I think apathy certainly has a lot to do with teenagers' terrible performance.
About ten years ago, I was doing that baby-egg social responsibility dynamic.
By the end of the month in wich we had to care for the egg, only 5 of us presented theirs, the rest of the class got failed.
Five years ago, one of my sisters did the same dynamic, once again only a handful of eggs survived.
Now last year my youngest sister had to take care of her own egg, and by the end, only two people in a group of 30 had the egg.
I cheated keeping my egg in a padded, covered cradle, it was impossible for it to break.
My first sister's kept her egg under vigilance and care, and still managed to do whatever else she had to, after all, it's a ☺☺☺☺ing inanimated object, it's not like it's looking forward to break at any second.
And finaly, my youngest sister just replaced her egg when it got squashed by a bully *****.
That dynamic has always been one of the easiest A's in highschool, yet an inmense amount of kids, year after year fail the egg test, why? Because they simply don't care, many manage to keep the damn egg there the whole month and still not present it on evaluation day because they don't care.
That is the problem.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Yes sir, I take fantasy art and character design commissions, PM me for rates.
English is an evolving language, it always has been and it always will be. To deny that is just being narrow minded.
Classics are not always going to be classics. A lot of the books I read when I was in high school aren't taught anymore, because they really have no impact on society anymore.
Maybe because each succesive generation had access to more knowledge. The twentieth century explosion was bound to happen after our accumulated knowledge reached a critical mass. But Im not sure we can say or know if our actual intellect has been going up. Sure some people, through thier environment and other stimuli, can develope increased problem solving skills. Dont know if they have been passing it on to their kids though.
EDIT:Saw your edit and completely agree. Again though, intelligence =/=knowledge
A higher point is one of wisdom where your accumulated knowledge, experience, natural talent, and developed talent merge with good decision making to get the best outcome for a situation relative to that which is under your actual true control.
The issue I find is that some youth have really great impulses toward to marvelous ideas and concepts, however us as a society believe that "children are too stupid to handle it" or feel threatened by precociousness. I'm saying society here, not just "the schools" which I feel get blamed way too much and
given too little credit trying to fulfill an overbloaded agenda. Some children do not belong in what we make our high schools to be, and some even belong in college or dare I say owning their own business and working.
Frankly, this is why I like the German system the best the children are placed into technical school and academic school. There's no worrying about trying to pass something like English literature for someone that wants to be in the trades, instead their education is one to scale where they learn more technical skills in place of that.
Furthermore, individual efforts to talk about "misguided youth" but people that stand to be able to reach these kids and teach them stuff by working with them don't do anything. If a kid has to make money, teach him how to make money the real way and not work for wage-slavery at McDonalds and have him or her make their down damn business.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Ambition must be made to counteract ambition.
Individualities may form communities, but it is institutions alone that can create a nation.
Nothing succeeds like the appearance of success.
Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle.
A higher point is one of wisdom where your accumulated knowledge, experience, natural talent, and developed talent merge with good decision making to get the best outcome for a situation relative to that which is under your actual true control.
YES! thank you.
Wouldn't a broader knowledge make someone more intelligent?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Standard
Get'r Dungrove (Friday July 6th - Friday September 21st)
TYPE 2: Best Builds
:symw::symg:Township Tokens 19-8-0 (ret. 2/24/12) Mono Green Eldrazi 22-8-1 (ret. 10/1/10)
I have seen nothing but anecdotal evidence in this thread. But I have seen no evidence that shows a declining in the average Intelligence of a Teenager. Really show me some form of evidence. Right now it seems that you think people are stupider because people seemed smarter when you were 17. And some people seem to be forgeting that there have always been people who's stupidity shows no bounds.
Also you have to remember that a huge change in the way we look at information has happened over the past 5 years. The prevalence of the internet has changed the importance of knowing facts and trivia off the top of your head.
If I want to know about the
My point is, show me some evidence that people are getting stupider.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
That's the remarkable thing about life. It's never so bad that it can't get worse
Calvin and Hobbes Cube Tutor
Wouldn't a broader knowledge make someone more intelligent?
I've had this discussion over many times with educators, but the basic point I come to is to educate to scale with a clearly defined goals and set limits. When those limits are unable to be met by educators, it is up to the society to offer alternatives. Some of the alternatives aren't all that bad really, such as after school apprenticeships and working at an early age in something that the child can really relate to.
I'm very much against a "well rounded education" that is so preeminent in today's mantra, rather it is not so much what the children know but whether they can glide through different thought formats themselves and synthesize materials outside on their own time to further specialize their skill sets and get a professional level of synthesis and mastery.
