|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 11, 2023 10:58:23 GMT
Back on topic. With such easy access to instant knowledge now available should exams switch from being a memory test and look at other abilities. Almost absolutely. A mixture of both would IMO be the right way to progress. I see no real gain from a memory test to check you have learned something when if you forgot it you can look it up in seconds. What I do find difficult is exactly what should be taught is schools beyond reading and basic maths. Everything else you either don't use or you can find out instantly. How long before we all have an AI permanently with us remembering peoples names, and answering our every question. So then the teaching comes down to, how to use your AI and when to check what it tells you. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Mar 11, 2023 12:08:19 GMT
Almost absolutely. A mixture of both would IMO be the right way to progress. I see no real gain from a memory test to check you have learned something when if you forgot it you can look it up in seconds. What I do find difficult is exactly what should be taught is schools beyond reading and basic maths. Everything else you either don't use or you can find out instantly. How long before we all have an AI permanently with us remembering peoples names, and answering our every question. So then the teaching comes down to, how to use your AI and when to check what it tells you. Having a reasonably good memory bank would reduce some of the need to look everything up on Google etc. IMO, even people with an apparent good academic training will use their ability to be able to look things up which will be part of their improving their ability to progress. While at the same time having a fading memory of much of their academic learning that is no longer of any use to them. To that extent I share what I see as your concern about just what should / could be taught. IMO a change of direction should begin at 'A' levels. I have long believed that 'academic excellence' is a false god who's roots may begin with a mistaken belief by some that I have a better education than you therefore I am better than you. I recall reading a comment by the top UK mathematician in the 1970s that he hated maths at school and only became interested in maths after leaving school. As you say future needs and inventions will change things anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 11, 2023 12:36:31 GMT
I see no real gain from a memory test to check you have learned something when if you forgot it you can look it up in seconds. What I do find difficult is exactly what should be taught is schools beyond reading and basic maths. Everything else you either don't use or you can find out instantly. How long before we all have an AI permanently with us remembering peoples names, and answering our every question. So then the teaching comes down to, how to use your AI and when to check what it tells you. Having a reasonably good memory bank would reduce some of the need to look everything up on Google etc. IMO, even people with an apparent good academic training will use their ability to be able to look things up which will be part of their improving their ability to progress. While at the same time having a fading memory of much of their academic learning that is no longer of any use to them. To that extent I share what I see as your concern about just what should / could be taught. IMO a change of direction should begin at 'A' levels. I have long believed that 'academic excellence' is a false god who's roots may begin with a mistaken belief by some that I have a better education than you therefore I am better than you. I recall reading a comment by the top UK mathematician in the 1970s that he hated maths at school and only became interested in maths after leaving school. As you say future needs and inventions will change things anyway. There is definitely snobbery in education just as there is in sport. At school I often thought sport should be streamed. why was I made to look hopeless in the football lessons and yet our football hero Peter Woods was not made to look a fool in my Physics lessons. As for learning it is required to build memory capacity, but most of this ability is achieved by the time you can read and write. After that its just whether you have a good or bad memory. Sadly exams are simply a test of that, they do not test any ability to apply or adapt what you've learned and these are the things needed by business. At least when we went through a phase of marking course work, you could see who had learned from previous errors, who had gone further than was required on a subject etc. |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Mar 11, 2023 17:08:01 GMT
Some people probably forget what Google is. Now back to the point of exams, how else do you test a person's knowledge?
