How practical was our education, really?

conorhal

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

What's essential for life that is currently on the syallabus?
Well, Maths and English unti lthe age of about 14 (if you don't have enough written/reading/maths for average life by then, SOMETHING has gone wrong)
And that's about it.

I'd argue science, but it's not a core subject (although it should be).

Other things like metal/woodwork are useful but not essential. Some others; yes - if you have an interest in doing them professionally.

Everything else is padding.

Ah, that's like saying, 'why doesn't your home consist solely of 4 walls a bed, a chair and a hob? Everything else is padding'.

There's something deeply disturbing to me about the current mind-set that insists education must be shaped to meet the utilitarian purposes of corporate/technocratic work environments, and everything else is just a waste of time.

All that ensures is that we produce a bovine workforce devoid of culture, history or soul that live, work and get buried in a box. It’s an attitude that is as anathema to the human spirit as it is useful to ensuring a compliant citizen-workforce.
It's the fundemental misunderstanding of the difference between 'education' and 'training'.
School is for educating, let your corporate overlords pay for your training.

Edgware

Before the Iron Curtain came down the education system in Eastern Europe was very much geared to include practical skills from primary school years. The idea of self sufficiency drove this approach. Kids were instructed on basic maintenance jobs such as electrical, plumbing and mechanical ones. Kids knew how to wire plugs, unblock kitchen drains, car maintenance etc
I have seen Polish girls here in Ireland in rented accommodation doing stuff like linking up washing machines that most Irish would call a plumber to do.
Certainly a lot of the subjects we were thought was forgotten as soon as the exam was over

gmisk

I found mine pretty useful, but the system in northern Ireland is very different to ROI.
So i did 3 a levels.
Technology, computer studies and biology.

I went onto study computer science, computer studies was terrific at a level and had an excellent teacher.

Wanderer78

We ve placed the world of acedemia on a pedestal in our educational system, it's time to rethink, and remove it from this position, as it's doing a pretty crappy job at preparing people for adulthood

hayoc

Its a pity basic life skills are not included at secondary level.

Things like budgeting, swimming, driving and basic car maintenance, basic cookery (not just for those who take home economics), and the most important of all - critical thinking.

Wanderer78

hayoc wrote:

Things like budgeting, swimming, driving and basic car maintenance, basic cookery (not just for those who take home economics), and the most important of all - critical thinking.

All these should be mandatory for all

Edgware

hayoc wrote: »

Its a pity basic life skills are not included at secondary level.

Things like budgeting, swimming, driving and basic car maintenance, basic cookery (not just for those who take home economics), and the most important of all - critical thinking.

Certainly basic cookery should be taught. We have a lad at work who is "highly educated" He is known as Professor Goodfella because of his dependance on pizzas.
Everyone leaving school should know how to cook basics such as soups, stews, curries etc

hayoc

Edgware wrote: »

Certainly basic cookery should be taught. We have a lad at work who is "highly educated" He is known as Professor Goodfella because of his dependance on pizzas.
Everyone leaving school should know how to cook basics such as soups, stews, curries etc

Absolutely.

Basic sewing is another one - I know people who have thrown out clothes rather than sew a button on!

Rob Humanoid

L1011 wrote: »

Entire system is dysfunctional and the patchwork to try fix it doesn't help. Primary is primarily baby sitting; was brought in to stop young kids getting broken by hard labour and ensure they could read and write; secondary was either designed for pure academia or technical work and nothing in between.

Both systems need to be re-engineered from the ground up; preferably by people who have NEVER worked in education before so they have no affection for anything. No ex-teachers, no ex-administrators. Some bits will be similar; some totally won't.

*Rote learning has to go, in all subjects, in all contexts.
*"that's what the book says" has to go - if a teacher needs to rely on the text book they are not competent to teach the subject.
*Teaching Irish as if it is English has to go, if you want an Irish literature/poetry/commentary subject, bring that in as a subject. An optional one, if you keep Irish as compulsory at all that is.
*Teaching anything technical without showing how it is of use to you has to go. Nearly everything does have a practical use, but it is rarely if ever explained. I'm thinking primarily of maths here.
*Teaching late teenagers as if they are children has to go. If a teacher can't handle that; go back to teaching actual children.



