you know the answer to that question. But I appreciate that now you are getting in points of substance. I am overwhelmed by your British rhetorical skills and strong arguments. I concede the field. I'll respond only to other posters in the future and save you the bile production. Thank you for letting me know so clearly what you think Brits consider philosophical discussion - your recent posts.. We'll have to agree to disagree at that, but I'll avoid you for both our sakes.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

No, posts that are broken into 'bites', without the names of who's written what. It's just bloody annoying.

Ah, you didn't understand that I was responding to one post by vegetariantaxidery (as seen in the first bite where vegetariantaxidery is cited) and all the rest of the bites are from the first post. That''s fairly common is some forums. I apologize for not knowing the culture. I assume that vegetatirntaxidermy will recognize his own writing.
But here's why I do it that way: it shows clearly what I am responding to in the post I am responding to. Terrible of me. I see the proper approach is to not respond to any points made, insult the poster and talk about irrelevant things. My father, who was born and raised in London - see I can bring up tangents also - had a different approach from yours to philosophical discussions. But, when in Rome, and all that. He'll be surprised to find out what passes for British these days. I think he even on occasion tolerates the word 'kids'. He must be holding back such rage.

vegetariantexidermy also wrote: Btw, does the word 'children' not exist in the kingdom of yank? It's always the horrible 'kids'.

I think you know the answer to that question. But I appreciate that now you are getting in points of substance. I am overwhelmed by your British rhetorical skills and strong arguments. I concede the field. I'll respond only to other posters in the future and save you the bile production. Thank you for letting me know so clearly what you think Brits consider philosophical discussion - your recent posts.. We'll have to agree to disagree at that, but I'll avoid you for both our sakes.

It's not necessarily my own writing that it involves. I simply avoid that kind of posting. It's tedious and smacks of finnicky small-mindedness and by-the-bookishness.
Why would you assume I'm a 'Brit'?
The culture/country-destroying, mass murdering 'Brits' are terribly 'woke' these days, or hadn't you noticed? Perhaps collective (faux) guilt for their psychotically racist imperialism and murderous rampages across the planet? So much holier-than-thou hypocrisy when it comes to claiming the moral high ground regarding WW11 (and WW1 for that matter). None too bright though, the 'Brits', because they still love their invasions. I mean, what could possibly be more racist than murdering people simply because of their culture/race/nationality...? Yet the Brits refer to their own professional killers as 'heroes'. 'Brit'land: a country of red-poppy-wearing, warmongering, pasty-faced, potato-headed racist imbeciles.

[Iwannaplato]

What are teachers failing to do, that you consider they ought to be doing?

1) more emphasis on teaching how to learn than what things to know - how to fish vs. giving a fish, and shifting the balance more towards the former than is current
2) connected to that: how to reflect on what one has learned and how one learned - and I would suggest this becomes part of the discussions. Fits in well the PBL processes, hence
3) problem based learning and since this can be done individually with students I would emphasize group PBL.
4) allow and encourage discussion of the why of any topic or skills teaching - let them challenge the point or usefullness of any subject, sub-subject and whey they as individuals need to learn it. And challenge them to be challenging. I don't think “Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it.” should be the end of the discussion. How do you know this? How has it protected you or your generation? How do we test an idea like this? That's a very general defense of the study of history, but I think questions about, for example, the specific way history is taught in the classroom should be encouraged to be critized/justified. How does memorizing dates of events help? Is the focus on powerful figures the best approach? how do we know the justifications are correct for the answers to the previous couple of questions? And so on down to specific lessons. How does knowing about {historical event/figure/issue X] help me/us/society? I am not suggesting that this kind of discussion happen all the time. Specific time can be set aside for it.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

The 'Brits' committed genocide wherever they went, the most blatant being on the Irish. How ironic that the potato played such a prominent role in the systematic destruction of a people, perpetrated by a people who look like potatoes...
Be as woke as you like, Brits, anyone with at least half a brain isn't buying any of it.

[Walker]

No computers for the little chillen.

Not in the form of smart phones, watches, notepads, laptops, gaming devices, or desktops.

Right now, Google is teaching the little chillen and fact-checking the parents.

Probably most of the minds on this website were taught without computers, when young.

Computers are ruining their eyes, their posture, and their interpersonal skills.

Computers are just a tool.

That tool is wagging the dog.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

No computers for the little chillen.

Not in the form of smart phones, watches, notepads, laptops, gaming devices, or desktops.

Right now, Google is teaching the little chillen and fact-checking the parents.

