How could we improve child education?

Growing up, should students be forced to learn an instrument?

Should schools (lets assume they could afford to) have mandatory music classes? Do you think it would have a significant impact on child development?

What other subjects should be given more/less focus?

Other urls found in this thread:

nature.com/nrn/journal/v11/n8/abs/nrn2882.html?foxtrotcallback=true
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278262616300550?via=ihub
jneurosci.org/content/33/45/17667
jneurosci.org/content/33/3/1282
jneurosci.org/content/35/3/1240
jneurosci.org/content/37/24/5948
cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db241.htm
m.youtube.com/watch?v=1pwCMxQW9Y4
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Why learn an instrument? Seems pointless. Pretty much every school has optional music classes anyway if the kid is into that sort of thing.

I was forced to learn the recorder.
It didn't help me at all and I forgot how to play it

>piano
>math
>latin
>christiany
>physics/philosophy
>social engineering
>go

It's a good way to bond with each other, it seems as though suicide is on the rise IIRC and I'd say I was at my happiest when I was in music class. Maybe it would also positively reflect your performance in other classes.

>it seems as though suicide is on the rise IIRC
[citation needed]

>Christianity

Only teach pure mathematics.

No thanks

If you just want kids to bond, sports are a lot cheaper than buying an instrument for each kid, and have the added benefit of getting those fat fucking shits to move around and not end up obese like their parents.

Sports when I was growing up was flag football and other gay shit. People were also segregated severely, being picked last for teams, etc.

Increase in trannys and other lgbt
They have a massive suicide rate
And such groups commonly prey on isolated children to boost their ranks

>t. Gender Studies Associate Degree from Community College says:

Castrate Your Kids!

Send music to devil. Musicians are tramps in mine country.

Suicide rates have waved from 13% to 10% since the 80s. Right now we're at about 12%. There has been no sharp raise, although there's a very slight upward trend right now

Citation needed

You need culture, faggot

Center of Disease Control

That's pretty significant to me.

I was forced to pick an "activity" as a kid to make up for my autism. It didn't help and was just a fucking waste of time. I could have been studying mathematics instead. My parents are utter retards.

and that wont happen with musical talent/ability?

It didn't happen in my case, probably because children had less control over the situation.

It did in my experience, with jazz band being highly sought after and only certain chairs being able to even audition. I never though of it but that could have lead to the same feelings that sports does, alienation, ect

If psychology were a valuable science, we would have already understood the nuances of how children learn, from understanding effective ways to present novelty without losing rigor to understanding how a particular approach to teaching creates a certain mental model of the subject taught (with its pros and cons, etc.), etc., enough to implement significant changes besides "hurr durr what if we taught everyone in the same way for the century... BUT WITH MORE IPADS AND WEBSITES N SHIIEEET! NEED MO MONEY FO DEM PROGRAMS!" Unfortunately psychologists are resentful manlets lacking any sort of inspiration, imagination, intellectualism, or sense of public service, so we've been deprived of any real major revolution in education.

What were your choices?
What did you choose?

There's a lot of error with what they determine suicide. For example, that would include certain kinds of accidents, people on sleeping pills doing crazy stuff like starting their car in a closed garage and falling asleep, etc. A 2 or 3% increase is within the realm of just interpretations of what's a suicide and what's an accident.

The chart I posted only goes to 2011 but the current rate as of 2016 is slightly over 13%.

Just make robots that can do math and exterminate the useless STEMcucks

wouldnt those errors be present in all years then?and if not, can you point towards something indicating they changed the way they define/measure suicide?

It's socially impossible to do proper scientific tests on education with control groups because people don't want human testing on children. If you were testing something that you thought might make education better, then they would demand that you give it to ALL children. And doing something that you theorize makes education worse would obviously be never allowed.

Get all those poor black kids to go to a boarding school. Honestly, most often then not the problem is their parents. Unfortunately there is no money for that, not even in the richest country on earth.

Had to choose between theater and theater, so I chose theater.

Heck, if it were something like debating it could have been actually useful. But I just had to rote learn some corny text instead.

You want to help kids? Invest in genetic manipulation for high IQ traits. You can't teach retarded people to become quantum physicists.

I don't have any source on changes in definition per-say, just that over the course of 40 years the practices of all involved, from police to medical personal have changed. I'm just appealing to common sense here. If the changes had been massive, like doubling or getting cut and half, that would be obviously a reflection of something big happeneing, but just 1.5% up and down around the mean of ~12% just isn't a very significant variance.