Shakespeare would not meet the definition of an "excellent example" or "good practices".

He's taught purely because he has always been taught.

I think this sums it up very well for me...

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Smacruairi wrote: »

What %of the English course is devoted to Shakespeare? How many marks of a leaving cert paper as a % is ascribed to studying him, if you want to look at it in raw figures?

You didn't enjoy him, that's fine. I personally loved him and I think Hamlet and the idea of prevarication holds up to today, just look at our handling of Covid!

The very fact that we're talking exams and percentages kind of prives that it's not that practical. That's not a practical reason for learnign anything.

conorhal wrote: »

Ah, that's like saying, 'why doesn't your home consist solely of 4 walls a bed, a chair and a hob? Everything else is padding'.

True. But we're talking practical here. What you're describing is decoration.

To take your analogy one step further: it's like everything else in the house is chosen by someone else and they might put in a baby room or a play room when you've got no kids. Is that practical?

Of course, their should be more than just walls; but on what basis does this get chosen?

There's something deeply disturbing to me about the current mind-set that insists education must be shaped to meet the utilitarian purposes of corporate/technocratic work environments, and everything else is just a waste of time.

All that ensures is that we produce a bovine workforce devoid of culture, history or soul that live, work and get buried in a box. It’s an attitude that is as anathema to the human spirit as it is useful to ensuring a compliant citizen-workforce.
It's the fundemental misunderstanding of the difference between 'education' and 'training'.
School is for educating, let your corporate overlords pay for your training.

What do you believe happens more - education or training? And how does the Leaving Cert exam fit in to your opinion?

If the purpose is functionality, what is the function of the exams at the end?

Smacruairi

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

The very fact that we're talking exams and percentages kind of prives that it's not that practical. That's not a practical reason for learnign anything

So you don't know. You just threw out "too much time on Shakespeare" without knowing how long. Grand. Can we discount that argument then?

I used Marks on the paper because your wanted to discuss utilitarianism in schools. I could talk about about specifications, key skills, learning outcomes and intentions instead if you want?

I admire that you want to back up your argument, and I don't want to be contrary, and it's very hard not to sound patronising on an Internet forum, but would you not sit back and say "you know what, I'll have a think on this again, there may be different points of view here".

Can I ask, what would be your definition of "critical thinking". And if you want to have a stab at how you would teach those in your opinion, that would be great.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

I think you might be mixing me up with someone else here.

Smacruairi wrote: »

So you don't know. You just threw out "too much time on Shakespeare" without knowing how long. Grand. Can we discount that argument then?

How are you connecitng percentages on exams with "too much Shakespeare?"

When I clarified my comment about it meaning a range of plays and playwrights rather than just one, you seemed to agree with the post.

I used Marks on the paper because your wanted to discuss utilitarianism in schools. I could talk about about specifications, key skills, learning outcomes and intentions instead if you want?

I admire that you want to back up your argument, and I don't want to be contrary, and it's very hard not to sound patronising on an Internet forum, but would you not sit back and say "you know what, I'll have a think on this again, there may be different points of view here".

Out of interest, what do you think my arguemt actually is? How did you get utilitarism from my posts?

Can I ask, what would be your definition of "critical thinking". And if you want to have a stab at how you would teach those in your opinion, that would be great.

Have I ever used the phrase "critical thinking" in a post?

---
To clarify what my ACTUAL argumenrs were in case you DID mean me:

I said that using percenages and exams marks is not a measure of practicality in eduacation.
I said that there was not emough emphasis on variety in a particular aspect of the English syallabus (plays and playwrights as an elecment of literature).

---

How exactly are you defining the word "practical" in this context?

smellyoldboot

Be fair now lads Shakespeare really is a ball of ****e. Thou thus know it though doesn't thou.

RandomViewer

hayoc wrote: »

Absolutely.

Basic sewing is another one - I know people who have thrown out clothes rather than sew a button on!

Lads , this is basic stuff , you shouldn't need anyone to help you figure how to feed yourself or basic use of a sewing needle

RandomViewer

completedit wrote: »

Why is the LC 2 years? It feels the JC could be condensed and LC cycle extended.

