While working on my Masters in Education, one faculty member told me that in his opinion, our schools were designed to babysit our kids so the parents can work.
I homeschooled my 7 children. We rarely worked more than 2 hours per day and we only schooled about 6 months/year on average. All are or will be college educated and will have become so without a single penny of debt. While in college, two of them have gotten jobs as tutors in a vain attempt to bring all the pitifully educated public school students up to speed. On girl of note was so uneducated that she literally didn’t know how to spell her own name. One of my daughters is currently the math tutor at our local junior college and she finds herself teaching long division to people trying to take college algebra. So yeah, for a huge number of students, public school is purely government funded daycare. For no less than 80% of students, we could graduate them somewhere between the 5th and 8th grades and lose nothing of value. In fact, if they were to get jobs they could actually contribute something substantial to the communities in which they live instead of sitting in “pre-jail” for 8 hours/day doing absolutely nothing except sucking up tax dollars as useless eaters.
This valuable experience of homeschooling your children needs to be written and published for all to read! Most of what I have learned , I learned through doing at work environment then complimenting that with additional reading at home.
@@richardblankenship5481 Thanks for mentioning time; I've always wondered that especially in light of the amount of time I saw wasted at school (as a teacher 20 yrs). I always wondered how the economics of a private tutor should work, and I'd have to say pretty well. My private school charges $275/day so starting from there the math looks good. Even at $80/hr a tutor could teach groups of 3 twice a day for 2 hrs and make a fine salary; this at a per diem cost of a lot of public schools.
@@richardblankenship5481 We homeschooled our kids, which meant the education never took a winter, spring, or summer break, kind of like life. But we spent maybe an hour a day on one-on-one academics, and the rest was pretty much on auto-pilot. 20 years later, and it was the best decision we made. All the kids are inquiring individuals always ready to investigate and debate, successful in their careers, and immunized to fallacies. What else can a parent hope for? Now they are doing the same with the grand-kids.
I'm amazed how the people behind this channel make such attractive fun animation while turning what could've been hours of lectures and studying into a 5-10 minute video
I’m genuinely amazed at how a person can consider these: - animations - attractive and fun - a substitute for actual learning But then again, no, no I am not amazed at all lol. Sorry folks, carry on with the numbskull cope.
I find it utterly interesting and a bit paradoxical to see Dewey's progressive ideas presented through a short and well made lecture which utilizes state of the art instructional design. It really tells us that the art form of lecturing is rather timeless..
I recently left the classroom as an English teacher because 1) the instructional emphasis was on SAT prep 2) the school mission was rooted in platitudes and slogans that didn't align with true learning 3) teachers' jobs were inflated (calling parents daily, monitoring piles of data, policing corridors, etc.) while doing so at the same / lower salaries 4) students weren't required to actually read books or write papers. None of what Dewey envisioned was implemented. Students were seemingly being prepared to become "cogs" in the American industrial wheel; they were encouraged to go to college in order to find a job.
I've been studying with the traditional academia style from my chidhood and I think this was one of the reasons of my deep unhappiness everytime I had to go to the school, and I agree the system can be totally useless when it comes to study died things in only books and not providing experiential oportunities to learn for children. Its a very serious matter that I hope will dramatically change very soon. I adapted to the system and became succesful in the studies but I can tell not in life. Sharing my experience, all the best to you guys
I am studying John Dewey's Philosophy. This video really makes me understand more clear on his principles, such attractive fun animation and clear explanation!
among dozens of teachers only three have ever allowed us to discuss their subject and come up with new ideas, use our imagination and speak ourselves. others shut us up and neglected our opinions, saying we were too stupid or too lazy or other stuff. if we DID give out opinions, some of them even laughed at us and later used it against us in offensive jokes. so yeah, basically, 11 years of school was a hell for me and I'm glad I'm graduating this year
Uniforms are super cool, you don't have to think too much about dressing up, yet everyone has their unique touch to thy self. Everyone feels part of a pattern, group, in for what matters most.
Uniform can help less affluent student, whose limited in clothing choice, to blend in. It also involves enforcement of nitty-gritty rules such as length of hems, etc, etc. So on one hand it's a training for being responsible for you public appearance. Ideal is making informed choices, you learn to dress formal, as well as express yourself in casual smart, then choose the one more appropriate to your current situation. Uniforms, sadly, are corporate branding. No denying on modern education systems are commercialized. Any incident in public places, first question heard is more "Are they in school unforms?" than "Are the students hurt?".
I completely agree I went most my life to a British school and while we knew who was less well off by shoes, it was no where near the drama I saw in American high schools where cliques were so ingrained into how friendships were made divisively, not to mention by class lines. There was an enormous unity where I saw uniforms at play and more focus into learning. I wish we did it here
When I went to school in the sixties, there was one program, one track, and it all revolved around completing workbooks, memorizing facts and spewing them back in exams, and in addition being judged on academic performance (if memorizing and spewing dates and other facts counts as performance), we were given a grade for "citizenship." A good grade in citizenship meant you didn't give the teachers any trouble: you had learned to go along to get along. A bad grade meant you were Trouble, and got a lot of negative attention from the vice principal. I spent most of school, particularly middle school, in terror of making someone mad, or being different. It was a hateful experience.
I completed my schooling in 2020 and how ironic it doesn't get better even after 60 years haha. More or less same experience for me as well, it was like they have a job of handling inmates and to train them for being an obedient employee without any critical thinking/ authentic views. It was so frustrating and am glad that I'm at least out of that phase now.
This video is amazing, it summarizes correctly Dewey's thoughts about education, it is a bittersweet feeling because many agree with his theory of learning while others do not, in my personal opinion for me since I was a child it has always been easier to learn with the practice of education than reading for hours thousands of pages, but it is true that not everything can be like that.
I developed an interest in educational philosophy after reading “Understanding Poverty”, although I know some educators aren’t fans of it. Just found your channel and lovin it! I saw a video of scientists being interviewed about their experiences with religion. Many became atheists or agnostics due to the rigidity of thought in the religions with which they were raised (some catholic). One scientist gave a pithy statement: “It’s better to have questions you can’t answer instead of answers you can’t question”. Dewey sounds like a very wise person, encouraging curiosity and questioning everything.
No linkage, only interest. Like the video described, here’s an interdisciplinary approach including statistics, neuroanatomy, sociology, and education. The book differentiates generational poverty from situational poverty. Keeping in mind that nature isn’t typically observed in absolutes - only bell curves described in standard deviations of probability so there’s always exceptions. Generational poverty is commonly thought of as a monetary problem. But the book points out many of the social ills of generational poverty are from poor decisions as opposed to lack of money. These bad decisions are passed from one generation to the next - making it generational. While being in possession of less money, this money is ironically more likely to be spent on unnecessary or harmful things including tobacco, alcohol, illegal drugs and tattoos instead of the most necessary things for survival. This is well known but not often discussed - which doesn’t help the problem. Decisions are made more with the amygdala / limbic system instead of the prefrontal cortex - meaning more decisions are made based on emotions instead of on reasoning. Thus, there’s more abuse, violence and crime - decisions that are harmful to oneself and others. This must be considered in the education of a child that can’t concentrate in school because their home life is in shambles. Whilst a college educated person may fall upon hard times (called situational poverty) they will have a lifetime of making fairly good decisions - studying hard, working hard, being responsible. It would be unusual for this type of person to purposely try to cause harm themselves or others. I was fascinated to hear how some groups such as priests and nuns may live near the poverty level but don’t have these problems showing that many problems with generational poverty have very little to do with money.
