From: harryb@phred.UUCP (harry barnett)
Newsgroups: misc.kids
Subject: Re: Branding kids, IQ tests, smart vs dumb (Was: Re: Seminar Program)
Date: 20 Jan 93 18:25:53 GMT
Reply-To: harryb@phred.UUCP
Organization: Physio-Control

In article MB1@mentor.cc.purdue.edu, hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes:
>In article <1993Jan18.152035.10261@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> ren@hopper.ACS.Virginia.EDU (Karen Prestemon) writes:
>>In article <1993Jan17.192113.26691@sequent.com> petel@sequent.com (Pete Lancashire) writes:
>>All children, regardless of test scores, should be encouraged to
>>work hard and do the best they can. 
>
>This notion that hard work is what is important in learning is a
>horrible mistake.

IMHO, this notion that hard work is NOT what is important in learning
is a horrible mistake.  You want to talk about horror, putting the
notion in our children's heads that "there IS such a thing as a free
lunch, I DON'T have to work to learn" will fill our welfare roles with
deadbeats, our streets with dropouts, our companies with menials, and
our government with a bunch of self-centered tribal chieftain mentality
bandits.  Do you think we'll learn anything from THAT?

>One has to work to learn, but working hard is
>likely to be highly counterproductive.

Oh, well, not just counterproductive, but HIGHLY counterproductive.

This opinion, postulated as fact, MAY be applicable to a small subset
of the population.  It is a glittering generality, and not even
generally true, again IMHO.

One of the six basic Laws of Learning is the Law of Exercise:  Things
learned which are most often repeated are the best remembered.  Another
is the Law of Intensity:  Those learning experiences which are the most
intense are retained the longest.  BOTH of these imply the necessity of
work, and not only work, but HARD work.

>Rereading that book 20
>times to try to understand something is unlikely to succeed.
>

Does this statement reflect an attitude problem, or just ignorance?
MANY people learn by rereading material, MORE than 20 times, if
necessary.  This statement ignores Levels of Learning, which are, from
simplest to most complex:  Rote, Understanding, Application,
Correlation.  An explanation of what these levels mean is readily
available in any public library.  I assume you can use one.  Check them
out.

If rereading material does not work for you, you have an obligation to
those to whom you are making such bald-faced assertions without support
to make it clear that IN YOUR EXPERIENCE YOU found it an unsuccessful
technique.  That's YOUR problem; don't mislead others into thinking it
is theirs, or will be ineffective with THEIR children.

>>					If anyone doesn't work hard,
>>it is the majority of gifted and talented kids.  Their teachers
>>(and I know from experience) push them along through school, and they
>>never know failure, never really struggle for anything, never learn
>>the least little bit about life.
>
>What do you expect the bright to do in school?  There is little which
>they are faced with which requires more than slight effort.  Usually 
>they are not even allowed to do more.  
>
>They definitely should be faced with situations which are too difficult
>for them to manage.  Some will be due to lack of background, and some
>will just be beyond their capabilities.  This is all to the good.

Another glittering generality.  Do you REALLY want your teenager in a
driver's training class to be deliberately placed, in high speed
traffic, in a situation which is too difficult to manage?  Or to
operate a machine tool that is too difficult for them to manage?  Or
require a second grader to use a scalpel to dissect a frog?

Superficially, the proposed technique appears to be a desirable
learning tool, it sounds like "a good idea".  However, it fails to
account for another Law of Learning:  the Law of Effect, i.e., pleasant
learning experiences are more effective and retained longer than
unpleasant learning experiences.  There is a LOT more to it than these
shoot-from-the-hip generalities with which you have graced us.

>But
>it will not happen in our current system, which assumes that everything
>is straightforward.  Even if memory is not their strong point, almost
>all of the bright are not weak at it, and that is all that is tested now.

Any bright, truly gifted child works HARD at learning ALL THE TIME.  I
am reminded of the old adage that there are three types of people:
those who make things happen, those to whom things happen, and those
who wonder what happened.

The first type are also styled "self-starters".  I believe, perhaps
optimistically, that most people, given even half a chance, will choose
to be self-starters, and it is up to us, as parents and teachers and
advisors, to provide a nurturing environment wherever possible to
encourage the self-starters, rather than the drones.  Someone who
habitually coasts may be an idiot savant, but they are NOT gifted, nor
bright, IMHO.  Bright, gifted people don't sit and whine about not
being challenged:  they go out and find their own challenges.

Life is a test, a challenge, and we are ALWAYS being tested.  From the
moment we are born, we are dying.  A goal set by some is to make the
most of their alloted span insofar as it is within their meager
capacity to understand, and while here, to work hard to make things as
interesting and as comfortable for themselves and their fellow
creatures as they can.  We are born as a blank slate, we work to try to
fill up the slate with learning, and thereby acquire wisdom.  If we
find wisdom, there we find peace and justice.  And speaking only for
myself, MY kids are going to have it ingrained in them that they will
NEVER acquire wisdom, peace, and justice for themselves or others
unless they WORK HARD AT THE JOB.

The more I think about it the more I think you just suffer from a BAD
ATTITUDE!  As far as I'm concerned, you're certainly welcome to express
your opinions anytime you like; just don't expect to try and convince
me of the validity of your opinion in re "Hard Work" by projecting a
lot of "Negative Waves". :-)

>-- 
>Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399
>Phone: (317)494-6054
>hrubin@snap.stat.purdue.edu (Internet, bitnet)  
>{purdue,pur-ee}!snap.stat!hrubin(UUCP)

harryb@phred
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Brittanius (shocked):  Caesar, this is not proper.
Theodotus (outraged):  How?
Caesar (recovering his self possession):  Pardon him, Theodotus:  He is
a barbarian, and thinks that the customs of his tribe and islands are
the laws of nature.

		--Caesar and Cleopatra, Act II, George Bernard Shaw
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: inna@hpindda.cup.hp.com (Inna Lauris)
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 23:51:50 GMT
Subject: Re: Scarey breathing incident
Organization: HP Information Networks, Cupertino, CA