Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

So, what should be the difference between educating smart and stupid people?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The writer in the OP may be a racist or whatever, but does anyone dispute the point that intelligence is a limiter on a person's achievements? I would think that that wouild be pretty much a given.

    Then the key is to make appropriate education available. I don't necesarily think that it follows that the smart kids need more time and resources devoted to them -- They are bright after all so they will catch on
    You don't get to 300 losses without being a pretty exceptional goaltender.-- Ben Kenobi speaking of Roberto Luongo

    Comment


    • Smart kids need to be - or probably benefit from - being challenged. That does not mean more time and resources, smart kids may even need LESS since they may be more self-motivating if actually challenged. A smart kid who isn't being mentally engaged can easily become a malcontent which is like double bad.

      Far too easy and far too hard are both bad things. In school I found maths and the sciences far too easy, and english far too hard. To demonstrate (and I'm not kidding), my understanding of what verb's, noun's etc are, is still hazy at best, in fact the only one I REALLY know is the Oxymoron; stupid eduction!

      Comment


      • Blake, I can't believe that you could really have a problem with english. I've read your Civ reports and you write well - you must be fooling yourself if you think you don't understand. Words are symbols that come in different types and combine in different ways to produces various meanings/outcomes - just like the components of a civ game.

        If the word refers to an object it's a noun. If an action, a verb. If it describes a noun it's an adjective. If it describes a verb it's an adverb. Little words that describe position are prepositions (above, below, outside). 'A' and 'the' are the indefinite and definite articles.

        That's all, really. How can that be harder than nasty maths?

        Comment


        • On the planet Marklar, all objects are referred to as "Marklar"
          THEY!!111 OMG WTF LOL LET DA NOMADS AND TEH S3D3NTARY PEOPLA BOTH MAEK BITER AXP3REINCES
          AND TEH GRAAT SINS OF THERE [DOCTRINAL] INOVATIONS BQU3ATH3D SMAL
          AND!!1!11!!! LOL JUST IN CAES A DISPUTANT CALS U 2 DISPUT3 ABOUT THEYRE CLAMES
          DO NOT THAN DISPUT3 ON THEM 3XCAPT BY WAY OF AN 3XTARNAL DISPUTA!!!!11!! WTF

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Cort Haus
            Blake, I can't believe that you could really have a problem with english. I've read your Civ reports and you write well - you must be fooling yourself if you think you don't understand. Words are symbols that come in different types and combine in different ways to produces various meanings/outcomes - just like the components of a civ game.

            If the word refers to an object it's a noun. If an action, a verb. If it describes a noun it's an adjective. If it describes a verb it's an adverb. Little words that describe position are prepositions (above, below, outside). 'A' and 'the' are the indefinite and definite articles.

            That's all, really. How can that be harder than nasty maths?
            I have no problem with english at all, I just learned it all by observation and lots of reading, didn't learn a damn thing in english class. Maybe I already knew everything I needed to know (kind of like brute-forcing the entire language). Regardless the concepts of noun, verb etc just didn't stick, maybe my brain - already knowing what all words are used for, just didn't see the use for the silly things - you could say I have a MENTAL concept of what a proverb is, I just don't have that mental concept linked to the word "proverb" (ie give me any word and I could give the definition and a perfect example of how to use it but not what type of word it is).

            Note also that I write extremely well on technical subjects which I have in depth knowledgeable about but I write quite poorly in other areas (an exam exercise like "read this excerpt then write about it" would draw a massive blank - I work best with huge amounts of information, not small amounts).

