It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Young Learning

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 10:21 AM
link   
Do you ever wish that you were more intent on studying when you were a child of 4 - 10 years ? Do you ever wish that you could turn time back so that you could be a genious by now. I really wish that there was an education system that pushed children to study at a young age. Because at an age of about 4 - 10 years, the human brain is developing quickly, and it is at this time that it is able to gather the most information. What are your thoughts about this ? Please post your replies.




posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 11:39 AM
link   
I totally agree and now I'm trying to make up for that lost time. All the while teaching my kids to do the same while they can.

Peace



posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 03:34 PM
link   
Heck, yes. I look back when I was that age, and while I didn't have as much knowledge or reasoning ability as I do now, my memory was MUCH better. As an example, when i was a kid, I used to collect hockey cards. I kept them in a big stack in numerical order, probably about 300 uniquely numbered cards. One day my uncle was over at my house and since he loves hockey I showed him the cards. I then noticed two cards in the wrong order, but I didn't notice because I saw the numbers, I noticed because I remembered the numbers and knew that one was supposed to be before the other. My uncle commented on this, and I told him I could number all of them. He laughed and said no way. So I went through them, looking at the hockey player and saying what card # was on the back, #123, or #69 or #444 or whatever. I made 2 mistakes out of a couple hundred.

I'd kill to have that memory now. I have difficulty remembering new names or memorizing much of anything anymore. I have a text file on my computer that has passwords for email accounts, ATS account, friends phone numbers, and stuff like that (hopefully safe behind my firewall, hehe). I remember being bored silly in elementary school because I could remember everything the first time around. As a result, I never tried at anything. By junior high and high school, I still had a pretty decent memory, but it was nothing unusual. In university, I don't trust myself to remember anything, anymore. Obviously, part of it is the increasing difficulty level, but I am just talking about memorizing lists of facts and things like that, not the actual understanding behind them.


from siddharthsma:
I really wish that there was an education system that pushed children to study at a young age.

Oh, yeah. Me too. Not just for me when I was that age. I think a lot of people had better memories as children, due to the developmental process. If I ever manage to find a woman to have my kids, you can be darned sure I will be cramming everything I can into their little heads. I believe that the difference between the people we consider geniuses as adults and us regular people is (largely) related to upbringing. There is some natural talent and inclinations towards certain areas for certain people, like Mozart to music or Gauss to math. I think that we could raise the average IQ by a heck of a lot if we would teach little kids useful stuff like elementary science and history and math instead of how to color between the lines on a map of the world or read a story aloud, one sentence at a time per student, or crap like that. Kindergarten (at my school, anyway) was just a time to play with toys; we should have been learning stuff, then.

I figure that if we taught young kids properly at an earlier age, like the 4-10 you suggest, we could end up having children who could complete what is now 'high school grade 12' a couple of years in advance of when they do now, i.e. at age 13-15 rather than 18, as a rough estimate. The benefits of that are pretty obvious, and since this post is already too freaking long, I'll leave them for you to imagine. I just had to say all this since it's a topic I've thought about a lot, especially in the last few years.



posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 10:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by siddharthsma
Do you ever wish that you were more intent on studying when you were a child of 4 - 10 years ? Do you ever wish that you could turn time back so that you could be a genious by now. I really wish that there was an education system that pushed children to study at a young age. Because at an age of about 4 - 10 years, the human brain is developing quickly, and it is at this time that it is able to gather the most information. What are your thoughts about this ? Please post your replies.


I have thought about this many times. That time period (4-10 years of age) is an amazing period of intellectual development, and the amount of information that is gathered and actually used for the rest of one's life is amazing. Not only are children learning basic academic skills at that age, they are learning nuances of language, facial/body expression, social norms, social interaction skills, etc... the list goes on and on. However, I don't know if this means that higher level concepts could be forced in at this period without sacrificing some of these other basic yet extremely important skills.

However, this does remind me of a study about gifted children, one that is ongoing here in the U.S. today. Children identified as extremely gifted at age 12-13 were selected to enter summer "courses" where teachers would basically see how much they could absorb. These gifted children (not gifted in the "popular" sense, these were literally the top 1 in 10,000 in cognitive ability) were able to absorb all high school mathematics in THREE WEEKS. All high school chemistry, biology, and physics in THREE WEEKS.

Imagine what happens when these kids aren't identified... they sit through classes for four years. What sort of an effect does this have on their motivation?

That is an extreme example, but we can think about it in terms of the topic of this thread. Imagine if the "more" gifted children are allowed to learn things at a rate that isn't hindered by the average student. They may not learn four years of average material in three weeks, but all of it in one year is plausible.

Take that same idea and focus on younger children.... If we are able reliably to identify individual differences in cognitive ability at very young ages and provide these children with accelerated education, it could make a huge difference. Of course, the same idea could be applied to the opposite end of the spectrum of ability.

