Poor old academics....... (RSA video: Ken Robinson)

Graham Christian wrote: I've told you before Mary, I only say what I do, what I teach, my views I use and the results. If you or anyone else don't believe or understand that then it's not my problem is it?

I'll believe it when you tell me how you're actually walking your talk, in re: the subject being discussed in this thread. What are your experiences in teaching people to read, or basic arithmetic? Have you ever done so in a situation where you didn't have the luxury of virtually unlimited time delivering one-on-one instruction? Have you ever done so in a situation where you were given thirty or more illiterate children and commanded to get them to a level of basic literacy, with a very real deadline? How did that go for you?

Mary Malmros wrote: I'll believe it when you tell me how you're actually walking your talk, in re: the subject being discussed in this thread. What are your experiences in teaching people to read, or basic arithmetic? Have you ever done so in a situation where you didn't have the luxury of virtually unlimited time delivering one-on-one instruction? Have you ever done so in a situation where you were given thirty or more illiterate children and commanded to get them to a level of basic literacy, with a very real deadline? How did that go for you?

O.K. Mary. A bit of a loaded question as all it is saying is 'Am I a school teacher?' Which I am not.

However, let's start with one ro one rather than rule it out first. (we can progress from there) Yes I have taught, helped, and as I prefer to call it: supervised, many on many different occasions to do with all kinds of study problems and barriers.

I have even helped some, including my brother in law, with dyslexia to the point of no more dyslexia.

So that covers that.

Now, back to groups of people and kids. As I said earlier I am not a school teacher. The only experience with kids is when my son and his friends would come to me for help with their studies. Apart from that is when family friends or friends would send their sons or daughters to me for help in the same manner.

I have however run different courses at my old Aikido center in watford where I was put in charge of study courses, not just Aikido, where I had groups of people and groups of teenagers.

Give me an illiterate person to bring up to literacy? No problem.

If you ever study Jamaican patua (broken english) for example from a grammatical point of view you will find it quite amusing. It is the grammatical view which will get someone to understand how it came about and the basic rules which are being broken. It it'self comes from illiteracy.

I'm not going down there = me nah go down deh

He gave me = him give I

Believe it or not but I gave it to her = me give it to him. All fascinating stuff.

So Mary, to understand me you will never do so by trying to put me in some classical identity of school teacher or doctor or such. That doesn't mean I don't know more than the average teacher or doctor for that matter based on fundamental principles studied learned and applied with success.

I'm not into fame or fortune thank you so I am and probably will always be just me, usually pennyless and usually happy with life and living and learning.

As it happens people usually come to me with be it Aikido problems, study problems, health problems, mental problems, as a last resort after having tried all the so called 'Authoritive approaches' without success. That's just the way it is my friend and is just the way I am.

Peace.G.

The point of the video is to show the school system is at fault. Nothing to do with parents or culture or whatever other 'minor' things you want to factor into the equasion according to me.

I disagree. The point of the video wasn't to ascribe blame on a system formed by cultural factors, but to show how certain elements of the system might be outdated; the segregation by age, being a great example. It's interesting that you seem willing to blame the system (teachers and administrators), but unwilling to do the same for the other part of it (the surrounding cultural factors). The role of parents is not minor. It alone can make a bad system work, or a good system fail....according to me and those I trust with direct experience.

Matthew Gano wrote: I disagree. The point of the video wasn't to ascribe blame on a system formed by cultural factors, but to show how certain elements of the system might be outdated; the segregation by age, being a great example. It's interesting that you seem willing to blame the system (teachers and administrators), but unwilling to do the same for the other part of it (the surrounding cultural factors). The role of parents is not minor. It alone can make a bad system work, or a good system fail....according to me and those I trust with direct experience.

Matthew. The video makes quite a few points but overall it is about the model, the system and it's drawbacks.

Let's get away from blame shall we as he tries to do in the video. It is not a blaming video but it is on the model and it's age and it's reason for coming about and the purpose of the video is to show its drawbacks.
The purpose is also to show how damaging it is.

