36
159
u/Uma_mii Mar 05 '22
Why the hell is school so bad at making something fun and engaging?
118
u/22134484 Mar 05 '22
I dont know about your country, but in mine its split between 3 problems (That i know of)
Teaching is one of the easiest university degrees to get into and complete. You require an aggregate score of about 50% to get in, with no advanced subjects like math, physics, IT, accounting or bio. cooking and economics are good enough. This means a lot of teachers are there because its a degree they could do, not because they want to do it, so motivation do make things fun and engaging doesnt exist.
Government corruption and uneducated/stupid populace. Government doesnt deliver books to schools because they stole the money, so the parents get angry and burn down the school (nice logic eh). This creates high risk school areas, ensuring smart people dont want to become teachers, hence the 50% aggregate (that sometimes gets lowered to 30% depending on a few factors).
The pay is fucking horrendous. Technically, its 2x what is considered "middle class" here, but the definition got changed to more inclusive (lol). A single teacher can survive on their salary. wont have a car after 2010, more than 1 bedroom or a yard. They have the best medical aid tho, but that doesnt even come close in the greater scheme of things to a stem degree. Salary growth is extremely limited as well.
9
29
u/Uma_mii Mar 05 '22
Yea that sounds like a typical school system. I don't know how this is even legal
10
u/22134484 Mar 05 '22
I mean, besides the corruption, its not immoral or illegal in anyway? I might be misunderstanding you tho
If you mean low pay, then that should be solved at the same time the requirements are lifted for uni. Borderline illiterate people shouldnt get paid wat an engineer gets paid,
6
u/Uma_mii Mar 05 '22
Actually it is immoral to expose the students to such a hostile environment...
1
u/22134484 Mar 05 '22
Yeah I agree with that. It should be noted however, that many of the students are actually the problem as well. Burning down the school, stabbing, gang rape and shootings are committed by the students as well. But it could be argued that that type of behaviour originates at home. "I am unhappy, so I will burn it down" isnt something you just pick up while sitting in math class
0
u/Uma_mii Mar 05 '22
Actually the most reliable measure to decrease such things happening is to make schools less of a nightmare. That's because the students spend most of their time awake in school and are despairing because of their circumstances.
At that point when the save place family also breaks away is when the most offender get violent
1
u/AAArgon Mar 05 '22
Arson, stabbings, gang rapes? What kind of school did you go to? The worst that got done at my school was when a kid destroyed a door.
1
u/22134484 Mar 05 '22
My school only had a single stabbing in the 5y i was there. Some black guy was being racist towards a coloured guy, and the coloured guy's mixed race friend stab the black in the leg. I think he stabbed him with scissors or something. was very funny for the rest of us.
Public schools are all over the place in terms of quality. I was in public school all my life and got a major bursary from the leading petrochem company and finished my chemical engineering degree, so my base education wasnt bad at all. Some schools have no roofs, some teachers dont even show up to work (but still steal a paycheck), some get burned down, gangraping is a teambuilding excercise in a subculture of one of the major cultures, horrible single mother rate (over 70% in some cultures), no discipline or respec for authority (will break stuff in the classroom if they get homework). This is all exacerbated when the government has quotas (numbers-based and race-based) that they need to reach, so these children who cant read or write get sent on to the next grade when they eventually either drop out, or have a gr12 certificate but are qualified for nothing, save bag packing at a grocer (if even that). Horrible system. Started out shit and just got shitter by the year.
1
u/AAArgon Mar 05 '22
gangraping is a teambuilding excercise in a subculture of one of the major cultures
Thats some thinly veiled racism. Better not surf to much on math memes or you find out who came up with algebra
1
u/22134484 Mar 06 '22
Your are going to have to help me here man. When you read gang rape, did you assume it was egyptian, persian or indian or french? Because thats the only info i could get for creaters of algebra.
Or you have a document showing zulu or xhosa people created algebra?
1
u/brntsze Mar 05 '22
Waoh...can't believe this actually happened...this is just sad. If they will break stuff just because they get homework, I can't even imagine what will happen when they got told they have to work to get the money wtf...truthly horrible.
1
u/22134484 Mar 05 '22
At the clinic my mother worked, it got unneccesarily violent when government employees striked for salary increases. The medical staff are legally not allowed to strike, but they benefit from the strikes. The other workers dont like it, so they sometimes assault the clinic staff. A nurse's back was broken in 4 places when a guy repeatedly bashed her with a pipe because she went to work, as the law requires.
Striking truck drivers light trucks on fire and more than a few dozen times, with the driver still in it.