My private education was strictly academic but I think this made me a better reader/researcher/writer. Critical thinking, questioning authority and iconoclast manifesting had become my mission statement at a very young age.
Im currently studying to become an elementary school teacher (age 7-10) and Im currently taking a course in development and education, in which teacher theories are being taught to us and your videos have been brought up as extra help to understand pragmatism, behaviourism, Vygotsky's theory and Piaget's theory. Its really good at explaining and giving examples. Keep up the amazing work
So when your solution is to pay teachers better, your argument is actually that higher pay will replace bad teachers? In other words, that bad teachers are the problem?
@@ozzy5146 Teachers have responsabilities outside of their jobs, families, children, debts, etc. Some teachers are "bad" beacause of a lack of interest or care but others are "bad" because they are having problems dealing with issues outside their jobs, a better salary could help them to make things less stressful in their private life. In other words: if a job is well paid is less likely that external issues diminish the performance of an employee.
@@ozzy5146 I think @Avni meant that the job of being a teacher should be paid more to encourage more people to get into the field making it more competitive and so more better teachers will be able to be teaching in school. So I think it's just a misunderstanding, either way, I think you could've approached the argument more politely by trying to make it clear or asking the other end to make their opinion clearer rather than accusing the argument of being silly.
@@JARZR Well, I think your point is valid, but it doesn't affect the teacher's performance as much, I don't think underpaying teachers justifies teachers not doing their best. (I have also addressed a more prominent effect of increasing pay for teachers in my reply to @Ozzy)
Actually, the result was he got students not to think. When student lacked pressure and could make concensus decisions, they usually avoided learning. The response was to lower the grading bar so students would pass, and they just kept lowering the bar until today which is why we are getting students who made straight A's in high school and can't pass a college entrance exam.
He has written with his own hand that the children should not become educated to the degree where they can think for themselves. His job was design a school day where the children would be prepared to work in factories and respond to bells and follow instructions. He was a reformer when the U.S. population was at its HIGHEST rate of literacy (90%) which was NOT what those in power wanted. Not a hero but a monster.
Dewey's influence has actually led to an erosion of standards in education. If a school becomes a 'playground' as Dewey argued, the kids will mostly follow their own interests. Today this amounts to social media, gossip etc. If they are going to learn crucial skills like literacy, numeracy etc then they need to be instructed. Very few children take an intuitive interest in these things.
My school was too crowded for everyone to flourish . I have not seen any change in the last 50 years since I graduated. RANKED CHOICE VOTING IS MUCH NEEDED NOW! I re-educated my self after I turned 35. It took me 17 years to realize how little they thought me.
The biggest problems are time and class size. In higher grade levels many teachers spend a lot of material that should've been covered in previous school years. Like a house, when a child has weak foundation you cannot build on top of it. Class sizes are often very high, sticking forty students at a time with one teacher leaves little time for individualization. Make elementary, middle, high schools interlinked...they could be in separate buildings but there needs to be a dialogue between the three. Cut down on testing and fund schools through summer (the summer break can be cut down to two weeks). Cut class sizes at 24 students regardless of grade level. Bring in more electives (culinary, auto shop, etc) that cater the student interests. Of course all of this requires more funding, but there would be better results.
When I went to school, in the 1960s and 70s, class sizes were around 25 kids. The industrial arts as well as home economics were a big part of the curriculum. Upon graduating, we had what they called at the time, basic competency tests. Oddly, the taxes required then were a pittance compared to today. Maybe the answer is to go back to that style schooling instead of having two administrators per student?
I don't agree that even more government Spartan camp school is the answer. You are saying it doesn't work now, so let's do more of it by killing summer? Yay! Now let's kill Santa...
I've heard the old saying, learning at youth like carving in the stone while learning at older age is like writing in the water. Children are fast memorizing and imitating they are not best at comprehension generally speaking. While adult is quick in comprehension. Trying to get a discussion going between teenager age 12 - 15 is way harder than one might even think.
I did learn by doing, and this includes abstract math. Even at the PhD level, I found doing example math problems necessary. However, office hours w a professor are equally necessary. A mulri-prong approach if you will. I don't necessarily agree all Dewy's ideas such as gearing public school for those least likely to learn, but i accept most of his tenants.
In following your train of thought, I was struck by the evolutionary process, here. Newton built on Kepler, Galileo, Copernicus, et. al.; Einstein built on Newton; Bohr built upon Einstein; Hawking built upon Einstein and Bohr's argumentation over quantum mechanics. They weren't 'adding on' by intent so much as by trying to tear open the gaps in the theories of their mentors. This process was frequently inspired by a confrontational approach that has always been inherent to the scientific process (and despised by those who prefer more dogmatic instruction methods). Dewey harnessed this approach for "young person" education, but softened it with a more inclusive attitude, as he no doubt understood the dichotomy of young minds that are in varying stages of physical development (as well as more deferential/less self-confident) while at the same time more likely to question authority figures of prior generations - at least in their own minds.
I have been looking for this man. I tried it hard to grasp his understanding on education and his contribution too. Thank you so much for this, Sprout!
Learning by doing is really effective in some areas. In the past decades we were thought to imagine things to learn but now atleast students experience how to actually do things
Hands on Learning is very important. Most Engg. graduates today ,I found as a recruiter& trainer, that they have only theoretical & little practical knowledge. That too, they have forgotten what they read(not studied) in the 1st year during the 2nd year!!!!
This is brilliant and sums up all the best bits about Dewey and his thoughts on education. I haven't looked but about to and see if you have done a follow on to Pragmatism that you hinted upon in the last few moments. Good stuff and keep up the great work.
Learn by doing? Only when baking a pie or sewing a nightgown in Home Ec. Oh, and choir or piano practice in music class. And art class...that too. That was it. Otherwise, the approach was learn by abstract imagining where I guess my teacher hoped we would somehow get it.
That's highlighted about making moments count rather than preparing for adult life. I think school indoctrinated me to think like that, and so I'm not living in the present and satisfied with my life. What an eye opener. These are really useful and we'll thought out videos! 🙂
I only experienced Dewy’s ideas of participatory learning twice. Once in elementary school when we made posters for a function assembly line style and once in high school when we dissected rats.
A lot of this get's referenced for children. How are these applied to adult learning? I enjoy the video's Sprouts offers, but I find very little apply-able in my own life, especially as I'm becoming an adult student this year.