            It could be said that my brain is wired for functional use of language as needed to communicate ideas but just refused to accept any more than that - discarded as useless. I'm absolutely terrible at rote memorization - not knowing how common or not these things are: I have not memorized more than about 1/3rd of of the times table (up to 10x10, I know the squares, multiplies of 2, 5 and 10 and anything which multiples to 24 - the rest is basically gaps and must be calculated on the fly - oh I've also rote-memorized powers of 2 up to 2^14 and pi to around 15 decimal places - gotta know pi since it can't be derived!).
            I have not rote memorized the alphabet other than as a linear sequence - if I wanted to know what letter comes before or after V I'd have to mentally "sing the alphabet song" starting at M and seeking to V (MNOPQRSTUVW ) (obviously optimized so I can either start at A or M to cut the average seek time in half). Again I have no idea how most people have memorized the alphabet, although it would be interesting to know...

            In Chemistry and Physics, instead of remembering the formulas, I just remembered the first principles and derived any complex formulas needed on the fly (including during exams, I'd often even rederive the formulas just for fun even if the formula chart was given - it'd also be faster and less mistake-prone than finding the right formula on the chart!).

            To describe my entire schooling experience in five words: "An exercise in amusing myself".

            Comment


            • I wouldn't equate learning by rote with language skills, other than learning vocabulary for foreign languages. I always assumed that the reason why English Language was one of my best subjects was becasue I didn't have to learn anything for it.

              I hated learning things by rote, and wasn't very good at it. I always prefered learning by experience.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Blake
                ...and pi to around 15 decimal places - gotta know pi since it can't be derived!).
                That's twice as many decimals places as I know, and most people seem impressed by my ability to rattle off 3.141592654.

                I can, however, quickly rattle off all the presidents of the United States, the years they served, and which number they were.
                Click here if you're having trouble sleeping.
                "We confess our little faults to persuade people that we have no large ones." - François de La Rochefoucauld

                Comment


                • I have no problem with english at all, I just learned it all by observation and lots of reading, didn't learn a damn thing in english class.
                  Ditto. I loathed English class. I probably learned something, but not much.

                  -Arrian
                  grog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!

                  The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Lorizael
                    I can, however, quickly rattle off all the presidents of the United States, the years they served, and which number they were.
                    That must really piss people off.

                    Comment


                    • Eep. Why? It's really just a bit knowledge I recently forced myself to memorize mostly for the fun of it. It pleased me to know that I could retain a long list like that. Maybe it will help with Jeopardy or something.
                      Click here if you're having trouble sleeping.
                      "We confess our little faults to persuade people that we have no large ones." - François de La Rochefoucauld

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Blake

                        In Chemistry and Physics, instead of remembering the formulas, I just remembered the first principles and derived any complex formulas needed on the fly (including during exams, I'd often even rederive the formulas just for fun even if the formula chart was given - it'd also be faster and less mistake-prone than finding the right formula on the chart!).
                        That's how you are suppose to do it. Memorizing formulas is almost worthless...

                        Jon Miller
                        Jon Miller-
                        I AM.CANADIAN
                        GENERATION 35: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Lorizael
                          Eep. Why? It's really just a bit knowledge I recently forced myself to memorize mostly for the fun of it. It pleased me to know that I could retain a long list like that. Maybe it will help with Jeopardy or something.
                          The fact that you had 'fun' learning it is what seems so alien to those of us who have trouble learning things by rote.

                          Much as I love playing bass, learning new songs where there is a complex, linear arrangement is very stressful and uncomfortable for me. In the end its my fingers that remember it (muscle memory) more than my conscious, it seems. I 'see' songs as patterns on the fretboard rather than as a list of notes.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Blake


                            (up to 10x10, I know the squares, multiplies of 2, 5 and 10 and anything which multiples to 24 - the rest is basically gaps and must be calculated on the fly - oh I've also rote-memorized powers of 2 up to 2^14 and pi to around 15 decimal places - gotta know pi since it can't be derived!).
                            I'm just poking fun with you but if pi can't be derived, how do we compute billions of digits of it?
                            Draw huge circle and use precise measurements?

                            And you'll never use 15 digits of pi for anything anyway. (I also know a few digits of pi, 20-30 depending on the day, but it's just for fun)

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X