So come on let's get real. In your life or dojo people come from various backgrounds and parentage and cultures. It is only a barrier to the degree you make it one. The ones who make these things a barrier are thus very divisive people actually and thus not very wise. So yes these may be small matters of concern along with a myriad of other small matters of concern but if you concentrate on them and give them more importance than they are worth then you, we, anyone, is actually creating a false problem, a mountainous one out of a minor.

The video, if you care to watch it again, shows how many brilliant kids and folks are discarded purely because of the way it is. For no other reason.

He also points out that some few may get through it and still be brilliant, some few. What a waste of resources.

The few get through despite it rather than because of it. That is his point.

Segregation by age was a minor example thinking outside of the box, giving something to look at and maybe to test. It wasn't some revolutionary insight.

Why say I blame the teachers and administrators? If you believe that then you are totally missing my point.

I am talking the model. The teachers and administrators and parents and who ever else are part of and in and may even earn a living from or even have a vested interest in but I don't blame them for it They are unaware of a better way and probably unaware of the need for one for it is them along with everyone public et al. who start off from the view that the system is good therefor any problems is due to other factors.

The video challenges this view and that's it's point.

Of course you may agree or disagree as is your prerogative but don't think I am just blaming two sets of people or that the video is merely pointing out a couple of minor things that need tweeking. That sounds like a politician speaking.

Peace.G.

Graham Christian wrote: Matthew. The video makes quite a few points but overall it is about the model, the system and it's drawbacks. Let's get away from blame shall we as he tries to do in the video. It is not a blaming video but it is on the model and it's age and it's reason for coming about and the purpose of the video is to show its drawbacks. The purpose is also to show how damaging it is.

I don't have a problem with the video, it's some of the phrasing you use to describe it.

So come on let's get real. In your life or dojo people come from various backgrounds and parentage and cultures. It is only a barrier to the degree you make it one. The ones who make these things a barrier are thus very divisive people actually and thus not very wise. So yes these may be small matters of concern along with a myriad of other small matters of concern but if you concentrate on them and give them more importance than they are worth then you, we, anyone, is actually creating a false problem, a mountainous one out of a minor.

Actually, while there is a fair amount of diversity in the dojos I've seen, they don't compare much to the schools I'm thinking of. Try telling a very traditional Somali father his daughter ought prepare for higher education. This isn't degrading the rich Somali culture, this is a fact of life with no easy answers. A problem no systemic change will address.
Also, while I agree that people who make a barrier out of it are generally being unwise, that is a huge difficulty for the public education system...they must deal with and respect those who do this...every day. Parents regularly make mountains out of mole-hills...and occassionally mole-hills out of mountains. As a compulsory system (unlike the dojo) this creates an "interesting" dynamic.

The video, if you care to watch it again, shows how many brilliant kids and folks are discarded purely because of the way it is. For no other reason.

I am personally familiar with one such individual so I appreciate this fact in a profound way. My point isn't that school systems don't deserve any blame. It's that I think many people are too eager to point the finger at the system instead of other factors that I consider to be even more important. Yes, fix the school system so it allows each individual to express their values and tastes in a self-actualizing way (there are a number of studies used to shape this endeavor already).
I think a number of people have pointed out the video has a lot of good ideas put forward, but with very little substance on how to go about it. The ideas put forward by the video are not new; they are at the very heart of many debates already within the system. Simply put, we do not have the resouces to put it exactly where it probably should be; we do not have a society which values it enough. And where it is valued you have ideological conflicts because so many people want to impose their own version of what is "best" for all.
I had a lot of fun in school...in the system which is being criticized for not allowing people to have more fun. There are two basic factors at play: the system and the society which shapes it. The particulars of how the system is structured is a minor role compared to the values of the community within which it's operating. The most obvious difference between successful students and less-successful students can be readily viewed in the habits formed at home. I've seen this principle at play my whole life, both as a student and as someone with a fair amount of classroom observation. It is a cardinal sin for teachers (those who make the system do what it does) to criticize parents; it is obligatory for parents to blame the reasonable failures of their students on the system or teachers.
Clearly this has created a bias in me and it reflects in the conversations I've had on this subject. I stand by my remarks on how to best improve the system. Changing the system can help, but it is the people who make it work or not; the people who make children enjoy this or that subject; the people whodetermine whether a lesson is understood or merely memorized. This is the heart of the learning/teaching dichotomy. Sure, change the system, but you will still have the same problems. Quit thinking that sending your kids to school will give them an education like it was some kind of factory: take an active role in teaching them and, more importantly, learning WITH them. Again, yes the system makes a difference, but I believe the keystone to education is and always will be found at home.