There is literally no difference for adults when it comes to learning. Learning works the same for children and adults. Study, experiment, observe, conclude, connect, discuss, etc, etc. What works for children, works for adults. Adults actually have a chance to learn far better because they can integrate new material to a lot of their life experience and knowledge they've gained, making the ideas stick better and have more meaning. If you can't use your time at work to learn, do it at home or during commute. Time and effort are all you need. If you want to learn math for example, even with good time dedication it will take you 4 years to cover pretty much all the subjects that exist to an intermediate level. If you want to learn sciences it will be a bit harder because of lack of equipment but there is a chance there are workshops out there you could go to. If you want to write better, then write and analyze, both your works, and the works of others, both the good and the bad to learn the DOs and DON'Ts. If you want something more artistic, you just need to do it. The only problems adults face are adult time consuming tasks. But the learning process doesn't change. Everything you see applicable to children in these videos, applies to everyone :]
@@SiMeGamer Totally, agree. Also, no more crowded and noisy classrooms full of people distracting you and making fun of you, no more grades, comparisons of evaluation scores, exams, teachers calling out your name when you don't want to talk or don't know the answer to that stupid question because it required you to memorize, no more of their facial expressions oozing of disappointment laced with disapproval when you can't answer it, no more eyes averting you because you failed to do give the correct response, no more being ignored because some authority figure, the keeper of knowledge deems you unworthy. If that sounded resentful, that's because I am. However, being resentful like that won't help me learn. Therefore, I should enjoy the perks of learning as an adult and that I no longer have to deal with the dead weight and instead only, purely, finally I can learn whatever it is that I want to learn. Like the video points out, for some (maybe "a lot of" I don't know) people their time was wasted at school, and for some others yet, education was turned to torture. Now that we are free and have the resources, we should not repeat what was done to us before and not waste our time. That is the first thing that needs to be learn: Our learning time is precious because we pay for it with moments of our lives.
@@michaelterrell5061 Depends on what you call "young". My last stint in college I was in my 40's. If I could afford it, I'd take classes the rest of my life!
My experience as a teacher in the UK, was that trying such innovative ideas got me into trouble. Almost universally, head teachers are obsessed with order and control. Effective education is a poor third. But Finland seems to have taken some notice, and the idea of rules by student/staff consensus rather than top down imposed was practiced by a few schools for severely disturbed children in the UK, and in Russia (Kitezh, a community of foster families).
I don't disagree with you me too, but school in the last 20 years WERE NOT using this model. Imagine how much you would have learned combined with your outside of school exploits.
I still on board for a mixture of pedagogies. If using his theory in total: 1. Limited knowledge could be gained and imparted. 2. Areas with limited adult's supervision/guidance may result in some problems. 3. Students with different and multiple backgrounds may have different learning experience. Same task but for poor and uncared kids, might be able to do much.
Learning by doing is indeed helpful for students. It helps them to experience and apply the lesson taught in the class. However,by doing so,It takes too much time and resoource to apply learning by teaching in real class. However,from i've experienced, i only able to apply the technique only quarter of my total teaching session per semester.
I do believe we ought to plot a new education model, perhaps inspired by the ancient Greeks. A model where we prepare humans to become utterly free and fulfilled. To do so we have to drive our education programs towards a much more eclectic and interdisciplinary syllabus.
Luis Atilano: This response is a year late, so you may not see it. But, if you do, I've been studying Educational Scholarship and Systems, moving towards a PhD in Research; and I couldn't agree more. Starting with a more Aristotlean model may not make everyone feel equal, but it will provide differentiated learning that matches not only the talents and abilities of each student. It will also match students to teachers to support learning strategies, styles, pacing, and give them more control over the speed at which students can cover the curriculum. Teachers unions hate this idea, so they'd really hate the idea of this method being used to curate teaching staff and give them the possibility of doing more And making more money based on their abilities and performance, as well as student achievement. School Choice needs to become a right. The teacher's unions must be destroyed and re-organized. The curriculum has to have a complete reboot. Unfortunately, the very group preventing All of the above are teachers and their unions. But, one we're at the reboot point, definitely go back to the Greco-Roman model. It's our best chance for the future generations to escape what's been done to Gen Y and Z
It is interesting to me that compulsory education is the norm in every nation regardless of the political ideology of the regime compelling it, and the fundamental lessons imposed are conformity of thought, along with uniform respect and fealty for 'Educators' authority and that of the regime in power.
Thank you. I didn't realize Dewey had this educational philosophy. It's the philosophy I followed teaching high school Ag and multiple subjects in a K-8 charter school.
Gracias Sprouts for estos excelentes vídeos pues permiten comprender las ideas de gente como Dewey en una manera divertida y fácil; lamentablemente, yo estudié en forma tradicional y los cursos pedagógicos los recibí sin comprender nada y sin relacionar con que deseaba poner en práctica estas ideas.
... I have taught all the grades, from K through 12. For ethical reasons, I quit teaching, because the 3 R's are all anyone needs, or even uses, in most jobs, and life. We learn the 3 R's by the 4th or fifth grade. Beyond this point, we are merely conditioning children to obey without questioning, and to report to work everyday, or else be punished. This is absolutely true.
@@sprouts The three Rs are reading, writing (it makes an R sound...poetic license), and arithmetic (bigger poetic license, but there's an R in there). The basics. We need more than just the basics, like computers and art.
Thanks, well done Sprouts and the visuals are just amazing. Dewey's theory is certainly viable if there is proper funding for Education. It It is therefore easier to implement in a private school setting as compared to a public school one. A critic would be: how possible is it to find enough time within the term to implement the learning by doing eg planting and watching plants grow while at the same time covering the required syllabus?. For the discussions it is important that some teacher instructions and prior reading and research happens before for the discussion/debate to be meaningful enough to sprout out new perspectives and ideas. For the interdisciplinary aspect to work, very strong school leadership is essential as well as a strong teamwork culture among staff as it would require a lot of sharing, consultations, planning and constant reviews.
education was like that in east-germany in the 80s. i took class 1-9 there. the last years i spent in westgermany, were it was almost multiple choice only. so, ... in my case the answer is "yes", but in most cases it´s "no" i guess. thank you very much for sharing.
Some things just have to be learned by rote,wrote,roat? Examples: spelling, times tables, penmanship. Hopefully teachers make things fun most of the time.
Penmanship isn't taught now that we have computers. Spelling? Spell check on the computer fixes that for them. My sister teaches music at the elementary level. She told me she has kids in Kindergarten who cannot name colors! Can't count to ten! These are kids in regular classrooms, too, not special education.
I have learned more outside of school by pursuing my passions, Though I have something of a bone to pick, the subjects that schools teach are the ones that the institutions of government and large businesses who finance the campaigns of the politicians who design the curriculum want, along with certain key voting blocks in state politics. This means that the subjects tend to be in line with the interests of certain influential voting blocks, Example, there are at least a dozen classes in AACC about racial sensitivity and colonial imperialist history (valid subjects for study but with strong political influences and for some reason now mandatory even if I want an accounting degree which has little to do with HR or fields that deal with social justice. Perhaps this is to raise the blue sheep of tomorrow?) Now in more conservative states, We have classes like the bible as literature (Gee I wonder what voting blocks matter there?) Perhaps this is to raise the Red sheep of tomorrow? We have many accounting engineering, computing classes, training the corporate peasants of tomorrow. We have almost no classes on stock trading. (because dumb stock traders are easy to compete with and it's not incorporate interests to have smart individual competitors.) what little finance I've seen taught in public schools is almost designed to take you into massive debt, with an emphasis on building good credit scores, or putting money in banks that pay an interest lower than the rate of inflation (wonder who sponsored this stuff being taught in school) So I've had to learn independently so I wouldn't be raised like a lamb for slaughter by a system designed to teach people to be useful cogs in someone else's design.
