But seriously, it's not like I was a child prodigy or anything, but I could do calculus at the end of elementary school, started learning to read at less than a year old, could draw/spell pretty well (went crazy on the Etch-A-Sketch), etc.
While I think it's definitely a cool feat to accomplish at a young age, all I can say is that stuff like basic calc really isn't that hard. The main problem is that our society tends to teach math fairly poorly and so we arrive at calculus later on than we'd otherwise be OK with. If we had a better-quality system that wasn't so geared towards the assumption of weakness rather than the assumption of strength, we'd see a lot more of these kids.
What bugs me is the window shit. Smart people DO NOT DO MATH ON THE GODDAMNED WINDOWS. I don't care what they show you in "A Beautiful Mind" or "The Social Network." It's agonizing to see that shit so overplayed.
Also just saw his physics video. More proof that a lot of this is memorization of surface-level stuff. Sirius is actually two stars about 23 AU apart, composed of a main sequence star and a white dwarf. You usually get Type 1A Supernovae when a white dwarf accretes enough matter from a companion red giant to push the Chandrasekhar limit. Sirius A is not yet a red giant and won't be so for any time soon -- and even when it does, it won't extend far enough to allow Sirius B to leech its mass. Earth is more likely to end due to our own sun turning into a red giant (its radius will extend out to Mars or so, completely incinerating the inner three planets). Billions of years in the future, though.
Today's math curriculum is teaching students to expect -- and excel at -- paint-by-numbers classwork, robbing kids of a skill more important than solving problems: formulating them. Dan Meyer shows classroom-tested math exercises that prompt students to stop and think.
From that video: "All kids have tremendous talents -- and we squander them pretty ruthlessly" -- this is, too, my view on things. There's a lot of wasted potential.
"Now our education system is predicated on the idea of academic ability. And there’s a reason. The whole system was invented — around the world, there were no public systems of education, really, before the 19th century. They all came into being to meet the needs of industrialism. So the hierarchy is rooted on two ideas. Number one, that the most useful subjects for work are at the top. So you were probably steered benignly away from things at school when you were a kid, things you liked, on the grounds that you would never get a job doing that. Is that right? Don’t do music, you’re not going to be a musician; don’t do art, you won’t be an artist. Benign advice — now, profoundly mistaken. The whole world is engulfed in a revolution. And the second is academic ability, which has really come to dominate our view of intelligence, because the universities designed the system in their image. If you think of it, the whole system of public education around the world is a protracted process of university entrance. And the consequence is that many highly talented, brilliant, creative people think they’re not, because the thing they were good at at school wasn’t valued, or was actually stigmatized. And I think we can’t afford to go on that way."
i enjoy his story of the ballerina dancer who wouldve, if born during the past couple of years, been diagnosed with ADD and put on medication probably ruining her chances of becoming as famous as she did back then
i enjoy his story of the ballerina dancer who wouldve, if born during the past couple of years, been diagnosed with ADD and put on medication probably ruining her chances of becoming as famous as she did back then
sad truth that everyone seems to ignore
I just got to this part a few seconds ago, lol. "Somebody else might have put her on medication and told her to calm down."
I agree 100% with what this guy's saying. However, to raise a counterpoint (and then to counter that point shortly), the reason we hold things like mathematics and science in high-value regard is because of the range and depth of application. If you're good at math and problemsolving, you can do many interesting things that add value and happiness to others. You can do this too if you're a good dancer, but the range isn't as wide. So we tend to place a high value on things that have high-value applications with greater probabilities.
The only reason I went into business/stats/finance and not my dream job -- game design -- is because of this notion. It takes guts to pursue something creative that may actually pigeonhole you into a lower-mean lifestyle. While it's true that we're taught to be afraid to be wrong, I think it's ultimately because later on in life, being wrong carries greater risks. Therefore we prioritize certain forms of education to help mediate these risks based on the types of lifestyles we desire.
So we look at these child prodigies as hyperintelligent because they're really good at things that we hold in high-value regard. They are certainly good at what they do, but you also need to keep in mind that our education system is geared a certain way and holds back a lot of potential -- even in the realms we value highly. Teaching calculus in middle school would require quite a few changes that would be tough to put into effect. Kids have enough trouble with algebra as it is, so you have to start there. But to be good at algebra, you have to be good with basic arithmetic, etc. There's a long chain of prerequisite skills that we don't press as hard as effectively as we can.
One reason for this? Not everyone is good at math. So we water down the system for everyone else. Children who are great at math can't have a normal environment to push forth because the system is built to accommodate and push everyone else down the same path. Imagine if our schools instead valued dancing. I'm horrible at it, but so are many others. This large mass of shitty dancers would require schools to slow the pace down and make it a dull pain for those who actually excel.
lol I couldn't help but chuckle imagining a kid furiously using the Etch-A-Sketch :P
but yea, you bring up a lot of valid points. Does anyone know if he went to public or private school prior to the univeristy stuff?
It's stated in the articles that he went to a public school, but he was already well educated with what they were teaching him, so he ended up going to a university instead.
It's stated in the articles that he went to a public school, but he was already well educated with what they were teaching him, so he ended up going to a university instead.
Thanks for the info. Kinda shows that public schools really do limit kids' ability to learn more. Only reason he was accepted to a university was because he was exceptionally smart. But other kids deserve the opportunity to higher learning too, but it won't happen with our education system.
Thanks for the info. Kinda shows that public schools really do limit kids' ability to learn more. Only reason he was accepted to a university was because he was exceptionally smart. But other kids deserve the opportunity to higher learning too, but it won't happen with our education system.
No problem. Although I'm not sure about if our schools "limit" the kids ability to learn. I can understand that half way, only because some kids can't take in so much information at one point, in which it's too hard, hence why certain grades only teach a certain level of subjects. But I also understand where you're coming from since schools in other countries teach higher levels of education in a low grade.
No problem. Although I'm not sure about if our schools "limit" the kids ability to learn. I can understand that half way, only because some kids can't take in so much information at one point, in which it's too hard, hence why certain grades only teach a certain level of subjects. But I also understand where you're coming from since schools in other countries teach higher levels of education in a low grade.
Yup. When I say limit, I mean like a cap. To the point that if you're above every other student, you'll still need to learn at their pace. There are no incentives or extra areas where someone could pursue higher learning. My whole 5th grade was running errands for teachers. There were three math groups; support, normal and advanced. I was the one running errands because advanced was too easy. Now I'm screwed having wasted precious years that could have been dedicated to learning something valuable.
Comment