Personality Cafe banner
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
162 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Reading the http://personalitycafe.com/myers-briggs-forum/20257-you-know-youre-sensor-when.html thread brought up two questions for me:

-Even if you personally don't enjoy learning about abstract ideas, do you think they are valuable for someone else to learn about, or do you think they are a waste of time?

-Do you think school could be structured/taught in a different way in which you would learn and enjoy yourself more? I'm thinking of becoming a teacher myself, so I'm really interested in any ideas and/or examples you have.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
889 Posts
I was going to become a teacher at one point, for high school music. Good thing I didn't pick that career path. :laughing:

1) I only enjoy learning theories that are applicable. Otherwise, yes, I do consider it wasted time.

2) Less fluff and more application. The books are just too damn big, with too much useless information, and there isn't enough hands-on (lab) work. Don't tell me how x+y/(q-z)*w=blah, show me how I can actually use that in real life by giving me a practical application.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,008 Posts
Reading the http://personalitycafe.com/myers-briggs-forum/20257-you-know-youre-sensor-when.html thread brought up two questions for me:

-Even if you personally don't enjoy learning about abstract ideas, do you think they are valuable for someone else to learn about, or do you think they are a waste of time?

-Do you think school could be structured/taught in a different way in which you would learn and enjoy yourself more? I'm thinking of becoming a teacher myself, so I'm really interested in any ideas and/or examples you have.
I had a humanities teacher whom was amazing. She took into account different learning styles and it really helped me to learn. She would show up visual powerpoint images of the stuff that we needed to know. Also, she would make us hand write and copy a paper word for word for the kinesthetic learners. Then she'd speak the written material for those who learned by audio sound. Finally, she'd have classroom discussions for interpersonal learners. I loved that teacher.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,053 Posts
I had taken Film & TV, and the bullshit theories that had... I passed because I basically talked shit, I had no actual clue what I was on about.

I am very poor with exams, I have no idea is this is because I am a sensor or not. So I would change that. I prefer coursework, I believe that shows someone's ability more than an exam, not that you becoming a teacher could change that. :tongue:
 

·
MOTM May 2011
Joined
·
14,041 Posts
Reading the http://personalitycafe.com/myers-briggs-forum/20257-you-know-youre-sensor-when.html thread brought up two questions for me:

-Even if you personally don't enjoy learning about abstract ideas, do you think they are valuable for someone else to learn about, or do you think they are a waste of time?

-Do you think school could be structured/taught in a different way in which you would learn and enjoy yourself more? I'm thinking of becoming a teacher myself, so I'm really interested in any ideas and/or examples you have.
Abstract ideas are important and need to be taught to encourage a higher level of thinking in the student.

Certainly schools, classes, teaching methods can and should be structured toward achieving the best results for the student(s) being taught.

Abstract ideas can be taught to sensors, just as they can intuitives. It is up to the teacher to provide the scaffolding necessary for the student to achieve success.

This also goes deeper than simply being sensors or intuitives, as learning styles differ for many within either camp. One of my kids (an intuitive) learns best kinesthetically, while another (a sensor) learns best via auditory methods. Yet my daughter (another intuitive) learns more easily by logical methods. Of course they all use multiple learning styles, but these were their preferred methods.

Good question. We need more teachers that truly understand their role in the education process. Too many times, the teacher lectures, assigns homework and sits back expecting learning to occur. And it does, to a degree--but this teaching style seldom sees the light bulbs going off, the amazement in the eyes, when true learning occurs. Get in there and get your hands dirty and see what happens when you interact with the child rather than talking at them. A perfect example of this is the "Yawp" segment of "Dead Poets Society." The kid is inspired to do more than he ever thought he could. That is the sign of a great teacher.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,761 Posts
Abstract ideas can be very valuable to learn about. Granted, I might not want to learn about the theory all the time (and especially you should make sure not to inundate me with theory in a lower level intro course on a subject). But I think theory can be vital to understanding stuff (at least when it comes to business, economics, psychology, etc.) I assume this holds for the sciences math as well. An S will need to learn theory if they are trully to understand chemistry (for example), especially if they want to continue their studies at the master's level or above (or are even thinking of it). You never know where life will lead you, so you might as well try to learn theory where it's relevant to know theory.