John Dewey was a Marxists! He is the modern American Marxist 😉. We all should see this; Teachers union, BLM, Antifa, Jim Crow Laws, Segregationist, Slavery, Most public unions, (maybe some decent unions out there, but unionisms were also brought out by Marxists and there are big differences from private unions to public unions or unionisms, just saying we have labor laws in place already with most businesses applying them through business policies or their procedures etc) Big tech, and more government interventions are all European values of the old democratic party or system. There is a reason why the GOP began and why America dumbs its history in America. That sole reason and why Dems are so afraid is because the left has this identity crisis in America or in American history. We some how dumbed American history down so the left or Dems wouldn't be portrayed as the destruction of America. We meaning the GOP after the civil war tried to have the Dems acclimate to American culture. The Dems or Left tried and was successful of ripping American culture apart by creating more slavery, segregation, and fighting against true American history. If we teach real history the left and Dems would have been portrayed as evil or even genocidal while the GOP (the true 1st American party) as the Dems have or always were stuck with the European values of colonialism, imperialism and slave ownership/slavery or segregation. Hence why the Left or Dems try and rewrite history or refuse to accept the destruction the Left or Dems have cause in our American culture. There are reasons why the teachers union tried to defund the police. The police union was one of the largest unions in America and now the Teachers union has now gained the powers over most unions and that's no different with or how the left or Dems have monopolized big tech to gain power. The Dems will never break these monopolies up or the teachers union because of power as the Dems never cared about the individual or person, they only care for what's good for the state or government. Hence why the Left or Dems say they will work with big tech, no, maybe we should break these monopolies up like TR did but not do what Taft wanted which is the Left in my opinion (large corporations in line with mucky politicans). America split in the Civil War and the Left or Dems have still fought against our American culture or true history (the truth). I personally believe Adam's and Jefferson were the true split or true party lines. Adam's the left or true Dems lost their way after the Civil War. If we actually teach history we would probably see that we actually had another split in America History. That split to me is the GOP splitting into two partys hence why the GOP never agrees because its conservatives vs libertarians. I believe conservatives are and always was the American left and that I think is more Adam's line of thinking (which I would love to have back in the dem or lefts party not the destructive party they are today). Jefferson the libertarian is the right or GOP. The GOP split where I believe left vs right is Taft vs TR. This split in the GOP created more of the swamp. Look at why TR stopped using the Antitrust act laws and why Taft wanted to go further interfering with capitalism. We can all agree that Taft was for more intervention by the government. We have to draw a line somewhere and not let politics interfere with the freedoms of capitalism. We have laws all for our protections but when we allow big tech or large corporations to interfere with government we now have socialism in America. The swamp was extremely prominent during the progressive movement in America as Taft wanted more intervention by using corporations and the political machine. That split created basically a 4 party system (socialism, independent, Dems, Republicans). Socialism is the new left or Dems, independents are centrists, Dems are conservatives and Republicans are libertarians. So left is Dems with 2 splits in the party of Socialist and centrists, thus GOP or Republicans are split from conservatives and libertarians (natural left vs right). (My opinion 😉) We have the laws and policies in place but we aren't implementing our own rules or laws. We have discrimination laws, and most laws are here but the Dems or left wants more laws upon the same laws to limit our liberties and freedoms all for control or power. I'm just adding to what you are saying 😉. I'm a libertarian but I also respect conservatives because of the similarities we have between us so its easier to have more common sense with each other by debating and listening to other ideals. The left would rather not have any debate or they would rather lie all for the good of power, and to me that isn't America.
recipient of a public school education here, 80's and 90's...I remember group work and projects but the look of the classroom spaces were still very traditional and used more often. When I watched this video I wondered what a truly interdisciplinary experiential school would physically look like. I don't think it would have rows of desks facing the blackboard as the main part of the classroom! On the other hand it looks like a lot of work for one teacher and 26 students. Anyone know any real places that do this? Sounds a lot like Montessori?
Some learning need experience. Now, learning focus to profit from experience of others. Animals learn by their experience. But when they die, their gained knowledge is not passed to succeeding offsprings. Humans tend to pass knowledge gained from past generations. Experiences you had can be distilled in education. Example: eating young fruits makes them taste sour; ripe fruits in many experiences taste sweet. So theory I becomes apparent to say (teacher), eat those ripes they taste better.
Hm-m-m. School uniforms eliminate class distinctions among students. They also relieve students of the anxiety inherent in making daily sartorial choices. Uniforms also reinforce the conviction that one's intellectual growth should be one's highest priority, not one's vanity served by fashion, fads, and agonizing over clothing purchases. When I was a university student In California in the 1970's, the universal uniform for students, male and female, was: tee-shirt, jeans, and tennis shoes. Clothing was purely a practical matter. (There were the occasional eccentrics, who were amusing on account of their rarity.) School children do not yet have the adult wisdom of those university students. They are vulnerable to their anxieties.
Our school was run by a convent of nuns. So it was mostly learning through reading or by rote. The teachers explained the lessons and we underwent assignments, tests and exams. That is how we were assessed. Of course they were activities like debates, dramatics and even sports. But basically it was all about learning the facts from textbooks. Hardly any practicals.
In Biology we had to let fruit rot in a Petri dish. Years later I realized that it gave me an abhorrence to eating fruit. Once I realized that I became a much healthier eater. It probably didn't effect most people the same way.
It is true that school has made great progress in teaching and learning methodology. However, many schools are still, one way or another in a Teaching Paradigm.
Support public education: patreon.com/sprouts
I will support as soon as I have some money on Tuesday!
While working on my Masters in Education, one faculty member told me that in his opinion, our schools were designed to babysit our kids so the parents can work.
I homeschooled my 7 children. We rarely worked more than 2 hours per day and we only schooled about 6 months/year on average. All are or will be college educated and will have become so without a single penny of debt. While in college, two of them have gotten jobs as tutors in a vain attempt to bring all the pitifully educated public school students up to speed.
On girl of note was so uneducated that she literally didn’t know how to spell her own name.
One of my daughters is currently the math tutor at our local junior college and she finds herself teaching long division to people trying to take college algebra.
So yeah, for a huge number of students, public school is purely government funded daycare.
For no less than 80% of students, we could graduate them somewhere between the 5th and 8th grades and lose nothing of value. In fact, if they were to get jobs they could actually contribute something substantial to the communities in which they live instead of sitting in “pre-jail” for 8 hours/day doing absolutely nothing except sucking up tax dollars as useless eaters.
But where would they procure their drugs, learn about porn, and learn the rule of the jungle
This valuable experience of homeschooling your children needs to be written and published for all to read! Most of what I have learned , I learned through doing at work environment then complimenting that with additional reading at home.
@@richardblankenship5481 Thanks for mentioning time; I've always wondered that especially in light of the amount of time I saw wasted at school (as a teacher 20 yrs). I always wondered how the economics of a private tutor should work, and I'd have to say pretty well. My private school charges $275/day so starting from there the math looks good. Even at $80/hr a tutor could teach groups of 3 twice a day for 2 hrs and make a fine salary; this at a per diem cost of a lot of public schools.
@@richardblankenship5481 We homeschooled our kids, which meant the education never took a winter, spring, or summer break, kind of like life. But we spent maybe an hour a day on one-on-one academics, and the rest was pretty much on auto-pilot. 20 years later, and it was the best decision we made. All the kids are inquiring individuals always ready to investigate and debate, successful in their careers, and immunized to fallacies. What else can a parent hope for? Now they are doing the same with the grand-kids.
I'm amazed how the people behind this channel make such attractive fun animation while turning what could've been hours of lectures and studying into a 5-10 minute video
True 🔥
Yep. I'm reading Dewey's "Experiences & education" at the moment. It's a short read but dry compared to this amazing synopsis.
I’m genuinely amazed at how a person can consider these:
- animations
- attractive and fun
- a substitute for actual learning
But then again, no, no I am not amazed at all lol. Sorry folks, carry on with the numbskull cope.
seriously!! Grateful for this channel!!