Segregation by age was a minor example thinking outside of the box, giving something to look at and maybe to test. It wasn't some revolutionary insight. Why say I blame the teachers and administrators? If you believe that then you are totally missing my point.

I don't think it's a minor example in terms of the learning process or community building or leadership development. In fact the current system is working on this in places by having older kids mentor younger kids. You're blaming the system, and I would love to get away from the blame game, but your rhetoric suggests otherwise to me...and maybe I'm alone in this?

I am talking the model. The teachers and administrators and parents and who ever else are part of and in and may even earn a living from or even have a vested interest in but I don't blame them for it They are unaware of a better way and probably unaware of the need for one for it is them along with everyone public et al. who start off from the view that the system is good therefor any problems is due to other factors.

Here is a major point of mine to you: they are not unaware of these issues. Major differences in pedagogy aside, the people who work through the system and shape it agree with many of the talking points brought up. The problem lies with how to make the rubber meet the road...because the road makes its own demands, day in and day out.

Of course you may agree or disagree as is your prerogative but don't think I am just blaming two sets of people or that the video is merely pointing out a couple of minor things that need tweeking. That sounds like a politician speaking. Peace.G.

I've watched it twice now. I'm going to watch it again and perhaps I'll try to give a better critique based on that. My responses so far have been based largely on segments of your remarks about it. Perhaps that will help.
Take care, and thank you for sharing your thoughts on this,
Matt

Graham Christian wrote: So Mary, to understand me you will never do so by trying to put me in some classical identity of school teacher or doctor or such.

I'm not trying to understand you. I'm trying to see if your criticisms are valid or not. I don't think they are, because your playing field is uneven. You're criticizing others for failing in a certain situation, and to validate your criticism you use your claims of success in a different situation. That's not valid.

Graham Christian wrote: That doesn't mean I don't know more than the average teacher or doctor for that matter based on fundamental principles studied learned and applied with success.

But it means you've never walked the proverbial mile in their shoes...and yet you judge them.

Graham Christian wrote: I'm not into fame or fortune thank you so I am and probably will always be just me, usually pennyless and usually happy with life and living and learning.

You started this thread by calling others out, and now you want to retreat into platitudes?

Graham Christian wrote: As it happens people usually come to me with be it Aikido problems, study problems, health problems, mental problems, as a last resort after having tried all the so called 'Authoritive approaches' without success. That's just the way it is my friend and is just the way I am..

Graham, are you interested in honesty? Is honesty important to you?

Thank you Matthew. So it seems our basic divergence is on the fact of the system being bad (my view) and your view of that not being the case. (correct me if I'm wrong)

A couple of things mentioned in the video: That it's only been around a short while really. So we can look to before it throughuot the whole history of mankind to discover where and how kids or people learned and especially to where and when very successfully. That's one thing we could do. Then we may or may not find that it's not as good or as bad as it seems.

Therefore I put it to you that having looked at this before I found that the best way of learning in the past, in all those centuries was by apprenticeship. That was the natural way.

Low and behold you will find that those with certain talents and desires could then be sent to the appropriate place as an apprentice.

So this basic natural way of learning, which I may say is based on solid principles of learning, covers some of the basics I have been talking about ie: children first and foremost finding what they are interested in and like, love, and thus already have a natural gait for. Then the nurturing of it via apprenticeship.

