New kinds of classes in schools?

[Revenant]

I got to musing on the fact that a lot of people don't know how their brain works, such things as creativity, hunches (necessary but at times incredibly incorrect and damaging), success, financial savvy, and basic neuroscience (which would get some people past the idea that if they can't do something, that it must be cause they're just not smart enough for it). Stuff like the hedonic treadmill, the science of happiness (at least I'd argue that happiness is in the end what everyone strives for), logic, and good political voting, seem more necessary than a lot of say, the more advanced maths, that which a lot of people never again use, however people get depressed often, use poor logic, vote for certainly what appears to be an inconsequential issue or on hunches based on subconscious racism. People give up when they could make it, they make poor financial choices, and somehow giving people more tools for daily life seems more useful.

So I guess I'd like to see what people's thoughts are on this as well as what other areas people feel should be taught.

 

[Glenski]

Thoughts on ..............what? Are you proposing that Japanese schools have classes on creativity, financial savvy, neuroscience, or what? You lost me in that first paragraph.

Maybe I don't know how your brain works...

 

[Tsuyoiko]

I think some more practical things should be taught in school.

Financial management, like how to open a bank account, how to pay bills and set yourself a budget.

Parenting skills - because most students are going to be parents some day.

Ethics - how to be a considerate member of society rather than a selfish little...

DIY - how to change a lightbulb and hang a picture without electrocuting yourself or flooding the house.

I learnt those things from my parents, but unfortunately not everyone has good parents. I don't think we should leave it to chance.

 

[Revenant]

Thoughts on ..............what? Are you proposing that Japanese schools have classes on creativity, financial savvy, neuroscience, or what? You lost me in that first paragraph.

Maybe I don't know how your brain works...

Think a lot of people are trying to figure that out.

Not just Japanese schools, but schools in general. I'm suggesting all of those as useful knowledge.

I'll try to explain myself a bit more here.

A lot of people have this idea that creativity belongs to a select few, and that for these select few creativity just flows out of them effortlessly. True some innate abilities like music and visual are beyond some people (you wouldn't want me to go to karaoke with you), but then creativity isn't limited to these fields. But it usually requires effort, lots of it, and sometimes the memory that brings about a creative solution is stored in a different part of the brain, and doing some activity like taking a shower may trigger that memory (still requires lots of attention on the problem or goal though).

Hunches are based on subconscious memories. In one study, a woman (working in cooperation with the researchers), was warm and friendly to half the people she met, and very cool with the other half. Later, they took all the people that had met her, and put them in a room with three strangers. One of the strangers had very similar features to the woman they had all met one on one with. The half that the woman they first met had been friendly to wanted to talk to the stranger with similar features, while the half that had met the cool and unfriendly version of that woman avoided the stranger with similar features. It's doubtful that any of them actually thought, that woman's similar to that friendly woman so I'll try and strike up a conversation with her, or she's similar to that antisocial woman so I'll avoid her if at all possible. Logically it probably makes little sense to assume that two people that have similar features would also have similar personalities. But our minds are always making these kinds of generalizations, and it might be this that racism is built on for some people. Of course subconscious memory is what allowed a Japanese scientist to rather than test 1000 gene combinations to find a way to produce stem cells from skin cells by just picking out five DNA.

Anyways, it might help if people knew that their subconscious was that powerful and at times very illogical. It may help them tolerate or connect better with people who they might otherwise dismiss with a there's just something I don't like about him.

Anyways, that's a start, I'll go on to the other points sometime.

 

[nice gaijin]

Revenent, you're kind of all over the place here.

One thing I'll comment on regarding creativity is that it's not something we need to teach children, because they already posses it. The problem is that modern education is structured to suppress creativity and dynamic problem solving in favor of formulaic thinking and rote memory. People need to relearn how to be creative because it's been beaten out of them. Revising this aspect of the classroom would require a whole new approach to education, something I believe is absolutely necessary.

The other things you talk about, while interesting, are difficult to incorporate into primary-level education (though it's unclear of what class level you're talking about here). Is it necessary to teach children neuroscience so they'll understand where hunches come from? I'd say it's more important for them to understand their own thought processes. I believe that a good education starts with an understanding of the self.

 

[Glenski]

Revenant,
I still have no idea what you are asking here. Are you asking or just soapboxing?