Exposure breeds generalists to a wide array of ideas, but for true synthesis and mastery necessary for many real world occupations requires hours be dedicated to honing those skills. We simply do not think to scale to engage our youth in our own adult culture. We use them as food servants and other low rung jobs and seek them out as consumers to buy the products we make or sell or have them sell. Yet, while true genius is rather rare, some of the wealthiest and most socially successful people I know are rather ordinary or dare I say some downright odd. Yet, they all share some very mundane qualities along with the ability to engage with the culture at large to which we deny our youth for the most part.
From all the history I've read, people I've talked to, the only thing I have come down to is that its all about drudgery, self discipline, and above that a culture of inclusive connectivity to other people and resources to get things done with a meaningful experience. And frankly sir, that's not something we do in our individualistic society very much.
I've noticed the decay of basic speech abilities first hand. my ex is going on a 9 day trip with his family to Hawaii.
he spelled it, 'hawiiwii.'
he's 20 years old this December.
*facepalm of the north star*
as far as kids not being interested in history, it's all in the teaching method. you have to find a hook within the story, something that captures their attention. that opens the door, then you pull them into the rest.
Take your monoblack deck, then set aside 14 swamps. Add 4 Creeping Tar Pits, 4 Darkslick Shores, 4 Drowned Catacombs, and 2 Jwar isle Refuge and add 4 Jace, the Mindsculptors. Your monoblack deck is instantly better. Better yet, drop those refuges, throw in some islands and some mana leaks, and lo and behold, you're now playing a real deck. Congratulations. Welcome to the world of competitive M:TG.
It should be noted that while we criticize others of apparently "dumb mother *******" statements we are not necessarily any better when misspeaking, doing something when not in a proper state of mind, or things we have simply skipped over.
Not knowing about Gulliver's Travels or anything isn't really that big of a deal in my opinion, it isn't a topic that was ever covered in my school system (we focused on other works) so I don't see any issue with not having known about it. Not to mention that said person must learn about Gulliver's travels from somewhere, why wouldn't it be in an English classroom? Are all your students expected to have prior knowledge to the course materials?
To be honest, I've read the great novels and I really don't think they're THAT amazing or spectacular. Yeah they're good reads but I wouldn't go out on a Sunday and plan to read some Moby Dick. Honestly, now that the internet is commonly accessible kids who don't find excitement in books can find it from something else.
Maybe it's not as "intellectual" in your opinion to not pursue or be greatly taken back by the quality of the "classics" but rather complete values dissonance and the inability to understand different types of personalities. Now that knowledge can be gained in so many ways in modern society it seems archaic to me to think that anyone who doesn't take the same interest in something you enjoy is some how an "ignorant person" connotatively (denotatively they technically are).
I used to really enjoy reading as a kid, but I discovered video games and computers and found them to be far more fascinating. I looked to other mediums for entertainment and enlightenment. That's how I ended up as a computer science major. I honestly couldn't care-less about the classics, yeah i respect them for what they are and I understand what others find in them, but i personally haven't read a novel in over 3 years and i really don't care to.
Not everybody has the same ambitions/interests, somebody of equal intelligence may loathe what you consider to be pure art, you just have to deal with the differences in preferences that modern society allows for.
Reading books is great for character but it isn't going to help you get a job.
Being able to use technology effectively will get you a job faster than having Gulliver's Travels under your belt. That's just for when you already have a job, and need something to discuss around the water cooler or on facebook.
The critical skills for today's employers are not the same ones you or I had to have. Nobody cares how you spell a word these days, just as long as you are friendly, energetic, and a good multitasker. That's what spell check is for. It's yet another tool people use to free their minds from the minor tyrannies of grammar and spelling, so they can have a better phone presence and pay more attention to the soft skills, the more important part of a person's portfolio as far as holding down a job and contributing to the team.
I honestly have no idea how reading classic novels helps anybody. If it's something that one enjoys doing, by all means get a complete collection of Shakespeare's works. But for the rest of us, who cares? If I know more about video games or about baseball or about celebrities or about whatever may peak my intrest, why does that make me such a bad person?
And what is so important about spelling anyway? I'm a pretty bad speller for my intelligence level, but nobody knows it. Spell check covers my ass just fine.
Now I'll admit, there are lots of stupid, uneducated teenagers out there. But this isn't anything new. For every student that is smarter than the average student, there will be a student who is dumber than the average student. There have always been stupid people and there will always be stupid people.
I honestly have no idea how reading classic novels helps anybody. If it's something that one enjoys doing, by all means get a complete collection of Shakespeare's works. But for the rest of us, who cares? If I know more about video games or about baseball or about celebrities or about whatever may peak my intrest, why does that make me such a bad person?