To me that is fundamental to all the other 'problems' for without that basic desire and love of the student in the first place you will end up with all kinds of problems and they will be given all kinds of false reasons, from parentage to culture to politics etc ad nauseum.

The simplicity is this: why should I, you or anyone study anything they are not interested in? I am afraid it's that simple.

Thus when kids leave school, apart from the opportunity to earn money they have a great release, a great feeling of freedom when they find they can study whatever they want, whatever they are interested in, the major factor of study itself.

As pointed out in the video he says how computers can actually help in this regard for knowledge on just about anything can be found. So that's one plus for this day and age.

I could mention many things wrong with the system not mentioned at all and I may say when looked at can be found to be completely mad. Kids aint stupid and many see these major failings are are generally put down for even mentioning them. I would say the exam system falls into this category.

Yes, the exam system itself is so stupid that you get people with qualifications who can quote all kinds of things and yet understand not much at all and do even less. But boy can they talk and come out with lots of data and 'appear' intelligent.

Another major fault in the system, unchallenged on the whole, yet obvious to so many workers and normal joe public.

Anyway that's enough from me. Good talking to you.

Peace.G.

Mary Malmros wrote: I'm not trying to understand you. I'm trying to see if your criticisms are valid or not. I don't think they are, because your playing field is uneven. You're criticizing others for failing in a certain situation, and to validate your criticism you use your claims of success in a different situation. That's not valid. But it means you've never walked the proverbial mile in their shoes...and yet you judge them. You started this thread by calling others out, and now you want to retreat into platitudes? Graham, are you interested in honesty? Is honesty important to you?

Mary, I don't judge them, ie: teachers, as someone who has never walked the proverbial mile. Just because I am not a school teacher does not mean I have no reality on the subject and indeed their problems and concerns. I have worked with many teachers and helped them with such concerns so I have done something worthwhile, walked rather than talked.

Saying how I am is no retreat and is no platitude thank you.

What do you mean 'call others out?' I started this thread with a video and precisely to point out not call out.

Can you take my honesty is more to the point. I give honest views and make some honest mistakes.

Glad you mentioned it though because it seems I find it strange how just because a person disagrees or don't understand what I say or on many occasions disbelieve what I say they come back at me with such comments.

Peace.G.

Graham Christian wrote: Therefore I put it to you that having looked at this before I found that the best way of learning in the past, in all those centuries was by apprenticeship. That was the natural way.

So you are into indentured servitude, exploitation and child labour?

The simplicity is this: why should I, you or anyone study anything they are not interested in? I am afraid it's that simple.

Why study anything? Life would be even simpler.

Graham Christian wrote: Thank you Matthew. So it seems our basic divergence is on the fact of the system being bad (my view) and your view of that not being the case. (correct me if I'm wrong)

More or less. I wouldn't agree the system on the whole is any more bad than any society can be said to be. I also get the impression we disagree on what is being implemented in schools. I fully agree it has problems that need addressing, but I also think they're trying in these regards. If I have a criticism of the video now, it's that in many regards it's a decade late...per my slice of the pie.

Therefore I put it to you that having looked at this before I found that the best way of learning in the past, in all those centuries was by apprenticeship. That was the natural way. Low and behold you will find that those with certain talents and desires could then be sent to the appropriate place as an apprentice.

Intensive focus on the student is essential for the student's needs in learning. Apprenticeship is one way of addressing this, because the mentor has a direct vested interest in how the student performs. One of the reasons it worked in the past though is because the student knew that without his master, his hopes for autonomy were sketchy at best. People didn't always get to choose which craft they practiced, it was based on availability.

The simplicity is this: why should I, you or anyone study anything they are not interested in? I am afraid it's that simple.

I see it as very simple too: because we're not always already interested in what we'd most be interested in. This is the premise behind the concept of general education which is the boring stuff most people complain about. One quick thing I disliked from the video now that I think about it: he says the subject matter is all boring stuff. Talk about exhibiting the very thing he's arguing against.