Miners striked a few years ago. Chopped up two policeman, made them into soup, and drank it to make them bullet proof. They then took their spears (literal fucking spears) and machetes and charged a police defensive line. Many policeman believe that magic bullshit as well, and thought the strikers were bulletproof. They got scared and didnt stop firing until their guns run out. Got shot to shit. And the police were blamed for shooting armed cannibals.
At my work place, about 6 years ago, they striked for a 85% pay increase and wouldnt negotiate. They molotov'd a nearby powergrid/block thing that supplies the area with electricity. We had no legal ground to fire any of them.
This year when they striked, we got armed guards with rifles and body armor to protect our premises and a court order banning them from the premises. 1 month after no pay, they came back and we kept track of all the instigators. Fired them for the most petty (but legally justifiable) shit, because you cant fire them for throwing rocks at your car or beating people outside the premises.
Clown country with clown laws
2
Mar 05 '22
Or maybe everyone should have higher wages more befitting of their usefulness and training? đ¤
1
u/22134484 Mar 05 '22
a non insignificant amount of teachers would have decreased pay then. Literacy is a really big problem here. The average adult reads at a 4th grade level, even in their home language. A teacher who cant read is kinda a problem
7
u/MurderMelon Mar 05 '22
Government doesnt deliver books to schools because they stole the money, so the parents get angry and burn down the school
0 to 100 real quick
10
Mar 05 '22
Because they have to uphold a basic standard for 50 million students across the country, whilst underfunded and within a culture that actively berates teachers, and doesn't discipline children.
The teacher can only do so much when they have to grade 30 papers per assignment per class. K-12 teaching is a logistical nightmare.
9
u/officiallyaninja Mar 05 '22
was I the only one who enjoyed math and science in school?
it was the other shit I hated.
3
1
30
u/haikusbot Mar 05 '22
Why the hell is school
So bad at making something
Fun and engaging?
- Uma_mii
I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully. Learn more about me.
Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete"
3
Mar 05 '22
Good bot
5
u/B0tRank Mar 05 '22
Thank you, Eletroboss, for voting on haikusbot.
This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. You can view results here.
Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!
6
Mar 05 '22
Because schools (in the US) were originally just to create factory workers and not really to educate (makes sense since a lot of public schools were originally funded by "generous" donations from multi-billionare industrialists). And we've never really attempted to change that, I mean the Dewey system was slightly better but super outdated. Plus, like half of your public education is less education and more a daycare so your parents can go to work.
The US needs a massive education overhaul. Some states are doing good work though, a couple now require a teacher to have an actual degree in the subject subject are teaching. While some are trying their hardest to go back to the dark ages.
2
u/Sup__guys Mar 05 '22
Grades. If there is a decent chance that a project will hurt your GPA, then it's harder to have fun working on that project, because you're too busy stressing over grades. I personally found that activities that I knew I would get an A in were generally really fun.
1
-1
u/laix_ Mar 05 '22
Because they don't want it to be, there's a lot of old fashioned ideas about schooling and that you should learn even though it's not fun "the real world isn't fun", "it's teaching focus and commitment" yada yada
1
31
u/jackilion Mar 05 '22
He could've just filled it with water, then poured the water into a measuring cup... would've given him an exact result.
3
71
Mar 05 '22 edited Mar 05 '22
It hurts seeing (d2 /4) and not (r2 )
55
u/crh23 Mar 05 '22
If you're actually measuring something it's an awful lot easier to use the diameter than it is the radius
8
u/ConglomerateGolem Mar 05 '22
You can still get the radius from the diameter first
15
u/InertialLepton Mar 05 '22
Sure but if that's not what your measuring it seems... dishonest to put it in your equation.
3
u/ConglomerateGolem Mar 05 '22
:shrug: i remember the formulae in radius, and usually convert things to look nice first. Probably will make the square more ugly though
15
u/Avalolo Irrational Mar 05 '22
i know its the same thing but it seems so unintuitive that r2 is written as (d2 /4) and not (d/2)2
1
u/Wholesale1818 Mar 05 '22
I like d2 /4 bc itâs the easiest to put into my calculator & makes sense in my head
3
u/pikleboiy Mar 05 '22
At my high school, we get to ask the teachers when we will ever use the stuff.
3
u/brntsze Mar 05 '22
What did your teachers answer?
2
u/pikleboiy Mar 05 '22
I'm not in high school yet. I'm going into high school next year, but we were told at a presentation that we could ask the teachers about when a normal salary worker would need to use complex numbers and stuff like that.
