Care Not Speed

[jcdammeyer]

I found this article years ago and cut it out of the magazine. Cleaning up and organizing books on the new shelves brought this to light again. I thought I'd share it.
I think any of us who use machine tools learn pretty quickly that trying to rush or do things quickly rarely pays off.

 

[David]

My evening read

 

[Susquatch]

Good read John. I enjoyed that.

It raises several problems with secondary school education. I'd like to raise another one not directly mentioned in the article but indirectly spoken loud and clear.

One is the filtering of potential by grades. Our school system unfairly uses grades as a proxy for potential. But most kids in grade 12 & 13 are not thinking about school. They are thinking about the opposite sex, or cars, or or or. How can you get good marks when all you can think about is the look that Julie gave you as you walked into the exam room? Kids in grade 12 and 13 often have no motivation to do well and don't have any slightest idea about the importance of good grades.

Second, too many of our teachers don't care about any students but the best. But the best might not be the ones with the most potential. We don't even try to evaluate potential. Why not?

Third, I think there is too much emphasis on memory. Memorizing formulas, constants, texts, facts. These are all things that can be looked up. Why do we need to require good memories? Even Einstein famously said “Never memorize something that you can look up.” in my minde need to emphasizes the importance of understanding and problem-solving over rote memorization.

 

[Doggggboy]

“Never memorize what you can look up in books” is a quote often attributed to Einstein, though what he actually said was somewhat different. He was asked, but did not know the speed of sound as included in the Edison Test. When this was pointed out, he said, “[I do not] carry such information in my mind since it is readily available in books. He also said, “…The value of a college education is not the learning of many facts but the training of the mind to think.”

 

[slow-poke]

I found most of our engineering exams too rushed. I recall messing up a Dynamics mid term, there were three questions we had one hour. So I went to the professor to figure out how to solve the problem that I got zero on. It took him over an hour to solve that particular problem (and he struggled) trying several failed approaches before finally solving the problem. Apparently this professor was on the who who list (top 100 in the world). My conclusion this is really messed up.

One of our professors stated that if you try and memorize exam type questions you will likely fail or do very poorly because we will almost never include a question that we taught during the term, the exam questions will always be new, however they will represent the concepts we taught. That was an understatement.

They also stated that technology is moving so fast we will not attempt to teach you the latest technology just the ability to learn the new technology when you graduate. Didn't make much sense to me then, but does now.

 

[jcdammeyer]

If I were to simplify the difference between High_School/Technical_College and University is the first group teaches 'things' and the second doesn't teach things but teaches how to learn.

I'm sure this will cause a major GRRRRRR but think about it. So many people have stated to me that for example engineers from Uni know nothing and have to be taught the practical side of things. But somehow Uni teaches more how to think or to adapt to changes. Well maybe not engineering but certainly my comp. sci. was that way.

So I agree with @slow-poke that the ability to think is way more important.

 

[trevj]

If I were to simplify the difference between High_School/Technical_College and University is the first group teaches 'things' and the second doesn't teach things but teaches how to learn.

I'm sure this will cause a major GRRRRRR but think about it. So many people have stated to me that for example engineers from Uni know nothing and have to be taught the practical side of things. But somehow Uni teaches more how to think or to adapt to changes. Well maybe not engineering but certainly my comp. sci. was that way.

So I agree with @slow-poke that the ability to think is way more important.

I have met FAR too many people, including several of my In-Laws, who actively dismissed my intellect, and my opinions, as they put it, "You don't even have a degree!"

One of my more epic responses, when I stated, "You have three degrees, so how come you are so f*cking stupid?"

Didn't buy me any points with the In-laws, but my Father In Law was fairly impressed...

IMO, far too many people that paid for a degree, or several of them, think that they have finished having to learn anything new once they have paper in hand. The folks that understand that they have been handed a path to learning for the rest of their lives, I have less problems with!

 

[slow-poke]

I have met FAR too many people, including several of my In-Laws, who actively dismissed my intellect, and my opinions, as they put it, "You don't even have a degree!"