Yes, the exam system itself is so stupid that you get people with qualifications who can quote all kinds of things and yet understand not much at all and do even less. But boy can they talk and come out with lots of data and 'appear' intelligent. Another major fault in the system, unchallenged on the whole, yet obvious to so many workers and normal joe public.

Yes and no, in my opinion. Being taught about the process of "assessment," I was actually reassured. I agree intelligence and aptitude aren't things which can be entirely measured. I am not a fan of No Child Left Behind even though I support the use of exams (even high-pressure exams) as one metric. The problem comes when people put too much weight on them and forget all the stuff that is invisible to them.
The same problem that causes experts to put too much wieght on exams is the same problem that causes lay-folk to dismiss them: knowledge obfuscates; we see what we've been primed (through experience) to see.

Matthew Gano wrote: More or less. I wouldn't agree the system on the whole is any more bad than any society can be said to be. I also get the impression we disagree on what is being implemented in schools. I fully agree it has problems that need addressing, but I also think they're trying in these regards. If I have a criticism of the video now, it's that in many regards it's a decade late...per my slice of the pie. Intensive focus on the student is essential for the student's needs in learning. Apprenticeship is one way of addressing this, because the mentor has a direct vested interest in how the student performs. One of the reasons it worked in the past though is because the student knew that without his master, his hopes for autonomy were sketchy at best. People didn't always get to choose which craft they practiced, it was based on availability. I see it as very simple too: because we're not always already interested in what we'd most be interested in. This is the premise behind the concept of general education which is the boring stuff most people complain about. One quick thing I disliked from the video now that I think about it: he says the subject matter is all boring stuff. Talk about exhibiting the very thing he's arguing against. Yes and no, in my opinion. Being taught about the process of "assessment," I was actually reassured. I agree intelligence and aptitude aren't things which can be entirely measured. I am not a fan of No Child Left Behind even though I support the use of exams (even high-pressure exams) as one metric. The problem comes when people put too much weight on them and forget all the stuff that is invisible to them. The same problem that causes experts to put too much wieght on exams is the same problem that causes lay-folk to dismiss them: knowledge obfuscates; we see what we've been primed (through experience) to see.

Thanks for the response. May I say that you are very focused on this subject and much more 'you' than on some things you discuss. Please take this as a validation.

Intensive focus on the student: Let's stop there for a moment. We are both in agreement there and thus we can both see it in apprenticeships. You say it's essential and and I agree with you. So I would say any system therefor which cannot do this is 'bad' So to me it's not a matter of excuses or 'yeah buts' but rather a matter of let's find which which fits that criteria.

Now with a bit of research for example a number could be found as to how many kids per teacher fits that criteria. Once found any problems and thus solutions can be found which handle them. Thus a new system developed. For example: The problem of money and spaces may come up to do with number of teachers needed for such a project if for example the optimum number of kids per teacher was found to be five.

Well, there's two ways of doing this to solve those kinds of problems. 1) A directive or law which says you have to do it this way. Then minds would have to focus on how to and then amazingly solutions are found. (that's the harsh way) 2) As I said in an earlier post if industry itself had a vested interested in schooling. Thus if they could design educational courses to be taught in school so that kids come out already able in that field of work then they would pump up the necessary funds for however many teachers or spaces for teaching necessary. So number two is giving it thought based on we can not 'yeah but.'

Your interest point I don't get. 'We're not always interested in what we most be interested in'? Doesn't make sense to me.

I have it as fundamental that without interest it is impossible to study properly and that most teachers know this and thus try to make the subject interesting. This to me may sound reasonable but is in fact putting the cart there after the horse has bolted and thus already having broken the golden rule of interest of the student must be there first for any education to work.

The exam question I say this. All kids and teenagers know quite thoroughly it's all about the piece of paper and it's drummed into them. Unfortunately this then rules out understanding. It also brings into play a whole market for tactics and ways of remembering data for those who can generally remember parrot fashion can get high marks. Nothing to do with understanding or ability to do.