Foster creativity. That's why we have art classes, for example. Kids still need the basics of education (call them the 3 R's if you like). Kinda silly to teach creativity and how to balance a checkbook if Johnny can't read or write.

Teaching people how to deal with hunches? Sorry. That's for detective school and psychologists, don't you think? Little Mary doesn't understand why she has STDs and is failing basic biology class. Priorities.

 

[Revenant]

Nicegaijin: My thoughts are a bit disorganized, and I'd rewrite everything were I posting from a regular computer, but I'm posting from my iPhone, so please bear with me. The neuroscience is seperate from hunches, and I'll get to explaining that all sometime. Hunches seem more a part of psychology, and the subconscious and it's hunches are all a part of understanding the self. I'm talking about any level within K-12 for education.

Glenski: I'm asking what people think of these subjects and what other ideas people have in regards to basic education. I quite agree that sex education needs to be taught, but I wouldn't stop there. Oddly happier people are less dependant on pleasurable sensory stimuli to be happy. They are less involved in drinking, drugs, sex, and risky behavior. So teaching people both sex education (and not just a quick gloss over the subject), and some techniques that may help them be happier, would be ideal as I see it. In short, evolution via natural selection has placed desires that aren't conducive to happiness. These desires are successful at promising happiness, they're frustrating desires when unfulfilled, but they usually bring a short pleasurable time when fulfilled (after which we all generally return to our baseline of happiness). And then there are skills that increase the baseline of happiness. Ascetics would do away with pleasurable sensory pleasure to get a higher baseline of happiness, but I see no reason not to balance the two, not being stuck in chasing after fleeting pleasures only.

Going on here, of course reading and writing are important, but what of beyond that? Is basic biology or math more important for most people than say techniques for happiness, knowing some of how their brains work, and understanding via basic neuroscience that much is more dependant on honest effort than natural intelligence? I would say our priorities may be different.

 

[Glenski]

teaching people both sex education (and not just a quick gloss over the subject), and some techniques that may help them be happier, would be ideal as I see it.

This (esp. the second part) will go over (and has gone over) like a lead balloon in many communities for obvious reasons. I will not debate them, but I trust you understand.

Is basic biology or math more important for most people than say techniques for happiness, knowing some of how their brains work, and understanding via basic neuroscience

Please get off your iPhone and make some sense, ok? No offense intended, but the above says zero about what you expect schools to teach. The ideas you show above are more like electives for a community college.

 

[Revenant]

No. I can't say I understand, cause the techniques have been tested (albeit not many places), but the numbers show that they did make a positive impact.

Going on here, I think it can be inferred that I think basic psychology and neuroscience should be taught. It could be all easily done in one class.

Perhaps you aren't aware of the fairly new science of happiness, so I'll fill you in a bit if that's what would help you make more sense of what I'm talking about.

And I'll clear up a mistake I made as well as clarify a bit more. When I put down basic math, that was a mind blip, I meant the more advanced maths. Not many people I know have used algebra or trig since highschool. They may come in useful for people who go onto certain jobs, but most would find it a challenge to help their kids with the same maths, I know my parents did (my father was a very successful dentist, and my mother was a well liked and intelligent speech path, in short, not dumb people).

As to the basic Biology, I speak of the electives taught in highschool. I never took biology, opting for Physics instead, and later Geology. I don't see why biology is an absolute necessity. Explain that?

The science of happiness is fairly new, but they have between psychology and neuroscience made some links between certain ways of thinking and the wiring within the brain to happiness.

I could dig up the studies if you doubt all that. That would take a while though.

But I don't think understanding hunches is beyond most highschool kids. I would've understood that, and I wouldn't say I'm among the brightest.

The basic neuroscience has been taught to elementary school kids via metaphors. The teachers of course didn't go into synapses and all that other stuff, but the main point of that was to teach kids that the brain is malleable, that through hard effort they could learn skills that they felt at first impossible. With a lot of parents praising their kids as 'wow, you did that very well, you must be smart' some kids seem to get the idea that if they don't get something right away, that it must mean they're not smart enough for it'. The dumbed down basic neuroscience that goes into the plasticity of the brain (the ability to even grow new neurons to fit a new demand) is meant to give kids real hard reasons why they could imrove and master a lot of skills just through hard effort, even if they don't get that as soon as other kids do.