And what is so important about spelling anyway? I'm a pretty bad speller for my intelligence level, but nobody knows it. Spell check covers my ass just fine.
Now I'll admit, there are lots of stupid, uneducated teenagers out there. But this isn't anything new. For every student that is smarter than the average student, there will be a student who is dumber than the average student. There have always been stupid people and there will always be stupid people.
Classic novels actual hold a pretty diverse vocabulary, a lot of which is lost in modern day society.
Classic novels hold the vocabulary of poets, revolutionaries, dreamers and adventurers. There is a lot to take from such books, this is just an example.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
UB - Tezzerator 2.0 - UB
8-3-0
(Decklist and blog updated 4/11/2011)
"Fun fact about me: I home brew my buddies meta deck. He went from having a much lower ranking then me to a significantly higher rating since I started doing this."
I honestly have no idea how reading classic novels helps anybody. If it's something that one enjoys doing, by all means get a complete collection of Shakespeare's works. But for the rest of us, who cares? If I know more about video games or about baseball or about celebrities or about whatever may peak my intrest, why does that make me such a bad person?
And what is so important about spelling anyway? I'm a pretty bad speller for my intelligence level, but nobody knows it. Spell check covers my ass just fine.
Now I'll admit, there are lots of stupid, uneducated teenagers out there. But this isn't anything new. For every student that is smarter than the average student, there will be a student who is dumber than the average student. There have always been stupid people and there will always be stupid people.
There are far too many "classics" thus it is difficult to be familiar with them all and certainly there are some that will simply not appeal to particular people. That's fine.
However, the point is that most works become considered "classics" for a reason. They tend to deal with themes, motifs and emotions that are fundamental parts of the human condition.
Being well versed in literature is beneficial insofar as it encourages introspection, develops critical thinking skills and expands literacy. These are not necessarily the most marketable skills but they are certainly marketable.
In any event, I disagree with the concept that education must be undertaken solely for economic benefit. Life isn't just about getting the best job.
As human beings, we want to discover the secrets of the universe, live and act ethically, share love and companionship with others, and reach a level of self actualization. Literature is a wonderful tool for that.
Source? How did they measure the problem solvinng skills of Imohtep and Alexander the Great?
We've come a long way in a lot of fields of understanding.
Mathematics, for example. It took us FOREVER to get to where we are now. Calculus is very recent compared to human history, which opened up a whole plethora of capabilities. Long division was nigh impossible until a few hundred years ago, and now second graders can do it.
I'm not sure about people being clever, but a high school graduate knows more than some of the most educated men from two hundred years ago.
I just graduated from high school, going to college at UC Berkley next year to study Biochem/cell bio. I have seen quite a few references between a person's intelligence and their ability to spell and I find it utterly ridiculous. Just because you can't spell a word doesn't make you a degenerate. I can teach any 2nd grader how to spell any word with enough time, but I cannot teach him to understand the meaning of that word and apply it within some context. Similar to what everyone has said, knowledge is not intelligence, and spelling is simply knowledge. Do you know it or don't you. It sure is funny to laugh at, but I don't believe that it is a measure of intelligence in any regard.
English is an evolving language, it always has been and it always will be. To deny that is just being narrow minded.
Classics are not always going to be classics. A lot of the books I read when I was in high school aren't taught anymore, because they really have no impact on society anymore.
Just because theyre not being taught doesnt take away their "classicness". Which is at the core of this discussion. At anyrate, its not just the time and place of the book's setting that they are read for. Moby Dick's message is just as relevant today, even if no one is on a whaling boat throwing harpoons at whales anymore.
My point is, show me some evidence that people are getting stupider.
No ones getting stupider and noone is claiming that. A missusage of the word 'intelligence' in the op is now plagueing this thread. The claim should be "they are getting less educated/knowledgeable."
Classic novels actual hold a pretty diverse vocabulary, a lot of which is lost in modern day society.
Classic novels hold the vocabulary of poets, revolutionaries, dreamers and adventurers. There is a lot to take from such books, this is just an example.
There are far too many "classics" thus it is difficult to be familiar with them all and certainly there are some that will simply not appeal to particular people. That's fine.
However, the point is that most works become considered "classics" for a reason. They tend to deal with themes, motifs and emotions that are fundamental parts of the human condition.
Being well versed in literature is beneficial insofar as it encourages introspection, develops critical thinking skills and expands literacy. These are not necessarily the most marketable skills but they are certainly marketable.
In any event, I disagree with the concept that education must be undertaken solely for economic benefit. Life isn't just about getting the best job.
As human beings, we want to discover the secrets of the universe, live and act ethically, share love and companionship with others, and reach a level of self actualization. Literature is a wonderful tool for that.