Education should be dictated by ability. NOT age. Learning how to do this is a very big project, but it would probably pay off in the long run for both the students and the community.

phaedrus



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 02:26 AM
link   
My personal believe is that no one could ever become a genius by starting studying at age of 4 or any other.

Let's define, what is "studying" for a kid.
2+2=4 is studying math, doing logical operations.
remembering that 6*6 = 36 , memorizing.
remembering that the earth is round and that green plants contain chlorofile ( or whatever ), also memorizing.

Yet I do not think that good logic and memory would make one a genius, rather then a walking-talking computer encyclopedia. Someone who would only be able to do logical operations on memorized facts.

Do you think that Einstein was a genius, just because he studied?
Once he said "I feel that that is so and so, but I can't logically explain you why." As well as most of Nobel prize winners agreed that there was something more for them to do their inventions, then just logical operations on known facts.

If we look at genius and innovators, who did they do in school? Mostly bad, because they refused to memorize "dead" facts and parrot them after their teacher. Einstein was kicked out of collage, Mendeleev had bad grades in chemistry, even Bill Gates did not graduate.

DragonsDemesne, are you sure you had memorized the card number? Did you look at the card and say "yes, yes, I remember it is that and that number!" or maybe you just looked at the card and "felt" its number?

Who's got little kids ( 3-5 years ) around, make an experiment. Take a deck of cards and ask them to "feel" what card ( color, suite ) you're holding.



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 02:43 AM
link   

DragonsDemesne, are you sure you had memorized the card number? Did you look at the card and say "yes, yes, I remember it is that and that number!" or maybe you just looked at the card and "felt" its number?


Lol, I have no idea, it was like 15 years ago at least.

I think my previous post was rather incomplete. I seem to be suggesting that memory is the only important thing for learning, and it is not. What I mean is that memory is an enormous aid to learning, but it is not the only requirement. People can memorize stuff without having any idea what it means. What I was talking about (and I did not make this clear at all) was the combination of memory and mental skills. Most young children probably don't have the mental skills to handle advanced stuff, but if you can cram lots of knowledge into their heads, it would save time later. For example, if a 5 year old knew how to read, could do simple math (like one or two digit add/subtract/multiply/divide) before going into school, well, they could probably start in grade 2 or 3, since that's mostly what they taught in the first few grades when I went to school. (I knew how to read before kindergarten, but I have no memory of whether I could do any math or not)

Maybe we can start the ATS Online School For Young Children, hehe.



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 09:07 AM
link   
I think the main problem with children at the age of 4 - 10, is that they have no incentive to Learn, and even parents do not push them because they are so young. The day the Education System changes to push the young, those will be the days where we will see many little Einsteins.




posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 02:25 PM
link   
first off..education is not just teaching you facts..though facts are very important.

What one needs in education in addition to facts is a logical reasonable coherant means of putting the facts together into a form useful to the individual in our daily lives to solve or manage problems.
Facts are merely grist to feed into the mill of thinking apparatus.
I suspect that the means of putting facts together into a logical reasonalbe thinking apparatus...the diciplined mind is not with many of us. It has been replaced by rampant consumerism..and desire..not thinking. Amusing not musing. This methodology is missing from alot of what passes for education today. Amusing ..breaks down into two words...a...without...muse ..thinking. Without thinking. Point made????
This becomes obvious to me when looking at the language faculties of many people...four letter words.
The younger one starts this thinking process with children the firmer most of them will take root in it. They must be given facts ..and the thinking process by which to digest the facts....not one or the other but both.
Did they not at one time ...in our history ..call this "dicipline"??
I think in the olde days ..people were often asked about their degrees "In what dicipline are you mastered..or what dicipline did you master."

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 07:13 PM
link   
I don't expect any of you to know what i'm talking about...but i'm going to give it a shot.

There is a BIG DIFFERENCE between being SCHOOLED and EDUCATED. What you call education is nothing more than schooling...basically nothing more than training...and animals can be trained to do what their handlers want them to do...but human beings should not.

At the age of 4 to 10 years, yes, children are very impressionable...this is when they should be EDUCATED. They do so through the guidance of an adult teacher that realizes that children can learn so much more when they WANT to learn through their natural curiosity...than when it is IMPOSED and FORCED on them through mandantory government/state schooling...a system that destroys that natural curiosity and produces non thinkers and easily controlled robots.

If any of you think that genious is taught in the school system...i suggest you look past your own indoctrination at what it means to truely be educated. A highschool diploma/college degree doesn't mean squat when it comes to being EDUCATED.

~oracle



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 10:50 PM
link   

There is a BIG DIFFERENCE between being SCHOOLED and EDUCATED. What you call education is nothing more than schooling...basically nothing more than training...and animals can be trained to do what their handlers want them to do...but human beings should not.


Absolutely. That's actually the thing that bugs me the most about my university experience so far. It focuses too much on rote knowledge rather than thinking. There are also PhDs who are idiots; a few of them have taught me courses
and there are really smart people like my grandparents, none of whom finished high school due to circumstances beyond their control, the furthest one finished grade 11. The reason they are smart is because they know how to THINK rather than follow some silly training.