We used to have group, inter and leaving cert, huge numbers left school after Inter cert in 80s
Transition year was then a trades class and few went on to do leaving, would expect repeat of same

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

RandomViewer wrote: »

Lads , this is basic stuff , you shouldn't need anyone to help you figure how to feed yourself or basic use of a sewing needle

To be fair, I think nutritional information shoud be covered.

RandomViewer wrote: »

We used to have group, inter and leaving cert, huge numbers left school after Inter cert in 80s
Transition year was then a trades class and few went on to do leaving, would expect repeat of same

I think he meant JC two years, leaving three; as oppose to the othe way around.

Personally, I'd make it two years plus one year tranisition, plus two again - but transition would need to include more up-to-date skills, such as basic coding and PC skills.

Montage of Feck

I don't agree with having subjects with a very narrow focus such as coding being an individual subject, make it part of technology (JC).

RandomViewer

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

To be fair, I think nutritional information shoud be covered.



I think he meant JC two years, leaving three; as oppose to the othe way around.

Personally, I'd make it two years plus one year tranisition, plus two again - but transition would need to include more up-to-date skills, such as basic coding and PC skills.

PC skills should be taught at National school, coding is so boring you'd have Two thirds of the class mitching it.

LessOutragePlz

Irish schools don't teach you enough practical life skills that will you help you tackle the challenges that adult life brings.

Way too much time wasted on teaching pointless irrelevant things that are soon forgotten once we've finished school.

Gods Gift

It’s a pity we dont come out of the womb stamped with the profession or job we’ll end up in, and our education tailored to it. Instead of having to cover all the bases.

RandomViewer

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

Irish schools don't teach you enough practical life skills that will you help you tackle the challenges that adult life brings.

Way too much time wasted on teaching pointless irrelevant things that are soon forgotten once we've finished school.

You have to give kids a rounded education, art, history and poetry may seem unimportant to you but you have to feed their imagination,
people may moan about smartphones but they've increased literacy levels and knowledge of current affairs ,

sydthebeat

You just have to look at America to see how the lack of education creates a toxic society and how intelligence is viewed with suspicion and hate.

With history, we have to know and understand how we became to be, before we can chart where we want to go in the future. So I view history as a very important subject.

I ended up working in design and construction, so some basic maths formulates have come in handy over the years... Though I could have learned them on the job. Appreciation of art came as more of an osmosis learning than really a practical one, and English learning opened my eyes to different forms of writing and how to appreciate a poem. Baz lurmans romeo and Juliette would have been incoherent mess to me without even a passing understanding of the writing of Shakespeare. I enjoy hearing people use poetry phrases in every day life... "to take the road less travelled"...."all hell broke loose".... "no man is an island"... "all that glitters is not gold".... Etc.

Things we leaned in school stayed with us even if we don't realise

hayoc

RandomViewer wrote: »

Lads , this is basic stuff , you shouldn't need anyone to help you figure how to feed yourself or basic use of a sewing needle

This isnt innate knowledge, some people pick it up at home or from friends. But it must be learned. You dont pop out at birth knowing how to do small things like this.

There are lots of small useful bits of skill or information that are of practical value in life that are not taught at all in school, and it would do no harm to teach it.

Just to be clear, Im not suggesting there is an entire year or even term of sewing skills (or how to feed yourself), but these things could and should be covered in few classes as part of a wider curriculum of practical knowledge.

I have been the "button sewer", "hem shortener", "tear repairer" among my friends since my teens.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

hayoc wrote: »

This isnt innate knowledge, some people pick it up at home or from friends. But it must be learned. You dont pop out at birth knowing how to do small things like this.

There are lots of small useful bits of skill or information that are of practical value in life that are not taught at all in school, and it would do no harm to teach it.

Just to be clear, Im not suggesting there is an entire year or even term of sewing skills (or how to feed yourself), but these things could and should be covered in few classes as part of a wider curriculum of practical knowledge.

I have been the "button sewer", "hem shortener", "tear repairer" among my friends since my teens.

Agree.

So, is reading, writing and basic maths; but there'd be outrage if they were taken out of schools on the asusmption that they were basic skills that someone would just pick up along the way or learn at home.