I find it utterly interesting and a bit paradoxical to see Dewey's progressive ideas presented through a short and well made lecture which utilizes state of the art instructional design. It really tells us that the art form of lecturing is rather timeless..
I recently left the classroom as an English teacher because 1) the instructional emphasis was on SAT prep 2) the school mission was rooted in platitudes and slogans that didn't align with true learning 3) teachers' jobs were inflated (calling parents daily, monitoring piles of data, policing corridors, etc.) while doing so at the same / lower salaries 4) students weren't required to actually read books or write papers. None of what Dewey envisioned was implemented. Students were seemingly being prepared to become "cogs" in the American industrial wheel; they were encouraged to go to college in order to find a job.
I've been studying with the traditional academia style from my chidhood and I think this was one of the reasons of my deep unhappiness everytime I had to go to the school, and I agree the system can be totally useless when it comes to study died things in only books and not providing experiential oportunities to learn for children. Its a very serious matter that I hope will dramatically change very soon. I adapted to the system and became succesful in the studies but I can tell not in life. Sharing my experience, all the best to you guys
Hands on experiments can also be pointless and banal. I would prefer the textbooks.
Wow. A week of lecture had just cut into a 5minute video. Great job.
I can't believe this was only 5 minutes . It was so comprehensive
1) learn by doing
2) discussion
3) interactive
4) interdisciplinary
I am studying John Dewey's Philosophy. This video really makes me understand more clear on his principles, such attractive fun animation and clear explanation!
I agree
among dozens of teachers only three have ever allowed us to discuss their subject and come up with new ideas, use our imagination and speak ourselves. others shut us up and neglected our opinions, saying we were too stupid or too lazy or other stuff. if we DID give out opinions, some of them even laughed at us and later used it against us in offensive jokes. so yeah, basically, 11 years of school was a hell for me and I'm glad I'm graduating this year
ELDII
-experiential learning
-discussion
-interactive
-interdisciplinary
Uniforms are super cool, you don't have to think too much about dressing up, yet everyone has their unique touch to thy self. Everyone feels part of a pattern, group, in for what matters most.
Uniform can help less affluent student, whose limited in clothing choice, to blend in. It also involves enforcement of nitty-gritty rules such as length of hems, etc, etc. So on one hand it's a training for being responsible for you public appearance. Ideal is making informed choices, you learn to dress formal, as well as express yourself in casual smart, then choose the one more appropriate to your current situation.
Uniforms, sadly, are corporate branding. No denying on modern education systems are commercialized. Any incident in public places, first question heard is more "Are they in school unforms?" than "Are the students hurt?".
I completely agree I went most my life to a British school and while we knew who was less well off by shoes, it was no where near the drama I saw in American high schools where cliques were so ingrained into how friendships were made divisively, not to mention by class lines.
There was an enormous unity where I saw uniforms at play and more focus into learning. I wish we did it here
To be honest , this channel keeps blowing my mind
When I went to school in the sixties, there was one program, one track, and it all revolved around completing workbooks, memorizing facts and spewing them back in exams, and in addition being judged on academic performance (if memorizing and spewing dates and other facts counts as performance), we were given a grade for "citizenship." A good grade in citizenship meant you didn't give the teachers any trouble: you had learned to go along to get along. A bad grade meant you were Trouble, and got a lot of negative attention from the vice principal. I spent most of school, particularly middle school, in terror of making someone mad, or being different. It was a hateful experience.
I completed my schooling in 2020 and how ironic it doesn't get better even after 60 years haha.
More or less same experience for me as well, it was like they have a job of handling inmates and to train them for being an obedient employee without any critical thinking/ authentic views. It was so frustrating and am glad that I'm at least out of that phase now.
@@shubham2516 I think now that it's up to us to make the life we want to live; no one else will do it. That only took me most of a lifetime to learn.
This video is amazing, it summarizes correctly Dewey's thoughts about education, it is a bittersweet feeling because many agree with his theory of learning while others do not, in my personal opinion for me since I was a child it has always been easier to learn with the practice of education than reading for hours thousands of pages, but it is true that not everything can be like that.
I developed an interest in educational philosophy after reading “Understanding Poverty”, although I know some educators aren’t fans of it. Just found your channel and lovin it!
I saw a video of scientists being interviewed about their experiences with religion. Many became atheists or agnostics due to the rigidity of thought in the religions with which they were raised (some catholic). One scientist gave a pithy statement: “It’s better to have questions you can’t answer instead of answers you can’t question”. Dewey sounds like a very wise person, encouraging curiosity and questioning everything.
No linkage, only interest. Like the video described, here’s an interdisciplinary approach including statistics, neuroanatomy, sociology, and education. The book differentiates generational poverty from situational poverty. Keeping in mind that nature isn’t typically observed in absolutes - only bell curves described in standard deviations of probability so there’s always exceptions. Generational poverty is commonly thought of as a monetary problem. But the book points out many of the social ills of generational poverty are from poor decisions as opposed to lack of money. These bad decisions are passed from one generation to the next - making it generational. While being in possession of less money, this money is ironically more likely to be spent on unnecessary or harmful things including tobacco, alcohol, illegal drugs and tattoos instead of the most necessary things for survival. This is well known but not often discussed - which doesn’t help the problem. Decisions are made more with the amygdala / limbic system instead of the prefrontal cortex - meaning more decisions are made based on emotions instead of on reasoning. Thus, there’s more abuse, violence and crime - decisions that are harmful to oneself and others. This must be considered in the education of a child that can’t concentrate in school because their home life is in shambles. Whilst a college educated person may fall upon hard times (called situational poverty) they will have a lifetime of making fairly good decisions - studying hard, working hard, being responsible. It would be unusual for this type of person to purposely try to cause harm themselves or others. I was fascinated to hear how some groups such as priests and nuns may live near the poverty level but don’t have these problems showing that many problems with generational poverty have very little to do with money.
My private education was strictly academic but I think this made me a better reader/researcher/writer. Critical thinking, questioning authority and iconoclast manifesting had become my mission statement at a very young age.
Im currently studying to become an elementary school teacher (age 7-10) and Im currently taking a course in development and education, in which teacher theories are being taught to us and your videos have been brought up as extra help to understand pragmatism, behaviourism, Vygotsky's theory and Piaget's theory. Its really good at explaining and giving examples. Keep up the amazing work
Wow imagine a world where teachers are paid well and quality education is given importance.
So when your solution is to pay teachers better, your argument is actually that higher pay will replace bad teachers? In other words, that bad teachers are the problem?
@@ozzy5146 Teachers have responsabilities outside of their jobs, families, children, debts, etc. Some teachers are "bad" beacause of a lack of interest or care but others are "bad" because they are having problems dealing with issues outside their jobs, a better salary could help them to make things less stressful in their private life.
In other words: if a job is well paid is less likely that external issues diminish the performance of an employee.
@@JARZR wow wut a silly argument: that individual teachers improve with a little more money. SHOOOR!
@@ozzy5146 I think @Avni meant that the job of being a teacher should be paid more to encourage more people to get into the field making it more competitive and so more better teachers will be able to be teaching in school. So I think it's just a misunderstanding, either way, I think you could've approached the argument more politely by trying to make it clear or asking the other end to make their opinion clearer rather than accusing the argument of being silly.