At the age of 4 to 10 years, yes, children are very impressionable...this is when they should be EDUCATED. They do so through the guidance of an adult teacher that realizes that children can learn so much more when they WANT to learn through their natural curiosity...than when it is IMPOSED and FORCED on them through mandantory government/state schooling...a system that destroys that natural curiosity and produces non thinkers and easily controlled robots.

Darned right. I don't know about the rest of you, but I think the school system where I live absolutely sucks crap, and it sucked even before the Alberta gov't started slashing education budgets about 10 years ago. I hope to have kids someday, and if I do, I will do whatever it takes to see them educated properly. I'd certainly be willing to put in loads of my free time into teaching them.


If any of you think that genious is taught in the school system...i suggest you look past your own indoctrination at what it means to truely be educated. A highschool diploma/college degree doesn't mean squat when it comes to being EDUCATED.


The school system doesn't do much more than teach socially acceptable behaviour. It's a little better in post-secondary, but there is still vast room for improvement. I'm studying engineering right now, and I know people who will be graduating in a week's time that I wouldn't trust to fix a flashlight. Jumping through the hoops at university doesn't mean you really know anything, it just means you know how to parrot back at your instructors what they told you.

That said, I think that if someone with the right mindset and ability goes into formal schooling, they can get a lot out of it. It's like the old saying goes, you get out of it what you put into it.

(side note: it's genius, not genious. It's a common mistake though, I play a lot of Scrabble, and I once played genious by mistake, and neither of my two opponents caught it, so I won the game, hehe) Some geni(o)us I am!)



posted on Apr, 23 2005 @ 02:23 AM
link   
Yet in my understanding educating ( in the terms of normal school ) is teaching one to think by a pattern - "life is hard", "2+3=5", "listen to what grownups tell you" and so on.

Can you imagine a genius, thinking by a pattern? I can't.

Therefor, in my opinion, if you want a child to be a genius, it would be better to help him develop an ability to look at things from multiple angles, understand that everything is relative and see things that no one sees.



Good Luck!



posted on Apr, 23 2005 @ 03:13 AM
link   
the problem is not that kids do not want to learn, or do not try hard enough. the real problem is that they need to be taught, not by a teacher standing at the front of the class and expecting everyone to understand what they are trying to teach.

the first step should be to cut teacher to student ratios. say 1 teacher to about 8 students. in a class of 30 students there is no way that a teacher can give all the help that is required for each student. it must also be understood that some students need even more help than others to learn.

in grades 1, 2, and 3 i spenty quite a lot of time after school and at the princibles office because "i obviously not paying attention". the real problem was that i was lost. even when kept after school it was for punishment and not to actualy help me.it wasn't untill at the end of grade 2 that i was even beginning to learn to read. this was because we had gotten a long term supply teacher who actualy noticed that i could not read or write ( i did manage to memorize how to draw my name though) at all. it was thanks to a teacher at church who worked with me to teach me how to read. i did not get the help i needed at school. heck by grade 3 i could barely add or subtract. i never was able to learn how to times and devide in my head and i have to "finger count", to even add or subtract to this day.

i was always forced to do my homework when i was young and my parrents tried to help as much as they could. of a personal note there should never be more than an hour or twos homework. i was doing homework quite often from the time i got home from school till i went to bed. not that it helped at all anyway. what good is homework that a kid dosn't even propperly understand? it is worthless, homework dosn't help teach at all. if you know how to do something you can do it, if not trying to do it wrong is no help at all.

in fact it wasn't untill grade 6 that i realy started to learn anything. ironicaly that was when i was put into a "special ed" class. where we only had 6 of us with one teacher, a teacher that spent most of her time actively helping each student. not just uselessly standing up front "telling us" what to do, without actualy helping us to learn.

guess what at the end of grade 6 after starting out at about a grade 3 reading level, i was reading at a highschool level. even though i can not do math in my head i was quite good at it. i was for the first time actualy "taught" how to do what i was suppost to know. not just lectured at. in fact the only thing i wasn't taught was french, it was too late as french was taught starting in grade 1 and by grade 3 it was totaly done in french. they tried but since my teacher could not teach french being put in a grade 5 class to learn a language without any english being used, again by lecturing, i was compleatly lost.

it is not students not trying hard enough to learn. it is totaly inefective teaching practices that is the problem. and honestly how can a teacher efectively teach 30 kids by giveing them the propper atention that they need to learn. lets see you are in school about 6.5 hors a day that means that if a teacher did nothing else, each student can only recieve about 15 minutes each a day. that is severely impractical to even considder. small wonder that youn children especialy do not learn well, there is not enough of a teacher to go arround. that was one advantage of the old one room school house, a more advanced student was able to help out the less advanced students thus freeing the teacher to help more. if properly done every student would be able to be taught with the personal attention that they needed. not to mention of course that there was not quite so much knowlage being crammed into their heads.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join