We've come a long way in a lot of fields of understanding.
Mathematics, for example. It took us FOREVER to get to where we are now. Calculus is very recent compared to human history, which opened up a whole plethora of capabilities. Long division was nigh impossible until a few hundred years ago, and now second graders can do it.
You bring up good points with the mathematics. Long term use of math can boost a persons problem solving skills among other things. As a whole, humanity has a greater knowledge base but are we correctly and proportionately conveying it to the next genereation? In the end most kids will never do any math after learning it and then it just has become acumulated knowledge as opposed to something done repeatedly and helps sharpen their minds.
I'm not sure about people being clever, but a high school graduate knows more than some of the most educated men from two hundred years ago.
This im highly dubious off. Granted the skill base would be vastly different but I believe you are severly underestimating our ancestors. They might have access to more 'advanced' knowledge in certain areas. But more total knowledge?
No ones getting stupider and noone is claiming that. A missusage of the word 'intelligence' in the op is now plagueing this thread. The claim should be "they are getting less educated/knowledgeable."
Yes, I've taken responsibility for the misuse of the word. Basically, I was frustrated because kids tend to shrug off the classics (literature as well as films) as being dull and boring. As a former teacher, I tried my best to make these things interesting and appealing to them as they were to me when I was at that age.
For the most part, I met some bright kids, some of whom I was happy to hear that they have read/experienced great artistic works.
Its a shame because so much useless contemporary nonsense has eclipsed all the works of old.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Standard
Get'r Dungrove (Friday July 6th - Friday September 21st)
TYPE 2: Best Builds
:symw::symg:Township Tokens 19-8-0 (ret. 2/24/12) Mono Green Eldrazi 22-8-1 (ret. 10/1/10)
@Duce: Maybe if you get another teaching position, some in-class comparisons between older and newer books/films would help fill your classics quota and satisfy the kids apparent 'need' for newer stuff. I guess in the interest of time you would have to stick to shorter books with such an exercise (Silas Marner as opposed to War and Peace).
@Duce: Maybe if you get another teaching position, some in-class comparisons between older and newer books/films would help fill your classics quota and satisfy the kids apparent 'need' for newer stuff. I guess in the interest of time you would have to stick to shorter books with such an exercise (Silas Marner as opposed to War and Peace).
Yeah, I agree. The students got a kick out of Poe, but depending on the school, we have to follow a particular curriculum, so I don't have the leeway of picking what to use in class.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Standard
Get'r Dungrove (Friday July 6th - Friday September 21st)
TYPE 2: Best Builds
:symw::symg:Township Tokens 19-8-0 (ret. 2/24/12) Mono Green Eldrazi 22-8-1 (ret. 10/1/10)
Yes, I've taken responsibility for the misuse of the word. Basically, I was frustrated because kids tend to shrug off the classics (literature as well as films) as being dull and boring. As a former teacher, I tried my best to make these things interesting and appealing to them as they were to me when I was at that age.
Times change, and with them do interests. Just because people today do not have the same interests as you did when you were their age, it doesn't mean they are less knowledgeable. Do not forget that English literature is not the alpha and omega of someone's education.
Its a shame because so much useless contemporary nonsense has eclipsed all the works of old.
This comes very close to falling into the fallacious thought that nothing good can be made any more.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
We have laboured long to build a heaven, only to find it populated with horrors.
This thread has just become a list of people defending the position of the OP by stroking the ego of the Arts. Regardless of what the thread title should be, it's not the ignorance vs. lack of intelligence that matters here. We all know what you meant.
You are saying teenagers are losing out on life be showing apathy or simply choosing ignorance of classic literature. That in itself is a stupid thing to say. Look at every defense of the arts here (these are just examples):
Yes, but when people learn only the things they need to work their job, such as engineering, all they can do is engineer. They become ants in a meaningless world. Without sociology and literature, life wouldn't serve any purpose other than surviving. Without art, math and science have no purpose.
Being well versed in literature is beneficial insofar as it encourages introspection, develops critical thinking skills and expands literacy. These are not necessarily the most marketable skills but they are certainly marketable.
In any event, I disagree with the concept that education must be undertaken solely for economic benefit. Life isn't just about getting the best job.
As human beings, we want to discover the secrets of the universe, live and act ethically, share love and companionship with others, and reach a level of self actualization. Literature is a wonderful tool for that.
Nothing said here can be remotely proven true, and are based entirely on the assumption that a lack of interest in reading severely limits the potential of a person; even if it does not limit their ability to say become a mechanic.
It's all good to laud the great artistic accomplishments all you want, but memorizing an Incomplete Education only ups your chances in Jeopardy an nothing more.