Thinking on your comment that the idea would go down like a lead balloon in some communities seems to refer to evolution. True, if evolution was stated within the curricula, it wouldn't go down well at all in some parts, but evolution doesn't even need to be stated, as evolutionary psychology is based on psychological findings of people today and of course upon the theories of evolution. In short evolutionary psychology isn't even the basis of the findings, EVolutionary Psychology is secondary, and only the psychological findings need be referenced (I'm sure there are a few very backwards communities that would reject that also, but then why try and teach evolution in Kansas anyways <-- hopefully that's a rhetorical Q with an obvious answer).

 

[Glenski]

As to the basic Biology, I speak of the electives taught in highschool. I never took biology, opting for Physics instead, and later Geology. I don't see why biology is an absolute necessity. Explain that?

Only if you can explain why geology seemed so important. C'mon. Basic biology here. What makes plants grow. Simple body functions. An overall view of ecology. Pretty general purpose use to anyone.

Geology?

Psychology and neuroscience of happiness? C'mon. We're talking about HS kids who can't even find their own country on a map. Kids who wear an $8000 piece of electronic headgear at McDonalds but can't make change for a buck and who need the pretty picture buttons on the cash register just to add up $1.57 and $.43.

But I don't think understanding hunches is beyond most highschool kids. I would've understood that, and I wouldn't say I'm among the brightest.

Community college elective.

Thinking on your comment that the idea would go down like a lead balloon in some communities seems to refer to evolution.

No. Stop changing the subject (your own, at that). Reread the remark. It was about teaching HS kids sexual techniques.

 

[Revenant]

Yeah, I don't think we're on the same page here at all. Basic biology as you put it is what I learned in grade eight general science. The Biology course I speak of was an elective in grade eleven and involved lots of microscopes and dissecting.

Geology isn't necessary, it was just the course I chose as an elective in highschool, the point being that I never took the Biology elective.

Dunno man, I know of some happy people in backwards countries who probably couldn't find their own country on a map, but are happy and kind nonetheless,, and then I've met some highly educated people that I wouldn't spend more time than necessary with. Perhaps your the guy who would prefer an unpleasant guy who knows his basic laths and geography over a happy guy that can't add well or read maps at all, but I'd guess you'd be in the minority then.

It seems silly to arbitrairaily say it's a college lelective when there's no reason a lot of kids who could understand it all quite easily, and that these techniques have been proven effective in raising the baseline of happiness. But if we're operating on they don't know their basic geography and laths, then we might as well do away with calculus and algebra. Would you say do away with algebra or trig?

And eh? Sexual techniques? As in Kama Sutra? I kind of think I'd have a lot of people disagreeing and not just you were that what I said. I'm pretty sure the only time I said anything of techniques was when I talked of techniques for happiness. I think within the context of the paragraph, even if that wasn't immediately discernable, that suggesting sexual techniques would make little sense in the context and that there is another way to read that.

 

[Glenski]

Dunno man, I know of some happy people in backwards countries who probably couldn't find their own country on a map, but are happy and kind nonetheless,, and then I've met some highly educated people that I wouldn't spend more time than necessary with. Perhaps your the guy who would prefer an unpleasant guy who knows his basic laths and geography over a happy guy that can't add well or read maps at all, but I'd guess you'd be in the minority then.

Nope, that's not me.

It seems silly to arbitrairaily say it's a college lelective when there's no reason a lot of kids who could understand it all quite easily, and that these techniques have been proven effective in raising the baseline of happiness.

ok, what do you eliminate from the curriculum then to make room?

But if we're operating on they don't know their basic geography and laths, then we might as well do away with calculus and algebra. Would you say do away with algebra or trig?

These are electives, too, right?

And eh? Sexual techniques? As in Kama Sutra? I kind of think I'd have a lot of people disagreeing and not just you were that what I said. I'm pretty sure the only time I said anything of techniques was when I talked of techniques for happiness.

ok, my mistake.

 

[Revenant]

Didn't take algebra or trig by choice.... and I've never used either after taking Math 10 and 11.

 

[Revenant]

Crud, wish Editing off of iPhone were easier, reading my posts now I can see that there's lots of room for misunderstandings. Unfortunately I don't have regular access to a proper computer.