Probably most of the minds on this website were taught without computers, when young.

Computers are ruining their eyes, their posture, and their interpersonal skills.

Computers are just a tool.

That tool is wagging the dog.

I totally agree. And I would be willing to bet that if a child did go to school with no clue how to use a 'device', then the teacher would have no clue how to teach THAT, or would complain that it wasn't their job to teach it. Classrooms must be very strange, silent places now--with the teacher at their desk, hiding behind their laptop, immersed in Facebook or other social media, and the children with their heads down, immersed in Google or whatever program the school uses to 'teach' them...

[Iwannaplato]

Computers are ruining their eyes, their posture, and their interpersonal skills.

Computers are just a tool.

That tool is wagging the dog.

I agree. The tool is changing the kind of social animal we are and reducing some of our key social skills. They actually make us less skilled at reading faces (the emotions the other person has, for example). This is a key homo sapian skill and it goes down the longer and the more a child (or an adult) uses the device. Since we now have parents addicted to social media and using while parents and then children using the devices so each generation is losing more and more of this set of skills. They are also more shy about direct contact and are learning to present themselves as surfaces. To confuse their surface with who they are: what they take photos of, what they report, the likes they get for these things, etc. (obviously other facets of modern society do this also, but nothing prior has allow a potential all waking minutes presenting oneself in way.

These devices and media obviously can be wonderful tools, but things like facebook have been designed by cognitive scientists and others to be addictive. This has been admitted by the creators. And it should be added that parents in silicon valley are extremely restrictive when it comes to these device and these media. They know the downside of these things....
https://www.cbc.ca/parents/learning/vie ... ell-phones
https://www.businessinsider.com/silicon ... ?r=US&IR=T
https://www.businessinsider.com/screen- ... ag-2017-10
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/26/styl ... alley.html
https://thriveglobal.com/stories/silico ... y-created/

[Belinda]

No computers for the little chillen.

Not in the form of smart phones, watches, notepads, laptops, gaming devices, or desktops.

Right now, Google is teaching the little chillen and fact-checking the parents.

Probably most of the minds on this website were taught without computers, when young.

Computers are ruining their eyes, their posture, and their interpersonal skills.

Computers are just a tool.

That tool is wagging the dog.

I totally agree. And I would be willing to bet that if a child did go to school with no clue how to use a 'device', then the teacher would have no clue how to teach THAT, or would complain that it wasn't their job to teach it. Classrooms must be very strange, silent places now--with the teacher at their desk, hiding behind their laptop, immersed in Facebook or other social media, and the children with their heads down, immersed in Google or whatever program the school uses to 'teach' them...

Information retrieval is a skill that is deliberately taught. I will check with my son who works with an examinations board. However it would be passing strange if teachers did not teach information retrieval.
One of the effects of covid lockdown is that children are being taught separately from the company of their peers at school, mediated only by electronic tools. Politicians are well aware of this, and the dire effects on children of mental wellbeing and education.

[Immanuel Can]

Information retrieval is a skill that is deliberately taught.

It's a very rudimentary skill, and yet one hard to teach. Despite exhaustive efforts to rectify this, children still get most of their papers off "wikis" and other low-quality sites, just as most people here think citing "wikis" is citing the best research, because that's the site that comes up first on Google, and it's the one they use themselves. No amount of instruction seems able to correct this, unfortunately; children still tend to find it easier to just trust the computer instead of thinking for themselves. Many adults do the same, of course.

The education guru Neil Postman pointed out long ago that the job of schools is not to capitulate to bad things going on in society, such as computer-dependency, but to act to counteract them. That's an interesting idea. He said that schools should work on emphasizing fixed text, like books, and not on maximizing exposure to advertising-heavy, corruptible sources like internet stuff. And in terms of brain-development, all the research bears him out on that: still text with, systematic, linear argumentation is good for the mind, and any kind of screen time is not.

But I think he's also spitting into a wind-tunnel there. Our society seems determined to yield all to the almighty computer...including our children's brain development.

One of the effects of covid lockdown is that children are being taught separately from the company of their peers at school, mediated only by electronic tools. Politicians are well aware of this, and the dire effects on children of mental wellbeing and education.

I don't think the politicians care. If they know the research on brain development, which I doubt, they're still only too happy to reassure the public that schools are operating "as usual" even though it's now electronically mediated. But the experts know. And real-world teachers know. It's just that the politicians never listen to the experts or the research...at least in regards to education. Instead, they use it selectively, quoting it only when it advances their own agendas, plans and careers.