Eduction is about getting a job. Period. The end goal of an education is to be adequately prepared for a professional career in society. The knowledge of the arts is in the exact same place as mathematics. Most people do not need to use advanced math later in life, and most people don't need to use a comprehension of literature later in life. A basic knowledge of both is important (such as reading, writing, fractions, fractions, etc.), but anything more means nothing later in life.
The point is that having a comprehensive knowledge of both simply means you wasted a lot of your time in getting an education to pursue personal interests. That is fine, but only when it's not mandatory - which is currently is. If students had more freedom to choose an education fitting to their academic, personal, and professional interests then they would lose the real emotion you experience in teenagers: apathy.
This thread has just become a list of people defending the position of the OP by stroking the ego of the Arts.
I have to agree with this sentiment. I ju-
Eduction is about getting a job. Period. The end goal of an education is to be adequately prepared for a professional career in society.
Waitwhat? No! Education should be given for the sake of education. Sure, you don't need to know advanced mathematics, but having a broad knowledge base increases your ability to reason, and come up with solutions. I do belief that knowing more does make you a better person.
And yes, this knowledge could be of classic novels, but it doesn't have to be. It could be knowledge of any subject a person prefers.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
We have laboured long to build a heaven, only to find it populated with horrors.
Reading less does not make me any less intelligent than the generation before me. The problem with books now is that they are not written as well as they used to be. Hell, some half-wit can jot down a few gushy words and random violence, stick the word "vampire" in it, and make millions! However, this generation would rather not read novels that are no longer relevant. The Great Gatsby is a very well-written book. However, I don't care for it in the least. It satirizes issues that have long since been extinguished from thought.
Maybe you're being too critical of your students and not critical enough on their previous pedagogues(from the Latin root paedagogus, paedagogi, btw). Perhaps they were not making learning accessible for their students. I, personally, would enjoy novels a lot more if I could read them online. In fact, that's the reason I actually somewhat enjoyed The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. Our teachers put an online copy onto the website, complete with narration.
The biggest issue is that teenagers won't go out of their way to do things that neither entertain them nor are required. If teachers made learning vocabulary and reading the assigned books more important to the class, I'm sure the students would pick up on things a lot more easily. You seem so inclined to blame it on the students when, in actuality, much of the blame rests on the shoulders of those whose jobs depend on making sure that their students learn the material.
P.S. It's also rather fallacious to call your generation smarter than mine. After all, your generation contains Glenn Beck.
If students had more freedom to choose an education fitting to their academic, personal, and professional interests then they would lose the real emotion you experience in teenagers: apathy.
If they had this freedom, what do you think would occur?
How many high school students actually LIKE or WANT to be there?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Standard
Get'r Dungrove (Friday July 6th - Friday September 21st)
TYPE 2: Best Builds
:symw::symg:Township Tokens 19-8-0 (ret. 2/24/12) Mono Green Eldrazi 22-8-1 (ret. 10/1/10)
I think that in no way am I any less intelligent than the generation before me.
Hell, I would go as far as to say that I am more intelligent than half the people in the generation before me. Those people have trouble deciding what they want for themselves; and listen to the radio or TV talk and tell them what they should think about the world.
About the OP: Part of the issue is that your "classics" have absolutely no relevance anymore. Books like, as mentioned above, The Great Gatsby, are well-written, but don't have the same resonance with people that they did; simply because the issue is relatively nonexistant.
For instance, I loved Clockwork Orange and 1984(Even the book within the book). The reason? They mean something still.
I hated Utopia. Go figure.
For reference, I'm 16, going into Junior year.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
xTrainx for those who know me on the Source.
Quote from Maxeel »
Get onboard. Join MTGO today. Play anytime you want. No pants required...
Hell, I would go as far as to say that I am more intelligent than half the people in the generation before me. Those people have trouble deciding what they want for themselves; and listen to the radio or TV talk and tell them what they should think about the world.
Same could be said of half the people in this generation, just from other sources (replace radio with internet).
About ten years ago, I was doing that baby-egg social responsibility dynamic.
By the end of the month in wich we had to care for the egg, only 5 of us presented theirs, the rest of the class got failed.
Five years ago, one of my sisters did the same dynamic, once again only a handful of eggs survived.
Now last year my youngest sister had to take care of her own egg, and by the end, only two people in a group of 30 had the egg.
I cheated keeping my egg in a padded, covered cradle, it was impossible for it to break.
My first sister's kept her egg under vigilance and care, and still managed to do whatever else she had to, after all, it's a ☺☺☺☺ing inanimated object, it's not like it's looking forward to break at any second.