A LOT of people unironically think that anybody can learn anything if they just put in enough effort.

...so the markets gets even more flooded and kids are "helped" by bringing their hopes up and then failing them.

That's what happened to me. "Study, I swear it's worth it!"

I ended up genuinely enthusiastic, but there aren't any jobs anymore. And I have to give up everything, while the others are not even aware of anything and live life to the fullest.

Thank you. Thank you for bringing me to this filth-ridden, treacherous world.

thanks for the answer, it say that makes sense to me, at least on the surface

You have the tools to cheat your way around life and live like a king, while others are bound to the life they've gotten and no way out. If you a depressed, then take some fucking drugs and sort yourself out, stop bitching about your brilliance.


Also, a world full of 140+IQ people would be a much better world. What brings one down is having to live surrounded by wild animals and the retarded, hyper emotional people that defend their every move.

You don't get it. The problem isn't mere brilliance, but about being among the top .1% who are brilliant. Investing in genetic engineering or general promotion of intellectual pursuits is just going to translate the curve to the right. In the end, only a select few are going to get a job in real science. And most of the time, they've been better prepared than the average because they had relatives who introduced them to the field very early and not in the context of a school. Meanwhile, the others will suffer because they realize how much they missed out on.

this, can you imagine 140 IQ people as garbagemen or other necessary trade jobs? they would blow their brains out at the monotony. Shit i almost did in retail

Shouldn't an increase in the IQ of the population greatly boost technological advancement? Maybe such needs and monotony would radically change the world for the better.

>More math
>more education about the functions of goverment
>Harsher P.E (Situps and stuff that builds muscles and fitness)
>Educate children on nutrition very early
>More grammar
>Start teaching statistics
>Less science (Outside of simple knowledge about which chemicals are dangerous)
>Less history
>No art
>No music
>Less time in school with more demands

Around 50% of children are smarter than what they seem, and this will give them some incentive to work harder.

I would like to think so, and im glad you brought that up, because i hadnt considered it really. What would this ideal world look like though? Technology is so advanced we no longer have to do physical/menial work, to the point where billions of people on the earth can pursue personal interest desires, including (due to the high average IQ) a lot of scientific progress? Sounds pretty good to me actually

Fuck off Mao, we need culture.

Since we are on a Veeky Forumsence board.
Make them understand the difference between corellation and causation
the basics of experimentation
what is abstract thinking
how to bridge the gap between abstract thinking and real applications
and they figure out the rest themselves

>It's socially impossible to do proper scientific tests on education with control groups because people don't want human testing on children
Who was Piaget? Get out of my sight, brainlet.

I ()
Can imagine adding this to the list, under the label "Philosophy".


We dont have culture in our youth. Our youth are lethargic victims of an excess of bullcrap. Our youth numb themselves down to not experience their lack of direction. The few who are willing to create art will do so anyways, they are generally risk takers. The others get reqiusite knowledge to work in the world and search for their goals, aswell as more free time.

Kids should be taking music classes, yes. Music theory is good for the mind. Kids should also take:
- sociology
- economics
- wood/metal shop
- cooking & general home skills
- art (a few options)
- philosophy, logic, and reasoning
- politics, debating, and rhetoric

Also expand physical education to include fitness, health, and nutrition.

I mean it's socially impossible NOW, in the modern era. People have been becoming progressively more and more protective of children for the past 100 years

Sports are too dangerous. Snowflakes, I mean kids, could get hurt out there. And let's not talk about the psychological damage that goes on in locker rooms.

Lol my school district is introducing Latin because some moms went on a trip with their kids to some kind of convention and those kids were learning Latin and now the local moms are jealous that their kids don't know Latin.

>Shouldn't an increase in the IQ of the population greatly boost technological advancement?

More likely, it would increase social unrest. Possibly bring about a civil war.

Everyone is now very smart but the wealth and capital to do shit in this world is still owned by very few people. You think a 140 IQ lower class would be just as docile as our current lower class? I think not.

Mohammed pls go

bulgaria, is it you?

Stupid, dead language. Teach them a useful second language.

Chinese?

That's a good one. Offer options though.

Make Spanish mandatory for Amerifats.

...

What did he mean by this?