When I ask teenagers now that's all they care about (the others have given up trying) and that is passing the exam or with such grades as gets them into the preferred university. They don't care much about understanding the subject at all but just about methods of remembering and as little understanding as possible in order to get the desired result in an exam. Like drug dealers boast in rap records 'it's all about the paper' (meaning money) so students do in education. By any means necessary. This isn't blame but it is reality. It's not their fault they think this way for they are taught to.

It's so absurd nowadays, in this country anyway, that it is standard procedure that you can ask a person in school or university what they are studying. The person will answer quite brightly and tell you let's say chemistry degree or a masters in biochemistry. Then you say 'oh, so you're going to be a chemist or you pick some trade or work that fits and they look at you blankly. 'No' they say, 'I plan on going into marketing or some such totally 'other' field of work. It's quite amazing really just how stupid and wasteful that is. I asked my friends daughter what she was studying in order to get into university and she told me. There were two languages and a couple of other main subjects but on me saying to her how good that was and then making the fatal mistake of complimenting her for being interested in such things she actually gave me a puzzled look and corrected me as if I was from another planet. As if to say 'you don't understand, that's now how we do things in our generation' Her correction included various reasons for doing those subjects and none of them included liking them but they did include finding the easiest ones and or the ones which meant she could go on echange holidays with. She hated studying and could see no future use for those subjects in her life apart from getting into the uni. She is half Italian studying Italian, easy peasy.

What makes all this laughable to many is the life and work system we are all used to means that a person with a university degree in 'baking bread' (joke) can walk into a high powered job which has nothing to do with bread. It's even more weird when no one finds that strange. It all fits into a job for the boys type society though unfortunately.

I bet many can justify it and put it down to IQ and such like and make it seem all reasonable though.

Wow! Is all I say to that. Reasonable would be to study the thing you are going to do. Simple.

This leads me finally to one more simplicity I have mentioned in past threads. A person from the moment they are born studies what they want to DO That's another basic. Another simple truth not adhered to in the reasoning of later education systems.

O.K. That's it from me for now. Time for tea ha, ha.

Peace.G.

Just for the sake of balance and political incorrectness, while there certainly is room and need for an improved educational paradigm, when do we empower the individual and hold them responsible and accountable for their learning participation and contribution to the educational opportunity and experience?

Is our lives (and learning) always someone else's fault?

Lynn Seiser wrote: Just for the sake of balance and political incorrectness, while there certainly is room and need for an improved educational paradigm, when do we empower the individual and hold them responsible and accountable for their learning participation and contribution to the educational opportunity and experience? Is our lives (and learning) always someone else's fault?

Personal responsibility?? That's just crazy talk.

The system extant doesn't empower the student beyond primary education.

Students who try to be responsible are discarded. They have to wait till they leave school.

Peace.G.

Graham Christian wrote: Can you take my honesty is more to the point. I give honest views and make some honest mistakes.

The reason I asked the question was because you keep referring to me as "my friend", and we're not. We're casual acquaintances on an internet forum. Nothing wrong with that, but it's not friendship in my book -- and it also illustrates the fact that you and I may be using the same terminology to refer to very different things. I understand that, but do you understand that?

Mary Malmros wrote: The reason I asked the question was because you keep referring to me as "my friend", and we're not. We're casual acquaintances on an internet forum. Nothing wrong with that, but it's not friendship in my book -- and it also illustrates the fact that you and I may be using the same terminology to refer to very different things. I understand that, but do you understand that?

Yes I understand that. That's how misunderstandings come about is it not? Why would you think I don't understand that?

To think that the use of 'my friend' could offend or even cause confusion is beyond me. Once again maybe it comes down to you're not understanding me.

It's actually an Aikido view in my book and a personal one too. Everyone is my friend in truth according to me whether they consider it so or not. What I do know is I am.

As I have said previously in Aikido threads the 'opponent' is not an enemy but merely a long lost friend. The degree of lostness determines his or her way of behaviour.

Being honest and sincere means yes I recognise all on here as friends even the ones who only comment negatively on anything I say.