Granted, don't teach most S's a theory just for the sake of theory. It's often best to provide examples of how the theory is relevant so that we can relate to it better.

As an ISTJ, I think I learn best by doing. Like, I'll need to do a math problem, or try to work through designing a computer program, or work throguh several accounting problems. Often take home tests with problems I have to solve, as well as homework problem sets, will help me learn. I sometimes have trouble seeing the big picture, so I find it helpful when professors summarize important concepts or facts at the beginning or end of the lecture. Otherwise, I may struggle to find and understand the main point, due to the litany of details. Also, make sure to test concepts, because I may be able to spit back details without knowing what's going on (I have a great memory). Concepts are way more important than irrelevant facts, so don't include any trvial junk on a test.

I have more trouble with subjects like English, which are open to interpretation. But I'm fine with classes that include logic and collection of facts. Maybe something can be done to help me there, but I'm not sure what.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,636 Posts
-Even if you personally don't enjoy learning about abstract ideas, do you think they are valuable for someone else to learn about, or do you think they are a waste of time?

Could we...be more specific here?:tongue: "Learning about abstract ideas" seem a little vague to me. I like ideas.

Let me put it this way.. I never liked physics or chemistry very much. Why is that? Because I can't wrap my head around it... There are too many atoms, molecules and particles. Too much formulas, tiiiny and enormous matters. It's too complex, because (as a sensor?) I want to learn the system from scratch, to build it from the ground. To discover something new or understand the subject (and get a good grade) I'd have to plough through so much information...and that's not very appealing.
However, I liked maths. All you need is 10 digits and a few letters. I can work from there.

Do I think abstract ideas are valuable for other people? Yes, I do. But not to everyone, and those who like it can have it, cause I don't want it:tongue:.
Knowledge is never a waste of time, but that doesn't mean everyone ought to be taught the same things. I'll expand on this for your next question.

-Do you think school could be structured/taught in a different way in which you would learn and enjoy yourself more? I'm thinking of becoming a teacher myself, so I'm really interested in any ideas and/or examples you have.

I believe school has a long, long way to go.
We know "people are different". We like different subjects and we learn using different methods. We have different talents etc. Even so we go to school for about 10 to 15 years with basically no room to develop our individual talents at all. We all sit in the same classrooms, for the same amount of time, reading the same subjects, having the same exams and graduating at the same time. That's a very bad system from my POV. It's not logical to teach people what they don't want to be taught, people learn/grow very slowly this way. I feel like we're wasting our kids time in a very unethical way..

Now I don't have any bright idea for change:tongue: but as stated before some learn best through vision, others are more auditory and others are kinesthetic. Maybe there are more. This is something every teach should utilize.
Kids have different talents and we should encourage them to develop their talents and to find new ones. Personality typing could help...I personally don't think it's too pseudo. It's my firm opinion school should be more individualistic and allow for better growth. Also I'd like more apprentice teaching methods. That's what I want. A "people have different talents" approach instead of the "put them all in a box and force em to learn" methods we have today.
 

·
MOTM May 2011
Joined
·
14,041 Posts
@Tucken--

I would agree that we need a more individual approach toward education. That is the best method. Unfortunately, as is with every thing else in society, the money limits what can be done in the class room. It is the responsibility of the parents and family to see that the children receive the appropriate education. The travesty is that this responsibility has been abdicated by the family and so the authority for education had to be assumed by the government. So we have a less than optimum education system and it is our fault.