And finaly, my youngest sister just replaced her egg when it got squashed by a bully *****.
That dynamic has always been one of the easiest A's in highschool, yet an inmense amount of kids, year after year fail the egg test, why? Because they simply don't care, many manage to keep the damn egg there the whole month and still not present it on evaluation day because they don't care.
That is the problem.
Classics are not always going to be classics. A lot of the books I read when I was in high school aren't taught anymore, because they really have no impact on society anymore.
A higher point is one of wisdom where your accumulated knowledge, experience, natural talent, and developed talent merge with good decision making to get the best outcome for a situation relative to that which is under your actual true control.
The issue I find is that some youth have really great impulses toward to marvelous ideas and concepts, however us as a society believe that "children are too stupid to handle it" or feel threatened by precociousness. I'm saying society here, not just "the schools" which I feel get blamed way too much and
given too little credit trying to fulfill an overbloaded agenda. Some children do not belong in what we make our high schools to be, and some even belong in college or dare I say owning their own business and working.
Frankly, this is why I like the German system the best the children are placed into technical school and academic school. There's no worrying about trying to pass something like English literature for someone that wants to be in the trades, instead their education is one to scale where they learn more technical skills in place of that.
Furthermore, individual efforts to talk about "misguided youth" but people that stand to be able to reach these kids and teach them stuff by working with them don't do anything. If a kid has to make money, teach him how to make money the real way and not work for wage-slavery at McDonalds and have him or her make their down damn business.
Ambition must be made to counteract ambition.
Individualities may form communities, but it is institutions alone that can create a nation.
Nothing succeeds like the appearance of success.
Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle.
YES! thank you.
Wouldn't a broader knowledge make someone more intelligent?
Get'r Dungrove (Friday July 6th - Friday September 21st)
TYPE 2: Best Builds
:symw::symg:Township Tokens 19-8-0 (ret. 2/24/12)
Mono Green Eldrazi 22-8-1 (ret. 10/1/10)
2012 Standard Platinum TCQ - Lowell, MA: Top 20
2012 MaxPoint TCG Open 5k - Providence: Top 35
Also you have to remember that a huge change in the way we look at information has happened over the past 5 years. The prevalence of the internet has changed the importance of knowing facts and trivia off the top of your head.
If I want to know about the
My point is, show me some evidence that people are getting stupider.
Calvin and Hobbes
Cube Tutor
I've had this discussion over many times with educators, but the basic point I come to is to educate to scale with a clearly defined goals and set limits. When those limits are unable to be met by educators, it is up to the society to offer alternatives. Some of the alternatives aren't all that bad really, such as after school apprenticeships and working at an early age in something that the child can really relate to.
I'm very much against a "well rounded education" that is so preeminent in today's mantra, rather it is not so much what the children know but whether they can glide through different thought formats themselves and synthesize materials outside on their own time to further specialize their skill sets and get a professional level of synthesis and mastery.
Exposure breeds generalists to a wide array of ideas, but for true synthesis and mastery necessary for many real world occupations requires hours be dedicated to honing those skills. We simply do not think to scale to engage our youth in our own adult culture. We use them as food servants and other low rung jobs and seek them out as consumers to buy the products we make or sell or have them sell. Yet, while true genius is rather rare, some of the wealthiest and most socially successful people I know are rather ordinary or dare I say some downright odd. Yet, they all share some very mundane qualities along with the ability to engage with the culture at large to which we deny our youth for the most part.
From all the history I've read, people I've talked to, the only thing I have come down to is that its all about drudgery, self discipline, and above that a culture of inclusive connectivity to other people and resources to get things done with a meaningful experience. And frankly sir, that's not something we do in our individualistic society very much.
Ambition must be made to counteract ambition.
Individualities may form communities, but it is institutions alone that can create a nation.
Nothing succeeds like the appearance of success.
Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle.
he spelled it, 'hawiiwii.'
he's 20 years old this December.
*facepalm of the north star*
as far as kids not being interested in history, it's all in the teaching method. you have to find a hook within the story, something that captures their attention. that opens the door, then you pull them into the rest.
Not knowing about Gulliver's Travels or anything isn't really that big of a deal in my opinion, it isn't a topic that was ever covered in my school system (we focused on other works) so I don't see any issue with not having known about it. Not to mention that said person must learn about Gulliver's travels from somewhere, why wouldn't it be in an English classroom? Are all your students expected to have prior knowledge to the course materials?
To be honest, I've read the great novels and I really don't think they're THAT amazing or spectacular. Yeah they're good reads but I wouldn't go out on a Sunday and plan to read some Moby Dick. Honestly, now that the internet is commonly accessible kids who don't find excitement in books can find it from something else.