One of my more epic responses, when I stated, "You have three degrees, so how come you are so f*cking stupid?"

Didn't buy me any points with the In-laws, but my Father In Law was fairly impressed...

IMO, far too many people that paid for a degree, or several of them, think that they have finished having to learn anything new once they have paper in hand. The folks that understand that they have been handed a path to learning for the rest of their lives, I have less problems with!

We started a tech company and hired the best and brightest we could afford. We hired this quirky but very bright and talented guy. He was a capable designer with no degree. He decided to enrol in engineering his grades were all over the place getting A+ when interested and D's when not interested. He was not really focused on school, dabbling in many side projects. He was about to graduate just had to complete his final exams and he decided not to write one of them. I received a call from the dean of the program begging me to convince Jeff to go write the exam, he stated if he writes it he will pass and graduate.

I tried but Jeff had other plans this was the dot com time and Jeff was off to sunny California. Within a year he created a start-up and sold it for many millions. The degree less Jeff doesn't need to work, but he continues to play.

 

[kstrauss]

Second, too many of our teachers don't care about any students but the best. But the best might not be the ones with the most potential. We don't even try to evaluate potential.

Yes, those with the most potential should get more support. Yes, the brightest should be supported. However, teachers (and many others that the media reports on) favour more emphasis and more resources for "special needs" kids. That is, the dumb ones, the non-verbal, the ones whose behaviour disrupts others, etc. Why?

 

[MrWhoopee]

They also stated that technology is moving so fast we will not attempt to teach you the latest technology just the ability to learn the new technology when you graduate. Didn't make much sense to me then, but does now.

I am frequently asked by my computer repair clients how I keep up with the changes in technology. I tell them I don't even try, particularly because I may never even see the latest change "in the wild" before it is replaced. I understand the underlying principles and the similarities that result. Sometimes I need ten or fifteen minutes to figure it out. Windows 8 took almost 20 minutes.

 

[YotaBota]

"You have three degrees, so how come you are so f*cking stupid?"

Just because you can sound smart doesn't make you smart.

I was on course one time where one of the students (great guy) got 100% on every written exam but failed every practical exam, he just couldn't relate the theory to working on the gear.

 

[Martin w]

I'm glad my second-grade teacher was wrong about me being a simpleton...Well at least I like to think she was wrong.

 

[YotaBota]

Toughest four years of school were grade two.

 

[trevj]

Toughest four years of school were grade two.

Sucks when they send you home to shave before they will let you back into the class, eh?

 

[Susquatch]

Yes, those with the most potential should get more support. Yes, the brightest should be supported. However, teachers (and many others that the media reports on) favour more emphasis and more resources for "special needs" kids. That is, the dumb ones, the non-verbal, the ones whose behaviour disrupts others, etc. Why?

I don't know the answer to that. Does anyone? But I'll share my own view.

There is no question that there is a continuum of IQ's in our world - some high, some low, and the vast majority in between. That doesn't even begin to touch on the differences between logical, mathematical, spacial, artistic, emotional, etc etc. We are not all gifted in the same ways.

But I try to view all people as equals in every way regardless. That includes throughout the primary and, secondary educational phases of their lives. Just because someone is more or less academically inclined doesn't change how much attention or help they need. I believe that every young person has potential in their own spectrum and I believe society at large has a responsibility to help young individuals achieve that potential whatever it is.

I do not believe that academic performance is a foolproof way to determine an individual's educational needs. I also don't believe that ramming an education down a young person's throat is appropriate either.

I believe it's better to give equal appreciative attention to all according to their needs, attempt to instill a sense of curiosity and a thirst for knowledge, while providing a basic education to everyone. Simply put, I do not believe in cutting off any young mind before they are old enough to find their own way. I absolutely hate the idea that any teacher can arbitrarily decide a child's future based on how much they like them or what their childhood marks are like.

 

[Downwindtracker2]

My dad had a saying "An engineer with common sense could write his own ticket . " All my working life I have been around engineers, my Dad was right.


I was lucky, I could write exams. Which was good considering my study habits.