Earthhorse

Budgeting is nothing more than addition, subtraction and self-discipline. You should have addition and subtraction mastered by the time you leave primary school. If not, you probably need remediation. Self-discipline I'm not sure can be taught in schools, I think it's something you pick up more from your family environment. If you want to include things like compound interest as part of budgeting, okay, but again this should be well covered by the maths curriculum before you leave school.

The point being, part of education is giving people the fundamental skills which they can then piece together into new solutions as new problems arise in their life.

I don't agree languages aren't practical for instance but I do think they way they are taught in our schools, with all the emphasis on reading and writing as opposed to speaking the language (which is a language's primary use), is the wrong approach. That's a different issue though.

And the same for English; letter writing, filling out forms etc. If you haven't gotten those down by around the age of 14 then again I think you probably need remediation. I don't mean that in a judgemental way. I think it would be a shame if our education system only taught people the basics and didn't try and dig a little deeper than that.

I do think there's an overemphasis on developing the mind and not the body in school; we should be teaching children first aid, how to exercise (stretching, warming up etc.), how to cook and eat healthy, those are all things which I think would be useful. Driving and car maintenance? I do get why someone would want to teach those skills but I don't think they belong in school really. Maybe teaching people the rules of the road.

Critical thinking is an interesting one. I do wonder if it can be successfully taught; a bit like self discipline I think it's something you learn from your folks as much as anything. Not saying we shouldn't try but I do think some of this stuff is covered by other subjects such as English and Maths.

hayoc

Earthhorse wrote: »

Critical thinking is an interesting one. I do wonder if it can be successfully taught; a bit like self discipline I think it's something you learn from your folks as much as anything. Not saying we shouldn't try but I do think some of this stuff is covered by other subjects such as English and Maths.

Put Philosophy on the curriculum, instead of Religion.

smellyoldboot

I'd agree Home Economics or similar "Life Skills maybe?" should be mandatory right up to leaving cert level. Could cover the full gamut from cooking simple meals, shopping/budgeting, basic household maintenance, even as simple as changing a plug/fuse/lightbulb. Financial education: pensions, investment, tax allowances, even how to claim certain state benefits. Hell you could even cover Driving Theory in final year and have everyone leave school with the provie license at least.

Smacruairi

smellyoldboot wrote: »

I'd agree Home Economics or similar "Life Skills maybe?" should be mandatory right up to leaving cert level. Could cover the full gamut from cooking simple meals, shopping/budgeting, basic household maintenance, even as simple as changing a plug/fuse/lightbulb. Financial education: pensions, investment, tax allowances, even how to claim certain state benefits. Hell you could even cover Driving Theory in final year and have everyone leave school with the provie license at least.

See I would see life skills as something the home should provide. Cooking simple meals, changing a plug,like what the hell are the parents doing to not be teaching them, or to want to teach them that? Also, you've a year or 6 year curriculum to teach, how long can your get out of driver theory!

Not trying to be hostile, I agree with some of what you said as a workshop in ty, but come on, are parents looking for schools to teach kids how to wash their teeth too? Oh wait.. Sphe.. So yeah..

hayoc

Smacruairi wrote: »

See I would see life skills as something the home should provide. Cooking simple meals, changing a plug,like what the hell are the parents doing to not be teaching them, or to want to teach them that?

Not everyone has a good home life or good parents. I was not taught a lot of basic life skills growing up in a toxic environment. It was more important in my family to shut up and keep your head down.

Rob Humanoid

RandomViewer wrote: »

You have to give kids a rounded education, art, history and poetry may seem unimportant to you but you have to feed their imagination,
people may moan about smartphones but they've increased literacy levels and knowledge of current affairs ,

I think everyone agrees with the need of a rounded education - to begin with. reading, writing and basic math should be taught to a very high standard.


I don't really buy school fueling the imagination, I never did. Not in a curriculum form at any rate. Some teachers did. History is critical.



I'm a professional artist/graphic designer and I loved drawing when I was a kid. Doing art is school was so just so boring I leaned feck all. It must have been even worse for the kids who had no interest in the subject. I love literature, but again I didn't get that from school. I was already reading the books that I wanted to inspire me. The school's idea of literature was far too old and dusty.



And don't get me started on Irish literature. That silly old hag Peig Saers.


I'd much rather a more focused/choice approach. I felt it would have served me a lot better.