Maybe it's not as "intellectual" in your opinion to not pursue or be greatly taken back by the quality of the "classics" but rather complete values dissonance and the inability to understand different types of personalities. Now that knowledge can be gained in so many ways in modern society it seems archaic to me to think that anyone who doesn't take the same interest in something you enjoy is some how an "ignorant person" connotatively (denotatively they technically are).
I used to really enjoy reading as a kid, but I discovered video games and computers and found them to be far more fascinating. I looked to other mediums for entertainment and enlightenment. That's how I ended up as a computer science major. I honestly couldn't care-less about the classics, yeah i respect them for what they are and I understand what others find in them, but i personally haven't read a novel in over 3 years and i really don't care to.
Not everybody has the same ambitions/interests, somebody of equal intelligence may loathe what you consider to be pure art, you just have to deal with the differences in preferences that modern society allows for.
Being able to use technology effectively will get you a job faster than having Gulliver's Travels under your belt. That's just for when you already have a job, and need something to discuss around the water cooler or on facebook.
The critical skills for today's employers are not the same ones you or I had to have. Nobody cares how you spell a word these days, just as long as you are friendly, energetic, and a good multitasker. That's what spell check is for. It's yet another tool people use to free their minds from the minor tyrannies of grammar and spelling, so they can have a better phone presence and pay more attention to the soft skills, the more important part of a person's portfolio as far as holding down a job and contributing to the team.
And what is so important about spelling anyway? I'm a pretty bad speller for my intelligence level, but nobody knows it. Spell check covers my ass just fine.
Now I'll admit, there are lots of stupid, uneducated teenagers out there. But this isn't anything new. For every student that is smarter than the average student, there will be a student who is dumber than the average student. There have always been stupid people and there will always be stupid people.
You can find me on MTGO. My username is gereffi.
Classic novels actual hold a pretty diverse vocabulary, a lot of which is lost in modern day society.
Classic novels hold the vocabulary of poets, revolutionaries, dreamers and adventurers. There is a lot to take from such books, this is just an example.
UB - Tezzerator 2.0 - UB
8-3-0
(Decklist and blog updated 4/11/2011)
"Fun fact about me: I home brew my buddies meta deck. He went from having a much lower ranking then me to a significantly higher rating since I started doing this."
There are far too many "classics" thus it is difficult to be familiar with them all and certainly there are some that will simply not appeal to particular people. That's fine.
However, the point is that most works become considered "classics" for a reason. They tend to deal with themes, motifs and emotions that are fundamental parts of the human condition.
Being well versed in literature is beneficial insofar as it encourages introspection, develops critical thinking skills and expands literacy. These are not necessarily the most marketable skills but they are certainly marketable.
In any event, I disagree with the concept that education must be undertaken solely for economic benefit. Life isn't just about getting the best job.
As human beings, we want to discover the secrets of the universe, live and act ethically, share love and companionship with others, and reach a level of self actualization. Literature is a wonderful tool for that.
We've come a long way in a lot of fields of understanding.
Mathematics, for example. It took us FOREVER to get to where we are now. Calculus is very recent compared to human history, which opened up a whole plethora of capabilities. Long division was nigh impossible until a few hundred years ago, and now second graders can do it.
I'm not sure about people being clever, but a high school graduate knows more than some of the most educated men from two hundred years ago.
Just because theyre not being taught doesnt take away their "classicness". Which is at the core of this discussion. At anyrate, its not just the time and place of the book's setting that they are read for. Moby Dick's message is just as relevant today, even if no one is on a whaling boat throwing harpoons at whales anymore.
No ones getting stupider and noone is claiming that. A missusage of the word 'intelligence' in the op is now plagueing this thread. The claim should be "they are getting less educated/knowledgeable."
^This
^and so much of this
You bring up good points with the mathematics. Long term use of math can boost a persons problem solving skills among other things. As a whole, humanity has a greater knowledge base but are we correctly and proportionately conveying it to the next genereation? In the end most kids will never do any math after learning it and then it just has become acumulated knowledge as opposed to something done repeatedly and helps sharpen their minds.
This im highly dubious off. Granted the skill base would be vastly different but I believe you are severly underestimating our ancestors. They might have access to more 'advanced' knowledge in certain areas. But more total knowledge?
Yes, I've taken responsibility for the misuse of the word. Basically, I was frustrated because kids tend to shrug off the classics (literature as well as films) as being dull and boring. As a former teacher, I tried my best to make these things interesting and appealing to them as they were to me when I was at that age.
For the most part, I met some bright kids, some of whom I was happy to hear that they have read/experienced great artistic works.
Its a shame because so much useless contemporary nonsense has eclipsed all the works of old.