 

[Arbutus]

In my time as a university teacher, an engineer, and a corporate executive, my filter for those I work with has always been Attitude, Aptitude, and Ability.

The right attitude opens many doors. A willingness to learn, to contribute, and to admit mistakes, among others, is the bedrock of professional and personal growth. In an era where information, both correct and incorrect is everywhere, a curious and humble attitude is more critical than ever. It's the engine for lifelong learning, distinguishing those who passively consume information from those who actively engage with it to create new knowledge and solutions.

Skills can be developed, but a foundation is essential. Without the aptitude to do the job, no amount of polishing will create a jewel. Aptitude isn't just about innate talent; it's about the inherent capacity to learn and apply new concepts. The internet and AI can provide answers, but they cannot instill the fundamental cognitive frameworks necessary to understand complex problems, to reason logically, and to see the interconnectedness of ideas. A university education, at its best, is designed to cultivate this very aptitude through a structured and challenging curriculum.

The ability to do a job is the synthesis of attitude and aptitude, developed through practice and experience. This is where the true value of post-secondary education shines, and where the argument that it's merely a "financial transaction" falls short. The ability to perform a role effectively is not just about knowing what to do, but how and why to do it.

I agree that the educational system falls very far short of our expectations. The filters applied to young people throughout their developing years have profound effects. But honestly, the factor that most affects our interactions wth others is attitude. Without that, theres always going to be a struggle. And quite frankly, many teachers simply abandon or ignore those students who demonstrate a poor attitude.

 

[kstrauss]

I don't know the answer to that. Does anyone? But I'll share my own view.

There is no question that there is a continuum of IQ's in our world - some high, some low, and the vast majority in between.

But I try to view all people as equals in every way. That includes the education phase of their lives. Just because someone is more or less academically inclined doesn't change how much attention or help they need. I believe that every young person has potential in their own spectrum and I believe society at large has a responsibility to help young individuals achieve that potential whatever it is.

I do not believe that academic performance is a foolproof way to determine an individual's educational needs. I also don't believe in ramming an education down a young person's throat is appropriate either.

I believe it's better to give equal appreciative attention to all according to their needs, instill a sense of curiosity and a thirst for knowledge, while providing a basic education to everyone. I do not believe in cutting off any young mind before they are old enough to find their own way. I absolutely hate the idea that any teacher can arbitrarily decide a child's future based on how much they like them or what their childhood marks are like.

I didn't mean to suggest that everyone shouldn't receive attention and support so that they achieve their potential. My concern is that we appear to be supporting those least apt to succeed to the detriment of those most likely to contribute -- smaller classes for "special needs" kids, class disruptions are tolerated, gifted programs cancelled due to insufficient resources, etc. A desirable future for Canada depends on the contributions of our best and hardest working rather than coddling our least productive.

 

[slow-poke]

I'm glad my second-grade teacher was wrong about me being a simpleton...Well at least I like to think she was wrong.

I have a good friend, in grade 12 he visited with the guidance counselor about possibly enrolling in engineering. The counselor stated, face it Lawrence, you should forget about engineering and focus on more of a trades type program at community college. So Lawrence ignored that advice, completed engineering and than a masters in business and went on to be VP of a $10B helicopter company.

 

[trevj]

I really do think that the Trades avenue, has been given short shrift for far too many years.

A Plumber, these days, can charge rates that would embarrass a Mob Lawyer, and the double your sewage back, guarantee, pretty much cuts down on the complaints, eh?
Besides, what do you really need to know, besides "Never look up an open Pipe", "Wash your hands before you pick your teeth.", "Poop ALWAYS runs downhill!", and "Don't park your Cadillac, in the Customer's parking space!"?

Maybe, "Pay Day is Thursday!". LOL!

May have been an apocryphal tale, but I still recall reading of an interaction betwen a Teacher and a kid in the class, where the Teacher retorted to a statement with along the lines of "What do you want to be when you grow up, a Ditchdigger?", and the kids says "They make Union Scale, and provide a Service to the Community!"