An often used phrase of yours regarding things I say is 'platitudes' Well, when you realize they are not platitudes but tested and applicable and real views we may reach a better plateau of communication.

As a twist on Steve Mcqueen in the magnificent seven (I think) 'I deal in wisdom my friend'

Any issues I have with anyone on here is actually an issue with myself. When a person gets angry with you they are actually angry with their-self. These are statements which fit with Masakatsu and agatsu and thus Aikido. The only enemy therefor is ourself not the other person.

Peace.G.

Yes Keith it sure is from an academic.

From the intellectual culture which produced the academic ability which discarded the non academic and thus the majority and caused chaos. That's what the video says.

That way of thinking causes chaos yet is full of 'logic' and worse of all sees nothing wrong with itself.

The majority may I point out, the non academic, he points out as potentially brilliant whilst only a few of the academic go on to be so. The problem he points out is that they the majority don't think they are due to that system run by their 'peers'

So please, 'I've watched it 'x' amount of times type statements mean nothing to me for it is the understanding that is important.

I know everyone is potentially brilliant but their potential has mostly been stumped by the system extant.

Your example of getting your daughter to do sword wrapping or whatever is hardly an example of creativity of the type he describes or divergent thinking for that matter. Then if you read what I said then you will see it's completely nothing to do with that either. The point I made was to find what the child is interested in not what you are interested in getting the child to learn. If your daughter is truly of her own volition and not due to wanting to merely please her dad interested in such things then go for it. That's the point.

My views are not fantasy my man, they are pointed out in many places by many people and in many films too for they strike a chord with people. The film about the boy who wanted to do ballet is a great example.

In fact that same intellectual model has plagued Aikido.

Peace.G.

It's not so much your smug ignorance on so many issues, it's that you share your facile, simplistic ideas with others with such, well, pride at being nearly completely ignorant of the topics you discuss. You wear your ignorance like a badge, as if being completely uninformed is somehow a plus. You wade in to areas where you are woefully uneducated and somehow feel that gives your uninformed opinions some sort of odd validity. I look back on the posts you've written over the recent months (or is it years?) and I wonder if there has been anything you've written that has been a positive contribution. Or if it's all just more "crap Graham made up supported by self-serving stories of anonymous people benefiting from your self-professed great wisdom".

Nothing.

Goodbye, Graham. I know it is of no significance to you, but I have lost the smallest sliver of respect for you I had remaining. I used to respect the fact that you were at least consistent. Now I just see it as more of the same insidious disease infecting way too many, and the internet gives it a forum with relatively equal footing. It seems you see yourself as some sort of Nietzschian Übermensch when in fact you appear to be the very sort of person Nietzsche was horrified that society was creating. A rush to the lowest common denominator with an admiration for mediocrity.

Too much time has been wasted.

Deeds, not words. All we have here is words. Goodbye.

Just occurred to me, has anyone invented, created computer games which teach literacy?

Note I didn't say computer courses or replicas of schooling methods, I said games.

For example I could envision a game where a person has lots of symbols (letters of the alphabet) and the game entails finding the matching names for those symbols. The names could be on bricks or in some form where the person has to go and get them or dig them up or whatever and take them back to the symbol and if they are correct they get a reward be it points or whatever the current reward in computer games is. (me not being one for such myself)

The same could be done for sounds which fit the symbols etc. Then on to the next levl where the symbols with their sounds have to be put together to make words. Thus a game of fun and challenge and each level is the next step towards literacy.

Kids of this day and age would compete to be literate with each other because that's what they do as kids with computer games, they challenge each other by levels of computer games.

Get some creative minds in the field of gaming to come up with a popular game which does this and they would make a killing.

Any geeks want to take up the challenge???

Peace.G.