Get'r Dungrove (Friday July 6th - Friday September 21st)
TYPE 2: Best Builds
:symw::symg:Township Tokens 19-8-0 (ret. 2/24/12)
Mono Green Eldrazi 22-8-1 (ret. 10/1/10)
2012 Standard Platinum TCQ - Lowell, MA: Top 20
2012 MaxPoint TCG Open 5k - Providence: Top 35
Yeah, I agree. The students got a kick out of Poe, but depending on the school, we have to follow a particular curriculum, so I don't have the leeway of picking what to use in class.
Get'r Dungrove (Friday July 6th - Friday September 21st)
TYPE 2: Best Builds
:symw::symg:Township Tokens 19-8-0 (ret. 2/24/12)
Mono Green Eldrazi 22-8-1 (ret. 10/1/10)
2012 Standard Platinum TCQ - Lowell, MA: Top 20
2012 MaxPoint TCG Open 5k - Providence: Top 35
Times change, and with them do interests. Just because people today do not have the same interests as you did when you were their age, it doesn't mean they are less knowledgeable. Do not forget that English literature is not the alpha and omega of someone's education.
This comes very close to falling into the fallacious thought that nothing good can be made any more.
You are saying teenagers are losing out on life be showing apathy or simply choosing ignorance of classic literature. That in itself is a stupid thing to say. Look at every defense of the arts here (these are just examples): Nothing said here can be remotely proven true, and are based entirely on the assumption that a lack of interest in reading severely limits the potential of a person; even if it does not limit their ability to say become a mechanic.
It's all good to laud the great artistic accomplishments all you want, but memorizing an Incomplete Education only ups your chances in Jeopardy an nothing more.
Eduction is about getting a job. Period. The end goal of an education is to be adequately prepared for a professional career in society. The knowledge of the arts is in the exact same place as mathematics. Most people do not need to use advanced math later in life, and most people don't need to use a comprehension of literature later in life. A basic knowledge of both is important (such as reading, writing, fractions, fractions, etc.), but anything more means nothing later in life.
The point is that having a comprehensive knowledge of both simply means you wasted a lot of your time in getting an education to pursue personal interests. That is fine, but only when it's not mandatory - which is currently is. If students had more freedom to choose an education fitting to their academic, personal, and professional interests then they would lose the real emotion you experience in teenagers: apathy.
I have to agree with this sentiment. I ju-
Waitwhat? No! Education should be given for the sake of education. Sure, you don't need to know advanced mathematics, but having a broad knowledge base increases your ability to reason, and come up with solutions. I do belief that knowing more does make you a better person.
And yes, this knowledge could be of classic novels, but it doesn't have to be. It could be knowledge of any subject a person prefers.
Maybe you're being too critical of your students and not critical enough on their previous pedagogues(from the Latin root paedagogus, paedagogi, btw). Perhaps they were not making learning accessible for their students. I, personally, would enjoy novels a lot more if I could read them online. In fact, that's the reason I actually somewhat enjoyed The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. Our teachers put an online copy onto the website, complete with narration.
The biggest issue is that teenagers won't go out of their way to do things that neither entertain them nor are required. If teachers made learning vocabulary and reading the assigned books more important to the class, I'm sure the students would pick up on things a lot more easily. You seem so inclined to blame it on the students when, in actuality, much of the blame rests on the shoulders of those whose jobs depend on making sure that their students learn the material.
P.S. It's also rather fallacious to call your generation smarter than mine. After all, your generation contains Glenn Beck.
If they had this freedom, what do you think would occur?
How many high school students actually LIKE or WANT to be there?
Get'r Dungrove (Friday July 6th - Friday September 21st)
TYPE 2: Best Builds
:symw::symg:Township Tokens 19-8-0 (ret. 2/24/12)
Mono Green Eldrazi 22-8-1 (ret. 10/1/10)
2012 Standard Platinum TCQ - Lowell, MA: Top 20
2012 MaxPoint TCG Open 5k - Providence: Top 35
Hell, I would go as far as to say that I am more intelligent than half the people in the generation before me. Those people have trouble deciding what they want for themselves; and listen to the radio or TV talk and tell them what they should think about the world.
About the OP: Part of the issue is that your "classics" have absolutely no relevance anymore. Books like, as mentioned above, The Great Gatsby, are well-written, but don't have the same resonance with people that they did; simply because the issue is relatively nonexistant.
For instance, I loved Clockwork Orange and 1984(Even the book within the book). The reason? They mean something still.
I hated Utopia. Go figure.
For reference, I'm 16, going into Junior year.
Same could be said of half the people in this generation, just from other sources (replace radio with internet).
My blog.