@@JARZR Well, I think your point is valid, but it doesn't affect the teacher's performance as much, I don't think underpaying teachers justifies teachers not doing their best. (I have also addressed a more prominent effect of increasing pay for teachers in my reply to @Ozzy)
As with almost all educational reformers, he was largely ignored. He threatened the status quo, and dared to encourage the children to ... THINK!
How so? If he wanted them to think, surely he would have led by example.
Actually, the result was he got students not to think. When student lacked pressure and could make concensus decisions, they usually avoided learning. The response was to lower the grading bar so students would pass, and they just kept lowering the bar until today which is why we are getting students who made straight A's in high school and can't pass a college entrance exam.
He has written with his own hand that the children should not become educated to the degree where they can think for themselves. His job was design a school day where the children would be prepared to work in factories and respond to bells and follow instructions. He was a reformer when the U.S. population was at its HIGHEST rate of literacy (90%) which was NOT what those in power wanted. Not a hero but a monster.
This. This is what education should be. If only it were like this, students would be happier and enjoy learning and actually increase their knowledge.
Dewey's influence has actually led to an erosion of standards in education. If a school becomes a 'playground' as Dewey argued, the kids will mostly follow their own interests. Today this amounts to social media, gossip etc. If they are going to learn crucial skills like literacy, numeracy etc then they need to be instructed. Very few children take an intuitive interest in these things.
My school was too crowded for everyone to flourish . I have not seen any change in the last 50 years since I graduated.
RANKED CHOICE VOTING IS MUCH NEEDED NOW!
I re-educated my self after I turned 35. It took me 17 years to realize how little they thought me.
The biggest problems are time and class size. In higher grade levels many teachers spend a lot of material that should've been covered in previous school years. Like a house, when a child has weak foundation you cannot build on top of it. Class sizes are often very high, sticking forty students at a time with one teacher leaves little time for individualization. Make elementary, middle, high schools interlinked...they could be in separate buildings but there needs to be a dialogue between the three. Cut down on testing and fund schools through summer (the summer break can be cut down to two weeks). Cut class sizes at 24 students regardless of grade level. Bring in more electives (culinary, auto shop, etc) that cater the student interests. Of course all of this requires more funding, but there would be better results.
When I went to school, in the 1960s and 70s, class sizes were around 25 kids. The industrial arts as well as home economics were a big part of the curriculum. Upon graduating, we had what they called at the time, basic competency tests. Oddly, the taxes required then were a pittance compared to today.
Maybe the answer is to go back to that style schooling instead of having two administrators per student?
I don't agree that even more government Spartan camp school is the answer. You are saying it doesn't work now, so let's do more of it by killing summer? Yay! Now let's kill Santa...
I've heard the old saying, learning at youth like carving in the stone while learning at older age is like writing in the water. Children are fast memorizing and imitating they are not best at comprehension generally speaking. While adult is quick in comprehension. Trying to get a discussion going between teenager age 12 - 15 is way harder than one might even think.
I did learn by doing, and this includes abstract math. Even at the PhD level, I found doing example math problems necessary. However, office hours w a professor are equally necessary. A mulri-prong approach if you will. I don't necessarily agree all Dewy's ideas such as gearing public school for those least likely to learn, but i accept most of his tenants.
In following your train of thought, I was struck by the evolutionary process, here. Newton built on Kepler, Galileo, Copernicus, et. al.; Einstein built on Newton; Bohr built upon Einstein; Hawking built upon Einstein and Bohr's argumentation over quantum mechanics. They weren't 'adding on' by intent so much as by trying to tear open the gaps in the theories of their mentors. This process was frequently inspired by a confrontational approach that has always been inherent to the scientific process (and despised by those who prefer more dogmatic instruction methods). Dewey harnessed this approach for "young person" education, but softened it with a more inclusive attitude, as he no doubt understood the dichotomy of young minds that are in varying stages of physical development (as well as more deferential/less self-confident) while at the same time more likely to question authority figures of prior generations - at least in their own minds.
I visited your channel 2 days back
Watched 2 videos... And immediately subscribed
Great content
Great presentation
Very informative...👍
I have been looking for this man. I tried it hard to grasp his understanding on education and his contribution too.
Thank you so much for this, Sprout!
Very welcome. Keep learning ;)
Learning by doing is really effective in some areas. In the past decades we were thought to imagine things to learn but now atleast students experience how to actually do things
Doing without thinking is Nazism
Hands on Learning is very important. Most Engg. graduates today ,I found as a recruiter& trainer, that they have only theoretical & little practical knowledge. That too, they have forgotten what they read(not studied) in the 1st year during the 2nd year!!!!
This is brilliant and sums up all the best bits about Dewey and his thoughts on education. I haven't looked but about to and see if you have done a follow on to Pragmatism that you hinted upon in the last few moments. Good stuff and keep up the great work.
Learn by doing? Only when baking a pie or sewing a nightgown in Home Ec. Oh, and choir or piano practice in music class. And art class...that too. That was it. Otherwise, the approach was learn by abstract imagining where I guess my teacher hoped we would somehow get it.
Pure Genius of simple descriptions of how Actual Intelligence is applied in Reality. Thanks to John Dewey.
Absolutely well done and definitely keep it up!!! 👍👍👍👍👍
Your art and constant building upon characters kept me engaged. Lol loved it
thanks for creating such beautiful piece on dewey!
That's highlighted about making moments count rather than preparing for adult life. I think school indoctrinated me to think like that, and so I'm not living in the present and satisfied with my life. What an eye opener. These are really useful and we'll thought out videos! 🙂
Pascal Gaggeli including the whole teams deserves a great round of Applause
Thanks a lot!
Most welcome!
Well that's out the window now. I just moved out of Seattle where the school system is about what to think and who to hate.
I only experienced Dewy’s ideas of participatory learning twice. Once in elementary school when we made posters for a function assembly line style and once in high school when we dissected rats.
A lot of this get's referenced for children. How are these applied to adult learning? I enjoy the video's Sprouts offers, but I find very little apply-able in my own life, especially as I'm becoming an adult student this year.
There is literally no difference for adults when it comes to learning. Learning works the same for children and adults. Study, experiment, observe, conclude, connect, discuss, etc, etc. What works for children, works for adults. Adults actually have a chance to learn far better because they can integrate new material to a lot of their life experience and knowledge they've gained, making the ideas stick better and have more meaning. If you can't use your time at work to learn, do it at home or during commute. Time and effort are all you need. If you want to learn math for example, even with good time dedication it will take you 4 years to cover pretty much all the subjects that exist to an intermediate level. If you want to learn sciences it will be a bit harder because of lack of equipment but there is a chance there are workshops out there you could go to. If you want to write better, then write and analyze, both your works, and the works of others, both the good and the bad to learn the DOs and DON'Ts. If you want something more artistic, you just need to do it.
The only problems adults face are adult time consuming tasks. But the learning process doesn't change. Everything you see applicable to children in these videos, applies to everyone :]
@@SiMeGamer thanks for that. Funny cause I am learning science so some of it can be a bit more abstract but a lot can employ practical applications!
@@SiMeGamer Totally, agree. Also, no more crowded and noisy classrooms full of people distracting you and making fun of you, no more grades, comparisons of evaluation scores, exams, teachers calling out your name when you don't want to talk or don't know the answer to that stupid question because it required you to memorize, no more of their facial expressions oozing of disappointment laced with disapproval when you can't answer it, no more eyes averting you because you failed to do give the correct response, no more being ignored because some authority figure, the keeper of knowledge deems you unworthy. If that sounded resentful, that's because I am.
