Education and software

Mar 28, 2005 02:10

Good teacher shortage. Kids are annoying by nature and inclination. We need effective teaching software agents ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

stolen_tea March 27 2005, 23:44:25 UTC
Found I that did learning Latin more for my knowledge of syntax than all my English courses put together... Think I, perhaps, that would be making sure that learns everyone at least one other language a better way to use school resources.

Reply

faendryl March 28 2005, 09:36:04 UTC
Yes, well, if we can't even teach proper English, I'm not confident of our ability to teach foreign languages properly. And at risk of sounding elitist (heh), I'm not worried about people like you. You're going to learn well, probably even in spite of teachers.

I'm not sure how this would interact with school resource use. Seems like a project for some wacky university research department, maybe Children's Studies meets Comp Sci meets Psych. Call up the Scaz!

Reply

stolen_tea March 28 2005, 10:20:20 UTC
Well, but the thing is, I didn't find that any of the English "grammar" that we were taught made any sense, until I had something to compare it with. It's a lot easier for anyone to find patterns when they have more than one piece of data to work with ( ... )

Reply

faendryl March 28 2005, 11:01:46 UTC
Of COURSE proper English is a social construct. What do you take me for :P I agree that grammar isn't enough by itself, and that what's actually required is far more comprehensive. The interesting question to me is not (for the purposes of this discussion, anyway) what we should be teaching, but whether and how we're teaching it effectively. "Proper" curriculum is a whole bag of worms that I'm not prepared to open at the moment.

That being said...you and fionnidhke both note that a solution to some of the problems noted is to get kids to spend more time reading (and writing). I'm of the opinion that a good program is potentially far more qualified than a bad teacher to accomplish this.

I am a little curious as to why teaching the prestige dialect as "correct" is a flaw. I don't necessarily disagree (or agree), but I'd like to hear more on that.

Reply

fionnidhke March 28 2005, 17:34:00 UTC
Teaching prestige dialect as "correct" is inaccurate, but much more importantly it's ineffective. (At least, I'd predict it to be -- I'd be interested to see actual data on this...) I would predict that very few kids (particularly in situations where the teacher is mediocre, and possibly also of a different cultural background from the entire class) would imitate a teacher's standard English simply because he or she said it was "correct" -- in fact, I bet it would make a lot of kids resist adopting standard speech even more. Even students who aren't rendered actively hostile to the idea will most likely have more trouble remembering a series of rules about "correct" usage than they would if they were learning standard English by immersion and allowing their language-learning faculties to kick in. Reading a lot of decent prose would have a better chance of engraining the patterns of standard English ( ... )

Reply

stolen_tea March 28 2005, 18:05:21 UTC
Yeah, that's pretty much what I'd say. No one likes to be told that something as fundamental as their speech pattern is "wrong", especially if it's what their family and friends use.

Reply

digitalemur April 5 2005, 18:22:17 UTC
Whoa. I forgot you were a Scazling.

I think I just made up a word. Is there a better one for students of the Scaz? We should come up with one.

Reply

faendryl April 5 2005, 20:28:50 UTC
Scasselites? Nicoherders? (Were you once a student of his?)

Reply

fionnidhke March 28 2005, 17:04:15 UTC
Heh. Argue can I not ( ... )

Reply


Leave a comment

Up