>improve education

why would you? the current education system serves its purpose. for the education system to change, capitalism would also have to be abolished

>why would you want to improve anything?

improve it for whom? the current education system like i said serves its purpose. there will never be any substantial change since its the vessel by which neoliberalism is propagated to the new generations

Unlike what a lot of people think, just a small percentage of the differences between student achievement (in this case science performance as defined in "PISA 2015 Assessment and Analytical Framework" among 15-year olds enrolled in school) is explained by the differences between education systems. And this is very interesting because we tend to think that our system is very different from, for example, the Japanese system, the Finnish sytem, the Singaporean system, etc., but what the actual data tells us is that, at least in the OECD member countries, they have a running system that is already functional, pretty much everybody is covered, everybody has a teacher, if the teacher doesn't arrive there's a substitude teacher, all schools have bathrooms, roofs, a curricula to follow, maybe there are differences in some policies but again, all OECD member countries have the foundations which make that the differences between countries don't be that big, and if we were to take out countries like Mexico, Turkey, Chile or Israel the differences between countries would be even less, and nevertheless when we take all countries/economies that took part in the PISA 2015 assessment then we see that the differences between countries explains more in the variation of student performance

...

...

...

>subjects

...

...

...

...

...

Abolishing public schools and letting free market private schools become the norm.

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

>Why learn an instrument? Seems pointless
nature.com/nrn/journal/v11/n8/abs/nrn2882.html?foxtrotcallback=true
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278262616300550?via=ihub
jneurosci.org/content/33/45/17667
jneurosci.org/content/33/3/1282
jneurosci.org/content/35/3/1240
jneurosci.org/content/37/24/5948

Hey PISA user, I always see you post a lot of these images, but what's your overall take on the matter? You never seem (or at least I've never seen you) to say anything, just post infographics.

Just because your autism prevents you from seeing the benefits of social education, doesn't mean they don't exist.

I had something similar.
I beat up my little brother and my parents decided I needed to learn drums.

Children should be taught to enjoy playing first. I distinctly remember being cynical about literally everything my mom pushed on me, I liked playing the piano and guitar, but they wanted me to play boring songs I didn't like and pass silly exams and shiz to impress a bunch of fat ladies who probably schlicked over me later, it made me lose interest and part of my faith in humanity.

No.

Playing musical instruments is as archaic and outdated a practice as riding horses or fighting with swords, while it still has some merit as a hobby for the wealthy, it has no relevance to the modern world.

Electronic music production is simply the way of the future, with just a basic computer setup and free software it's possible to flawlessly record any composition using any combination of instruments or literally any digitally produced sound.

There's simply no reason to waste students' time with obsolete technology when they could be learning the fundamentals of music composition and production needed to launch any creative project with modern relevance.

naa, I still love to listen to people playing woderful piano music

Not really a science thread, but oh well.

I think only maths, science, history, geology and English should be taught at schools, everything else should be made a secondary, if not tertiary priority. Any time spent on medieval dance and some goobledygook language inevitably eats into the other IMPORTANT subjects. If someone has a passion for music, they'll obviously learn it in their free time.

>woderful

go back 2 school

>Not really a science thread, but oh well.
science is a subject taught in school, user.

KIDS ARE SHIT
THEY SHOULD ALL BE KILLED
STOP FUNDING EDUCATION AND START FUNDING THE WEAPON INDUSTRY MORE
NOBODY GIVES A FUCK ABOUT KIDS AND EVERYBODY HATES THEM

>Should schools (lets assume they could afford to) have mandatory music classes?

That requires money user. You think many of our public schools can afford that shit?

cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db241.htm

too many of them are brown these days anyways.

Teaching all children to actually play musical instruments would kill the maybe largest propaganda instrument used on teens. Pop music.
So that won't happen.

Also, really educating all kids would kill the largest hard labor force, the uneducated, so that will also not happen.

There is a reason education is so bad. It garantees soldiers and people who are willing to do shitty jobs.

And it's no secret either. Socrates mentioned it allready. Or find out what Skinner has to say on education.

You can be a genius in music and still love pop music.

Psychology has showed us a downside of proper education.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=1pwCMxQW9Y4

Also this

>Unfortunately psychologists are resentful manlets lacking any sort of inspiration, imagination, intellectualism, or sense of public service, so we've been deprived of any real major revolution in education.

Because they've been shutdown every time though. That's the issue with social sciences you an make big discoveries or research in shit but no matter how much to advocate it or try to show it off people in power will discard it, ignore it, misinterpret it among other thing and use for their political purposes to this day.

True, but to a most musicians pop music is like boilling an egg to a chef cook.
Whoever boils the egg does not seem like a special cook. Pop artists are like gods to teens, because they bring out cool music, while in fact, the poetry might be good, but the actual music mostly lacks, well, musicality.