|
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 11, 2023 17:19:34 GMT
Some people probably forget what Google is. Don't worry that's natural in the old. I'm not saying we shouldn't have exams, I'm questioning how they work. Job interviews rarely work, but after only a couple of days you can tell someone's intelligence and work ethic. Maybe a similar method could be devised to judge a child's advancement. |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Mar 11, 2023 17:33:43 GMT
Some people probably forget what Google is. Don't worry that's natural in the old. I'm not saying we shouldn't have exams, I'm questioning how they work. Job interviews rarely work, but after only a couple of days you can tell someone's intelligence and work ethic. Maybe a similar method could be devised to judge a child's advancement. Many companies use a department to interview people for jobs, pity so many of those interviewers haven't a clue. Some companies rely on managers to interview people, some of those managers should have long ago been fired. I've rejected applicants purely on the basis their handwriting was atrocious. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 11, 2023 19:14:12 GMT
Don't worry that's natural in the old. I'm not saying we shouldn't have exams, I'm questioning how they work. Job interviews rarely work, but after only a couple of days you can tell someone's intelligence and work ethic. Maybe a similar method could be devised to judge a child's advancement. Many companies use a department to interview people for jobs, pity so many of those interviewers haven't a clue. Some companies rely on managers to interview people, some of those managers should have long ago been fired. I've rejected applicants purely on the basis their handwriting was atrocious. My experience of interviewing is that no one ever says they are lazy, rude or argumentative. They all say they are a team player and often have the right credentials. Its the month trial that shows up the issues. I'd rather have someone with terrible handwriting that someone to timid to make a decision. Or someone who thinks they're busy but gets nothing done. I'm sure you seen a few of those. |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Mar 11, 2023 20:21:06 GMT
Many companies use a department to interview people for jobs, pity so many of those interviewers haven't a clue. Some companies rely on managers to interview people, some of those managers should have long ago been fired. I've rejected applicants purely on the basis their handwriting was atrocious. My experience of interviewing is that no one ever says they are lazy, rude or argumentative. They all say they are a team player and often have the right credentials. Its the month trial that shows up the issues. I'd rather have someone with terrible handwriting that someone to timid to make a decision. Or someone who thinks they're busy but gets nothing done. I'm sure you seen a few of those. An interview is probably the best candidate's performance he/she will maybe ever make, you should always take that into account. My emphasis on handwriting is because where it is a means of communication, other people will have to read it. I have never had a trial period and I never put people on a trial period but they do have to prove themselves. I have seen several of those useless people you mention; I never appointed them, and suggest you try different questioning. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 11, 2023 20:40:42 GMT
My experience of interviewing is that no one ever says they are lazy, rude or argumentative. They all say they are a team player and often have the right credentials. Its the month trial that shows up the issues. I'd rather have someone with terrible handwriting that someone to timid to make a decision. Or someone who thinks they're busy but gets nothing done. I'm sure you seen a few of those. An interview is probably the best candidate's performance he/she will maybe ever make, you should always take that into account. My emphasis on handwriting is because where it is a means of communication, other people will have to read it. I have never had a trial period and I never put people on a trial period but they do have to prove themselves. I have seen several of those useless people you mention; I never appointed them, and suggest you try different questioning. Handwriting is hardly used anymore. I must have interviewed 50+ people over the years and got at least half a dozen plonkers. I knew you'd have a perfect record on interviewing just like everything else. Fortunately I don't have to do it anymore. |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Mar 11, 2023 20:55:13 GMT
An interview is probably the best candidate's performance he/she will maybe ever make, you should always take that into account. My emphasis on handwriting is because where it is a means of communication, other people will have to read it. I have never had a trial period and I never put people on a trial period but they do have to prove themselves. I have seen several of those useless people you mention; I never appointed them, and suggest you try different questioning. Handwriting is hardly used anymore. I must have interviewed 50+ people over the years and got at least half a dozen plonkers. I knew you'd have a perfect record on interviewing just like everything else. Fortunately I don't have to do it anymore. I wish I did have a perfect record but I've been overruled at times by people who know too little about the topic and I've been stuck with someone I would never have appointed. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 11, 2023 21:24:05 GMT
Handwriting is hardly used anymore. I must have interviewed 50+ people over the years and got at least half a dozen plonkers. I knew you'd have a perfect record on interviewing just like everything else. Fortunately I don't have to do it anymore. I wish I did have a perfect record but I've been overruled at times by people who know too little about the topic and I've been stuck with someone I would never have appointed. Luckily (Or not) I've always been in the position to make the final decision, which of course makes it my fault if its wrong. Once again you come out perfect. |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Mar 11, 2023 21:57:31 GMT
I wish I did have a perfect record but I've been overruled at times by people who know too little about the topic and I've been stuck with someone I would never have appointed. Luckily (Or not) I've always been in the position to make the final decision, which of course makes it my fault if its wrong. Once again you come out perfect. Only by comparison.  |
|