Keith Larman wrote: It's not so much your smug ignorance on so many issues, it's that you share your facile, simplistic ideas with others with such, well, pride at being nearly completely ignorant of the topics you discuss. You wear your ignorance like a badge, as if being completely uninformed is somehow a plus. You wade in to areas where you are woefully uneducated and somehow feel that gives your uninformed opinions some sort of odd validity. I look back on the posts you've written over the recent months (or is it years?) and I wonder if there has been anything you've written that has been a positive contribution. Or if it's all just more "crap Graham made up supported by self-serving stories of anonymous people benefiting from your self-professed great wisdom". Nothing. Goodbye, Graham. I know it is of no significance to you, but I have lost the smallest sliver of respect for you I had remaining. I used to respect the fact that you were at least consistent. Now I just see it as more of the same insidious disease infecting way too many, and the internet gives it a forum with relatively equal footing. It seems you see yourself as some sort of Nietzschian Übermensch when in fact you appear to be the very sort of person Nietzsche was horrified that society was creating. A rush to the lowest common denominator with an admiration for mediocrity.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

The guy's trolling, and disputatious, egotistical, un-aiki nature, has made these boards a waste of time - he ruins every thread he enters (which is a great many), and he has probably turned a great many curious people off aikido, which is a real shame.

Graham Christian wrote: Just occurred to me, has anyone invented, created computer games which teach literacy?

Questions such as this are best answered by Google ( http://www.google.com ). Here is something to get you started: http://www.google.co.uk/search?rls=e...teach+literacy

Graham's world reminds me of this guys world.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RaGG8Oh3Qas

dps

David Soroko wrote: Questions such as this are best answered by Google ( http://www.google.com ). Here is something to get you started: http://www.google.co.uk/search?rls=e...teach+literacy

Nice. Good to know it's being looked at and some have been made. Good positive things.

Peace.G.

Graham Christian wrote: Thanks for the response. May I say that you are very focused on this subject and much more 'you' than on some things you discuss. Please take this as a validation.

Well, thank you. This is a subject I am clearly biased about and have a fairly strong opinion on. I also have a lot more experience on this subject than I do on most any Aikido subject. At any rate, please forgive this relatively brief reply, but my pc is down.
Suffice to say, much of what you'r describing in terms of studies on which conditions promote interest and functional skills have been done in a myriad of ways. In some placs at least, there is already a huge shift toward more "student-centric" pedagogies. Direct interaction with high expectations and intensive scaffolding are the more current models; direct interaction requires cooperation; cooperation requires the student cares and has a sense of purpose.

Your interest point I don't get. 'We're not always interested in what we most be interested in'? Doesn't make sense to me.

Just that we don't always know what we're going to like until we've tried it. This is one principle behind general education (the "boring" stuff).
If I get the chance I'll try to respond to the other ideas when I have more time. Again te problem is not in the ideals, but in the pratictical applicatin.
Take care,
Matt

Matthew Gano wrote: Well, thank you. This is a subject I am clearly biased about and have a fairly strong opinion on. I also have a lot more experience on this subject than I do on most any Aikido subject. At any rate, please forgive this relatively brief reply, but my pc is down. Suffice to say, much of what you'r describing in terms of studies on which conditions promote interest and functional skills have been done in a myriad of ways. In some placs at least, there is already a huge shift toward more "student-centric" pedagogies. Direct interaction with high expectations and intensive scaffolding are the more current models; direct interaction requires cooperation; cooperation requires the student cares and has a sense of purpose. Just that we don't always know what we're going to like until we've tried it. This is one principle behind general education (the "boring" stuff). If I get the chance I'll try to respond to the other ideas when I have more time. Again te problem is not in the ideals, but in the pratictical applicatin. Take care, Matt

Hi Matthew.
That last point being the one I questioned I consider a fundamental to ALL learning. The video at the beginning points this out when he says that modern kids don't believe in this system.

Now if it is a principle that 'we don't always know what we are going to like before we've tried it'
and equated with the boring stuff then I would say that is once again a fundamental error. Thus more chaos would ensue.

Firstly the 'saying' is hardly a principle and quite nothing to do with why a subject is boring.

But more importantly it shows me only that they don't still grasp what study actually is thus as with many things just go round and round in circles. I think certain principles are missing and that is the problem.

Perhaps we can carry this foreward when you computer is in better shape.

Peace.G.