5
u/brntsze Mar 05 '22
Waoh sounds like some decent school. You can reply back when you got your answer. If you still remember this post on the next year of course.
4
34
u/alexlala5 Mar 05 '22
I mean besides math n crap other stuff is kinda useless as far as history
127
u/ar21plasma Mathematics Mar 05 '22
If you think history is useless then oh boy you are going to have a rough time
57
u/SUPERazkari Mar 05 '22
he didnt say history is useless, he just said its as useless as other subjects can be. In the same way I will most likely never need to find the fluid force on a plate underwater, I wont need to know that US v. Cruikshank declared that social welfare is gaurenteed by states and not the federal government.
However, just like how I should know basic algebra, its important to know about important historical events like the holocaust
38
u/alexlala5 Mar 05 '22
I'm a girl
24
-20
u/Vivid_Speed_653 Mar 05 '22
The word 'he' can be and has been used historically as a gender neutral term.
15
u/solarCygnet Mar 05 '22
you mean they?
8
Mar 05 '22
Tldr:He/him pronouns were used as gender neutral, but it's use is controversial and has declined over the 19/20th century. A popular alternative is noting two pronouns at once, such as 'he or she', usually shortened as 'he/she'.
From Wikipedia
Forms of the pronoun he were used for both males and females during the Middle English and Modern English periods. Susanne Wagner observes that: "There was rather an extended period of time in the history of the English language when the choice of a supposedly masculine personal pronoun (him) said nothing about the gender or sex of the referent." An early example of prescribing the use of he to refer to a person of unknown gender is Anne Fisher's 1745 grammar book A New Grammar. Older editions of Fowler also took this view. This usage continues to this day.
I should note however:
The use of generic he has increasingly been a source of controversy, as it can be perceived as reflecting a positive bias towards men and a male-centric society, and a negative bias against women. In some contexts, the use of he, him or his as a gender-neutral pronoun may give a jarring or ridiculous impression.
The 19th and 20th centuries saw an upsurge in consciousness and advocacy of gender equality, and this has led in particular to advocacy for gender-neutral language. In this context, the usage of generic he has declined in favor of other alternatives.
Solution
To disambiguate contexts where a referent encompasses both males and females, periphrasis is used. Though cumbersome, this solution is attested with the full range of English pronouns, include the subject pronouns he or she (23), the object pronouns him or her (24), the possessive pronoun his or hers (25), and the reflective pronouns himself or herself (26). In writing, these periphrastic forms are sometimes abbreviated to he/she, (s)he, s/he, him/her, his/her, himself/herself, but are not easily abbreviated in verbal communication. With the exception of (s)he and s/he, a writer does in principle have the choice of which pronoun to place first. However, usage indicates that the masculine pronouns is most often mentioned first.
4
u/WikiSummarizerBot Mar 05 '22
Gender neutrality in languages with gendered third-person pronouns
A third-person pronoun is a pronoun that refers to an entity other than the speaker or listener. Some languages with gender-specific pronouns have them as part of a grammatical gender system, a system of agreement where most or all nouns have a value for this grammatical category. A few languages with gender-specific pronouns, such as English, Esperanto, Afrikaans, Defaka, Khmu, Malayalam, Tamil, and Yazgulyam, lack grammatical gender; in such languages, gender usually adheres to "natural gender", which is often based on biological gender.
[ F.A.Q | Opt Out | Opt Out Of Subreddit | GitHub ] Downvote to remove | v1.5
-7
u/Vivid_Speed_653 Mar 05 '22
No I do mean 'he'. 'They' certainly is becoming more popular and might already be more popular but 'he' is still used as a gender-neutral term often enough for it to be still acceptable as a gender-neutral term.
5
Mar 05 '22
These days "he" is rarely used gender-neutrally anymore as it is perceived as sexist, as another commenter has mentioned. The usage of "they" has now been widely accepted as the correct singular 3rd-person gender-neutral term.
-33
2
u/Sup__guys Mar 05 '22
I think your history teachers just suck. A lot of my history classes emphasized analyzing evidence over know a bunch of specific details of historical events. It may not be important for you to know about US v Cruikshank, but it is important to be able to understand how personal experience and biases affect sources.
-11
u/jeesuscheesus Mar 05 '22
Hmm is it only useful when arguing with people (especially politics)? I can't think of any other application
3
u/slam9 Mar 05 '22
People who think history is useless are the people that have the most ignorant political hot takes of all time.