However, being resentful like that won't help me learn. Therefore, I should enjoy the perks of learning as an adult and that I no longer have to deal with the dead weight and instead only, purely, finally I can learn whatever it is that I want to learn. Like the video points out, for some (maybe "a lot of" I don't know) people their time was wasted at school, and for some others yet, education was turned to torture. Now that we are free and have the resources, we should not repeat what was done to us before and not waste our time. That is the first thing that needs to be learn: Our learning time is precious because we pay for it with moments of our lives.
What’s more is that adult students are all usually rather young themselves are they not?
@@michaelterrell5061 Depends on what you call "young". My last stint in college I was in my 40's. If I could afford it, I'd take classes the rest of my life!
My experience as a teacher in the UK, was that trying such innovative ideas got me into trouble. Almost universally, head teachers are obsessed with order and control. Effective education is a poor third. But Finland seems to have taken some notice, and the idea of rules by student/staff consensus rather than top down imposed was practiced by a few schools for severely disturbed children in the UK, and in Russia (Kitezh, a community of foster families).
Thank you for sharing your experience!
I wish I had seen this video sooner, in life "learning by doing" is so much better.
School was a nightmare for me. I learned more out of school
Me too
Me too
I don't disagree with you me too, but school in the last 20 years WERE NOT using this model. Imagine how much you would have learned combined with your outside of school exploits.
I still on board for a mixture of pedagogies. If using his theory in total:
1. Limited knowledge could be gained and imparted.
2. Areas with limited adult's supervision/guidance may result in some problems.
3. Students with different and multiple backgrounds may have different learning experience. Same task but for poor and uncared kids, might be able to do much.
Thanks for them, our schools do exactly the opposite 😂😤
Great job Sprouts ❤
Yes most do. So sad!
Just amazing👍👍 Appreciate your work🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
Join us ;)
Where?😀😀
Dewey was great person!
The information is very educative and precise
Thank you for the short and sweet video. It is much more understandable for hours of reading.
Please keep up creating such content
Informative and useful as Always 👍
I was homeschooled via the Abeka Homeschool program. I got to do all sorts of things to apply what I learned.
Wonderful video. Thanks for sharing. Great philosophy.
Glad you enjoyed it!
I think John Dewey’s ideas are the best of learning strategies.
Thank you for doing this amazing job Sprouts!
Every video on this channel is a useful crash course. Thank you so much
Welcome 🙏
Learning by doing is indeed helpful for students. It helps them to experience and apply the lesson taught in the class. However,by doing so,It takes too much time and resoource to apply learning by teaching in real class. However,from i've experienced, i only able to apply the technique only quarter of my total teaching session per semester.
Wow! Isn't it great. John Dewey's ideas brought us to where we are now. Just great.
Lol
I feel so grateful because I found this amazing channel with this wonderful videos that I need in my life. ❤
Can you do one on Bertrand Russell on his educational beliefs
Thank you for this shirt video, it really helps me trying to get through Dewey's texts! I am writing my pedagogy vision, which is influenced by Dewey!
I do believe we ought to plot a new education model, perhaps inspired by the ancient Greeks. A model where we prepare humans to become utterly free and fulfilled. To do so we have to drive our education programs towards a much more eclectic and interdisciplinary syllabus.
Luis Atilano: This response is a year late, so you may not see it. But, if you do, I've been studying Educational Scholarship and Systems, moving towards a PhD in Research; and I couldn't agree more.
Starting with a more Aristotlean model may not make everyone feel equal, but it will provide differentiated learning that matches not only the talents and abilities of each student. It will also match students to teachers to support learning strategies, styles, pacing, and give them more control over the speed at which students can cover the curriculum.
Teachers unions hate this idea, so they'd really hate the idea of this method being used to curate teaching staff and give them the possibility of doing more And making more money based on their abilities and performance, as well as student achievement.
School Choice needs to become a right. The teacher's unions must be destroyed and re-organized. The curriculum has to have a complete reboot. Unfortunately, the very group preventing All of the above are teachers and their unions.
But, one we're at the reboot point, definitely go back to the Greco-Roman model. It's our best chance for the future generations to escape what's been done to Gen Y and Z
Brilliant. Thank you for taking the time to create this. Really good stuff.
It is interesting to me that compulsory education is the norm in every nation regardless of the political ideology of the regime compelling it, and the fundamental lessons imposed are conformity of thought, along with uniform respect and fealty for 'Educators' authority and that of the regime in power.
Super illustration. Thank you
Thank you. I didn't realize Dewey had this educational philosophy. It's the philosophy I followed teaching high school Ag and multiple subjects in a K-8 charter school.
Gracias Sprouts for estos excelentes vídeos pues permiten comprender las ideas de gente como Dewey en una manera divertida y fácil; lamentablemente, yo estudié en forma tradicional y los cursos pedagógicos los recibí sin comprender nada y sin relacionar con que deseaba poner en práctica estas ideas.
Welcome 🙏
... I have taught all the grades, from K through 12. For ethical reasons, I quit teaching, because the 3 R's are all anyone needs, or even uses, in most jobs, and life. We learn the 3 R's by the 4th or fifth grade. Beyond this point, we are merely conditioning children to obey without questioning, and to report to work everyday, or else be punished. This is absolutely true.
A drama! Thanks for sharing
Is that: Read, Recite, Repeat?
@@sprouts The three Rs are reading, writing (it makes an R sound...poetic license), and arithmetic (bigger poetic license, but there's an R in there). The basics.
We need more than just the basics, like computers and art.
Very helpful for me and saving me a lot of time too.
Great content! Extremely helpful!👍
Thanks, well done Sprouts and the visuals are just amazing. Dewey's theory is certainly viable if there is proper funding for Education. It It is therefore easier to implement in a private school setting as compared to a public school one. A critic would be: how possible is it to find enough time within the term to implement the learning by doing eg planting and watching plants grow while at the same time covering the required syllabus?. For the discussions it is important that some teacher instructions and prior reading and research happens before for the discussion/debate to be meaningful enough to sprout out new perspectives and ideas.
For the interdisciplinary aspect to work, very strong school leadership is essential as well as a strong teamwork culture among staff as it would require a lot of sharing, consultations, planning and constant reviews.
Our education system whether basic or higher needs an overhaul. It's messed up right now.
education was like that in east-germany in the 80s. i took class 1-9 there. the last years i spent in westgermany, were it was almost multiple choice only. so, ... in my case the answer is "yes", but in most cases it´s "no" i guess. thank you very much for sharing.
These had been also my thoughts for the past year and I would love to see an education revolution, unlucky that I dont know how to start it :'(
Some things just have to be learned by rote,wrote,roat? Examples: spelling, times tables, penmanship. Hopefully teachers make things fun most of the time.
Penmanship isn't taught now that we have computers. Spelling? Spell check on the computer fixes that for them. My sister teaches music at the elementary level. She told me she has kids in Kindergarten who cannot name colors! Can't count to ten! These are kids in regular classrooms, too, not special education.
If kids today could learn to make a coherent argument at all, I'd be amazed!
Excelente video
Excellent Presentation. !!!
