I’m absolutely not an expert and not qualified here. But if we accept that you’re 100% right and need way more broad options, is it even possible to solve this at scale? (I’m assuming we’re all talking about the US since our education is atrocious). 350M Americans spread out across 3.5M sq miles - only smaller in landmass than China, Canada, and Russia, but with substantially LESS uninhabitable land and a relatively large population. That means our population density is nearly ¼ of China’s.
How many different learning styles do we support? Do they each get their own tailored schools, each with their own full staff? How do you equally support the 1/5 of the country (60M+) that live in all those spread out rural communities? And what time scale can we even fix this problem on, understanding that we’re in the midst of a teacher shortage as it is?
I think proper spending on education absolutely is part of this equation, but someone will have to gut our military spending, so that’s hurdle number one. But regardless, tax dollars being a limited resource… I wonder how much spending doing this right would cost. For a full educational overhaul.
you can’t accommodate everyone. one of the biggest problems with our current education system is exactly that we are doing this and it’s gutting education.
people are going to fail. they need to fail. that is how they learn. some people are smarter, faster, stronger than others, and we need to celebrate that fact rather than pretend it’s an evil to be eliminated.
education is systematically failing because we are trying to squeeze blood from stone. and the expectations on all sides are completely out of whack. but nobody wnats to ‘go back’ to the stuff that worked because it’s considered ‘oppressive’. which was pens, paper, and respect for educators. technology has overwhelmingly been a disaster for education.
We should only support neurodivergent learning styles. The neurotypical kids can just conform or end up in prison; they’re not worth the tax dollars to accommodate, sorry. It’s simply not cost effective, we’ll have to leave them behind.
I’m absolutely not an expert and not qualified here. But if we accept that you’re 100% right and need way more broad options, is it even possible to solve this at scale? (I’m assuming we’re all talking about the US since our education is atrocious). 350M Americans spread out across 3.5M sq miles - only smaller in landmass than China, Canada, and Russia, but with substantially LESS uninhabitable land and a relatively large population. That means our population density is nearly ¼ of China’s.
How many different learning styles do we support? Do they each get their own tailored schools, each with their own full staff? How do you equally support the 1/5 of the country (60M+) that live in all those spread out rural communities? And what time scale can we even fix this problem on, understanding that we’re in the midst of a teacher shortage as it is?
I think proper spending on education absolutely is part of this equation, but someone will have to gut our military spending, so that’s hurdle number one. But regardless, tax dollars being a limited resource… I wonder how much spending doing this right would cost. For a full educational overhaul.
you can’t accommodate everyone. one of the biggest problems with our current education system is exactly that we are doing this and it’s gutting education.
people are going to fail. they need to fail. that is how they learn. some people are smarter, faster, stronger than others, and we need to celebrate that fact rather than pretend it’s an evil to be eliminated.
education is systematically failing because we are trying to squeeze blood from stone. and the expectations on all sides are completely out of whack. but nobody wnats to ‘go back’ to the stuff that worked because it’s considered ‘oppressive’. which was pens, paper, and respect for educators. technology has overwhelmingly been a disaster for education.
We should only support neurodivergent learning styles. The neurotypical kids can just conform or end up in prison; they’re not worth the tax dollars to accommodate, sorry. It’s simply not cost effective, we’ll have to leave them behind.