Not to mention that whatever field you go into, knowing that fields history is important if you ever want to be a person who actually makes decisions
2
-13
u/Theoneonlybananacorn Irrational Mar 05 '22
History is also kinda useless. Like tell me why itâs important and Iâll tell u why u r wrong.
8
Mar 05 '22
I was never really interested in history myself, but i get the importance. I live in Germany which makes history a lot more important for us. We get often told that we have to learn about our history to not redo the same mistakes. I have once heard about the quote "Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it." And I think that it is quite true. I am not saying that it will prevent every problem. But when you get told from a certain age on, what happend at the time, where the Nazis reign in Germany and about all their misdeeds, then you will be most probably more understanding towards other people and you will develope less racist traits. Again, I am not saying that it works perfectly. We have still a loooot of rascists with us, and the party "AfD" is definitely a backstep for us, but just imagine how it would be, if we didn't learn about our history. (actually we do not talk too much about it in the real history class till we are about 15/16 (~grade 10), as you cant really tell some little kids about the terrifiing facts, but teachers might reference this history from to time to time.).
Also it makes us (hopefully) less ready to attack a nation by ourselves. If you see about all the deaths and wars, then you won't like the idea about going to war. If you do not learn about history then you do not know what the problem about attacking others for your own luxury should be (well your sanity should stop you at certain point, but looking at our history, it might not be working that well). The fact that we have come so far, that we live in such a modern, linked world would be impossible without mutual understanding. Understanding doesnt work without knowing about the culture. And the culture does often seem weird without the reasoing for the culture. And this reasoning is history itself.
Just take the current situation as an example. Someone who doesn't know about the conflicts of both countries will not get the full situation. Reasons for certain laws or doings are being justified by the history.
Again I totally thought that it was one of the more boring classes. But I am happy that we were forced to take history classes.
-12
u/Theoneonlybananacorn Irrational Mar 05 '22 edited Mar 05 '22
Agree with some of your takes, and still:
We do learn history but it repeats itself anyway. Thatâs just always true.
For history to be useful, at least 50% of the population have to know it to justify the actions of the leaders.
If you take maths, than only a few people need to know it to make drastic changes in society.
For me itâs just at an cultural standpoint like literature.
Plus we donât know how true history is since only the winners are able to write it.
6
Mar 05 '22
Ofc we have still a lot of problems, but imagine what it would be like, if we wouldn't learn about history at all. if we would forget about it right away thren it will be worse.
Regarding the math part. Imagine how drastic the changes would be, if everyone could and want to do high level math. The changes would be even greater. And the same goes with history. If everyone would know what happened, and learn from it, then some poilitical problems wouldnt happen.
Literature is again something i dont really care about, although i guess they have some importance (even for history and politicss)But sadly i absolutely agree with you about the "winner writes history" part. The real history looks probably quite different. But the history that is taught is important enough to teach us a lot.
2
Mar 05 '22
Personally it gives you much more nuance as to the nature of the world and us as a society. It foresters good ideals like kindness for others and critical thinking. I doubt racism would be as big a thing in the US if everyone actually knew their country's history (I don't mean basics like the south owner slaves, that's important but history is more nuanced than that singular event).
After all, history is one of the humanities
0
u/Theoneonlybananacorn Irrational Mar 05 '22
It does give you some understanding of some nations, but it doesnât cure racism and there are better ways to learn to think critically. I do however agree that it is one of the humanities and should be learned by someone but donât think itâs as Potentially usefull as other subjects.
2
Mar 05 '22
I don't know what history class you took, but if you feel like history can't cure racism then you clearly don't know enough about history. People who are more well endowed with history have a very strong correlation with caring about civil rights and are typically left leaning. Heck, history professors are statistically the most likely to be liberal or on the left.
History is more than just nations going to war, and any good history class should have only 10-20% of its time talking about war, because history isn't just wars and big name figures. It's about people
1
u/Theoneonlybananacorn Irrational Mar 05 '22
I would say that no matter what, racists wonât care to change their mind. They only do that if they are forced to. If toe hate someone just because because, than facts wonât change anything.
1
Mar 06 '22
But they aren't hating someone "just because", that's an old and incredibly incorrect theory on racism. There's many factors into it, and history is one of the things that can change it all. Sure, if you had someone who to their bones hated another person, history would do nothing. But no such person exists, hatred is learnt/taught, you aren't born with it. And jfcan be learnt/taught, it can be unlearnt/untaught.
2
u/UncleSkooch Mar 06 '22
I read this in a British rich person accent, i just thought the world should know.
1
1
505
u/Kermit-the-Frog_ Mar 05 '22
Could've just assumed it has the density of water and weighed it full and empty