All theories given by John dewy are included in b.ed. and we have learnt useful video 👍
I have learned more outside of school by pursuing my passions, Though I have something of a bone to pick, the subjects that schools teach are the ones that the institutions of government and large businesses who finance the campaigns of the politicians who design the curriculum want, along with certain key voting blocks in state politics. This means that the subjects tend to be in line with the interests of certain influential voting blocks, Example, there are at least a dozen classes in AACC about racial sensitivity and colonial imperialist history (valid subjects for study but with strong political influences and for some reason now mandatory even if I want an accounting degree which has little to do with HR or fields that deal with social justice. Perhaps this is to raise the blue sheep of tomorrow?) Now in more conservative states, We have classes like the bible as literature (Gee I wonder what voting blocks matter there?) Perhaps this is to raise the Red sheep of tomorrow? We have many accounting engineering, computing classes, training the corporate peasants of tomorrow. We have almost no classes on stock trading. (because dumb stock traders are easy to compete with and it's not incorporate interests to have smart individual competitors.) what little finance I've seen taught in public schools is almost designed to take you into massive debt, with an emphasis on building good credit scores, or putting money in banks that pay an interest lower than the rate of inflation (wonder who sponsored this stuff being taught in school) So I've had to learn independently so I wouldn't be raised like a lamb for slaughter by a system designed to teach people to be useful cogs in someone else's design.
John Dewey was a Marxists! He is the modern American Marxist 😉. We all should see this; Teachers union, BLM, Antifa, Jim Crow Laws, Segregationist, Slavery, Most public unions, (maybe some decent unions out there, but unionisms were also brought out by Marxists and there are big differences from private unions to public unions or unionisms, just saying we have labor laws in place already with most businesses applying them through business policies or their procedures etc) Big tech, and more government interventions are all European values of the old democratic party or system. There is a reason why the GOP began and why America dumbs its history in America. That sole reason and why Dems are so afraid is because the left has this identity crisis in America or in American history. We some how dumbed American history down so the left or Dems wouldn't be portrayed as the destruction of America. We meaning the GOP after the civil war tried to have the Dems acclimate to American culture. The Dems or Left tried and was successful of ripping American culture apart by creating more slavery, segregation, and fighting against true American history. If we teach real history the left and Dems would have been portrayed as evil or even genocidal while the GOP (the true 1st American party) as the Dems have or always were stuck with the European values of colonialism, imperialism and slave ownership/slavery or segregation. Hence why the Left or Dems try and rewrite history or refuse to accept the destruction the Left or Dems have cause in our American culture.
There are reasons why the teachers union tried to defund the police. The police union was one of the largest unions in America and now the Teachers union has now gained the powers over most unions and that's no different with or how the left or Dems have monopolized big tech to gain power. The Dems will never break these monopolies up or the teachers union because of power as the Dems never cared about the individual or person, they only care for what's good for the state or government. Hence why the Left or Dems say they will work with big tech, no, maybe we should break these monopolies up like TR did but not do what Taft wanted which is the Left in my opinion (large corporations in line with mucky politicans). America split in the Civil War and the Left or Dems have still fought against our American culture or true history (the truth).
I personally believe Adam's and Jefferson were the true split or true party lines. Adam's the left or true Dems lost their way after the Civil War. If we actually teach history we would probably see that we actually had another split in America History. That split to me is the GOP splitting into two partys hence why the GOP never agrees because its conservatives vs libertarians. I believe conservatives are and always was the American left and that I think is more Adam's line of thinking (which I would love to have back in the dem or lefts party not the destructive party they are today). Jefferson the libertarian is the right or GOP. The GOP split where I believe left vs right is Taft vs TR. This split in the GOP created more of the swamp. Look at why TR stopped using the Antitrust act laws and why Taft wanted to go further interfering with capitalism. We can all agree that Taft was for more intervention by the government. We have to draw a line somewhere and not let politics interfere with the freedoms of capitalism. We have laws all for our protections but when we allow big tech or large corporations to interfere with government we now have socialism in America. The swamp was extremely prominent during the progressive movement in America as Taft wanted more intervention by using corporations and the political machine. That split created basically a 4 party system (socialism, independent, Dems, Republicans). Socialism is the new left or Dems, independents are centrists, Dems are conservatives and Republicans are libertarians. So left is Dems with 2 splits in the party of Socialist and centrists, thus GOP or Republicans are split from conservatives and libertarians (natural left vs right). (My opinion 😉)
We have the laws and policies in place but we aren't implementing our own rules or laws. We have discrimination laws, and most laws are here but the Dems or left wants more laws upon the same laws to limit our liberties and freedoms all for control or power.
I'm just adding to what you are saying 😉. I'm a libertarian but I also respect conservatives because of the similarities we have between us so its easier to have more common sense with each other by debating and listening to other ideals. The left would rather not have any debate or they would rather lie all for the good of power, and to me that isn't America.
Except for the interactive session others are amazing. Dewey seems to have way ahead of his time.
You mean the one step that explicitly involves the instructor ! ???
I was a victim of public schooling. 4h as a kid taught me so much more by doing rather than pedantic bookish learning. I dreaded those tests.
public schooling then you must come from a wealthy family.
Gratitude
No not really unless you were in like shop class or art you got gym music cooking class I guess those are all Hands-On 🇺🇸👍
Learning is a blast.
Long Live Dewey
recipient of a public school education here, 80's and 90's...I remember group work and projects but the look of the classroom spaces were still very traditional and used more often. When I watched this video I wondered what a truly interdisciplinary experiential school would physically look like. I don't think it would have rows of desks facing the blackboard as the main part of the classroom! On the other hand it looks like a lot of work for one teacher and 26 students. Anyone know any real places that do this? Sounds a lot like Montessori?
There are some projects-schools, also in the US. But it’s still rare.
Brilliant, thank you.
learning=experience
education=interactive=flexible-out of limits
Wow.. this need to be implements.
Some learning need experience. Now, learning focus to profit from experience of others. Animals learn by their experience. But when they die, their gained knowledge is not passed to succeeding offsprings. Humans tend to pass knowledge gained from past generations. Experiences you had can be distilled in education. Example: eating young fruits makes them taste sour; ripe fruits in many experiences taste sweet. So theory I becomes apparent to say (teacher), eat those ripes they taste better.
great summary
Hm-m-m. School uniforms eliminate class distinctions among students. They also relieve students of the anxiety inherent in making daily sartorial choices. Uniforms also reinforce the conviction that one's intellectual growth should be one's highest priority, not one's vanity served by fashion, fads, and agonizing over clothing purchases. When I was a university student In California in the 1970's, the universal uniform for students, male and female, was: tee-shirt, jeans, and tennis shoes. Clothing was purely a practical matter. (There were the occasional eccentrics, who were amusing on account of their rarity.) School children do not yet have the adult wisdom of those university students. They are vulnerable to their anxieties.
Great video
👌 suprb ....
If Dewey tried any of this, he’d get excommunicated.
Our school was run by a convent of nuns. So it was mostly learning through reading or by rote. The teachers explained the lessons and we underwent assignments, tests and exams. That is how we were assessed. Of course they were activities like debates, dramatics and even sports. But basically it was all about learning the facts from textbooks. Hardly any practicals.
Sad
In Biology we had to let fruit rot in a Petri dish. Years later I realized that it gave me an abhorrence to eating fruit. Once I realized that I became a much healthier eater. It probably didn't effect most people the same way.
Just in 5 min ..Amazing
It is true that school has made great progress in teaching and learning methodology. However, many schools are still, one way or another in a Teaching Paradigm.