terrybunny19240 United States. Dec 28 2011 16:27. Posts 13829
Art is the natural realm of creativity. It is there that creative people should focus their energy. Art is where creativity is relevant. At least, that is a view that many express. In reality creativity is everywhere. Logic, science and reasoning are viewed as non-creative; there are rules to follow after all. But perhaps a better view is that there are "rules" to be understood. In this frame it becomes clear that the advance of science and mathematical concepts, and the daily implementation of them to real-world problem, doesn't come about by the following of rules. Just because the result must satisfy certain conditions doesn't mean the methods and result itself aren't creative, or incorporate benefit from creative solutions.
As a result of the stereotyping of creativity, it is often treated as the opposite of "hard" sciences and the maths. A young, intelligent, creative person may not pick up math immediately but excel in their art class. So they are encouraged to focus on "what they're good at". Math, the structure & rules of problem solving, numbers beyond 10. These are all very new concepts when a child first enters school. At age five, which is when Americans enter kindergarten, they've already spent over four years playing with blocks. Developing a feel for color. Drawing, painting, none of these are new to them. By the end of elementary school with nearly a decade of art experience and less than five of math, superior performance in the former results in the judgement of respective ability!
A smart kid, whether directly told or not, may get the vibe that they aren't a "math person". Math or other "tough" subjects are downplayed in importance. Every parent wants to see their child succeed and to minimize any apparent suffering, so this process happens naturally (let alone if they are directly told they're "bad" at something) if the parent isn't specifically aware of it. Children, and keep in mind that being intelligent doesn't mean to possess wisdom, are malleable. They are sensitive to adult's expectations of them and will endeavor to fulfill them.. How should they know that focusing all of their energy on art at the detriment of more rigorous subjects will cause them to be at a disadvantage when it comes to surviving and flourishing in adult life?
It is clear that people develop at different speeds both mentally and physically. This is most apparent in childhood and it is therefore most important that the young are not judged or sorted based on apparent strengths or weaknesses. Professional athletes fell tens or hundreds of times before learning to even walk; in math, algebra is the equivalent of that process. It is a foreign and abstract tool, often difficult to learn the intricacies of. Some struggle should be understood as part of the learning process much more than is currently recognized. A shift ought to take place in our schools and among the people, where it is kept in mind that at the root of all excellence is persistence -- a far more general and accessible skill.
tldr; education, early results don't necessarily indicate further achievement
0 votes
Last edit: 28/12/2011 16:54
1
RaiNKhAN United States. Dec 28 2011 17:12. Posts 4080
quit hon --> life begins
The biggest Rockets, Sixers, and Grizzlies fan you will ever meet!
1
TheHuHu3 United States. Dec 28 2011 18:18. Posts 5544
TheHuHu4 coming soon :)
1
KeanuReaver United States. Dec 29 2011 02:59. Posts 2022
god i love that gif so much
and the endurance required for MMA, which has actions like punching and kicking bone and muscle with 1000-2500 PSI. - Taco
1
qwerty67890 New Zealand. Dec 29 2011 05:21. Posts 14026
Well, I disagree that focusing energy as a kid on an art form you enjoy/are good at will be detrimental to later life.
There are basically 2 key subjects at school, Maths and English, which need to be passed at high school level, that will be useful skills for later life and are the only real prerequisites for an entry level job and functioning day to day, in and out of career/business.
When you force a kid to do something hes poor at and tell him that he will fail later in life unless he masters it, you will slowly crush his self-confidence and desire to continue with his talent. I dont see why you would force someone to be persistant in learning a subject they dont understand well and dont enjoy, when instead they could persist with their talent.
The real world isnt a meritocracy anyway, so theyll probably get soul crushed when they step into it whether they graduated with a degree in maths or interpretive dance.
1
terrybunny19240 United States. Dec 29 2011 14:27. Posts 13829
Well, I don't mean that young people shouldn't still take art or other soft type courses (I think they're very important). And I definitely don't mean tell them they'll fail at life if they don't learn subject x quicker haha.
There is no need to force a kid to focus on tough subjects.. when they're taught in a way that is engaging to the student, and healthy learning attitudes are promoted. The biggest idea I've learned is that lower performing students shouldn't be partitioned off from those who pick up a subject more quickly to nearly the degree that they are (this is esp. true for math, higher achieving students can mix with lower achieving ones). Partitioning breeds feelings of "I'm not good at math so I'm in a dumb person class" which becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy once confidence is lost.
Persistence isn't always easy but it really is a learned skill; the skill of persistence should be what schools focus on -- the rest comes naturally. I suppose that is the core of my thought here.
...yeh that's one of my fave gifs ever
it also reminds me of "fuck that, time to 360 -- walk away"
Last edit: 29/12/2011 14:28
1
sc1pio United States. Dec 29 2011 18:31. Posts 117
Sal Khan (Khan Academy) makes this point (along with other germane and excellent points) in this talk:
1
qwerty67890 New Zealand. Dec 30 2011 00:18. Posts 14026
I definitely agree about self-fulfilling prophecies when students are divided. Pretty sure there was a study done where students were divided at random and the ones who were led to believe they were in the top set performed better than those in the lower set.
I think the term "soft" for Art is wrong. Arts are very hard. Infact id be inclined to say that someone with an artistic brain could learn maths, but someone with a more maths/science brain would struggle to become 'good' at Art.
That said, the problem with Arts in schools are that it takes more resources/space/money than virtually any other subject. To really give kids a challenge in creativity outside of poster paints and glue takes a lot of work, equally with music.
When i was at school we had 2 instruments available for music class, some shitty keyboard or a glockenspiel. It doesnt matter how much you like music, youre not falling in love with the subject based on the tools we had. Equally there was little to no information on learning instruments and no information on music as a career.
Persistence isn't always easy but it really is a learned skill; the skill of persistence should be what schools focus on -- the rest comes naturally. I suppose that is the core of my thought here.
Totally agree, unfortunately its rare to find a teacher with the patience and desire to actually do this, at least in my experience.
1
terrybunny19240 United States. Dec 30 2011 18:52. Posts 13829
Word.
I too think the arts are very important.. sucks that your (and so many) school(s) don't seem to put enough emphasis on it or can't budget it in more.
Thanks for the sal khan vid. I didn't watch it yet, but Khan did an "ask me anything" on reddit. He said that the night before and day of his TED talk he was super sick and exhausted from it but his wife ensured he'd make it by giving him mass dayquil lol.
I actually just started using his site yesterday (should I started loooooooong ago). What a great resource.
United States. Dec 28 2011 17:12. Posts 4080