The best that can be done at this time is for the parents and extended family to assume as much of the teaching of their children as is possible. For some, this will be home schooling, but for others it will be a heavy involvement in their children's schooling and development while having the majority of the teaching performed by others. Parents cannot sit back and ignore their children's education and expect good results. A parent must educate themselves in areas of child development and child rearing before they have children. Then they must educate themselves about learning styles that people use and how to reach their kids so that they help them achieve the very best that they can. They must also realize that having children is a selfless and life long commitment. The other day I was talking to a parent friend and he was wondering about his kids. Are they making the right choices? Are they doing well? Emotionally and physically? My friend is in his 90's and his kids are are in their 70's.:crazy: So, no--it's never over.

As for your comments on abstract ideas--all of physics and chemistry is not abstract. And even the abstract can be related to the concrete for better understanding. Failure to teach the abstract is the failure to understand what teaching is really about. We teach all of the same data from PK through 12 to prepare you for more advanced thinking. You need to know the data of the concrete before the abstract can be sufficiently understood for discussion at higher levels. To fail to teach the abstract is to fail to teach thinking. Everyone can recite data, but the application of that data to new ideas--now that is thinking. And thinking means better understanding which ultimately yields better learning for us all.

Don't delegate the thinking to others. Every child deserves parents that think and understand the importance of their role. The getting your hands dirty role of helping a child develop their potential.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,636 Posts
@niss63
You seem like a good father. I like how you take parenting with great responsibility.

I was being very idyllic. Education and kids are very important to me and I'd like to see more changes for the better. When I take a step back and picture our education from a distance I feel like we are doing everything wrong. Money is always an issue, but wouldn't better education pay off in the long run? Even generating more money in the process.

Haha, the idea to delegating my thinking to others do sound very appealing. Is it also possible to delegate feeling? :D I didn't mean it like that though... I meant to say I'd trade certain subjects for other if I had the chance. Not everyone are natural musicians, scientists, crafters, sportsmen etc.

Chemistry and physics may not be all abstract but I wasn't sure about "abstract" in the first place and did provide an explanation to why I never liked said subjects. Yes, I like it when I can make use of the knowledge that I learn and when things get too abstract I tend to feel it's a waste of time. Doesn't mean it is, though. Knowledge is good, thinking is good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: niss

·
Registered
Joined
·
889 Posts
To me, teaching a child how to think starts with asking them "what do you think about this?". "Dad, why is this the way it is?" "Well, what do you think about it?" That builds critical thinking skills. For abstract thoughts, nothing builds those like the arts. Music, drawing/painting, creative writing, etc..

If you're teaching me something, however, I want to able to apply it to the real world. I was the same way as a kid.

Consider this. I failed most of my math classes in school and had to take "consumer math" (ie: math for idiots) in order to graduate from high school. (On a side note, I almost failed that class because I was able to get the same answers in half the steps of the ridiculous formulas provided and while doing most of the work in my head. Rather than see that I was more advanced than the material, I was berated and told to dumb it back down.) However, I have few problems with the math associated with engine building, which is pretty darned complex, because it's something that interests me and that I can use in the real world.
 

·
MOTM May 2011
Joined
·
14,041 Posts
To me, teaching a child how to think starts with asking them "what do you think about this?". "Dad, why is this the way it is?" "Well, what do you think about it?" That builds critical thinking skills. For abstract thoughts, nothing builds those like the arts. Music, drawing/painting, creative writing, etc..

If you're teaching me something, however, I want to able to apply it to the real world. I was the same way as a kid.

Consider this. I failed most of my math classes in school and had to take "consumer math" (ie: math for idiots) in order to graduate from high school. (On a side note, I almost failed that class because I was able to get the same answers in half the steps of the ridiculous formulas provided and while doing most of the work in my head. Rather than see that I was more advanced than the material, I was berated and told to dumb it back down.) However, I have few problems with the math associated with engine building, which is pretty darned complex, because it's something that interests me and that I can use in the real world.
Good points and is exactly what I'm driving at when I say that the teachers should provide scaffolding. Concrete examples of real world necessity for what they are learning helps many kids achieve better learning, by simply establishing relevance.

I can't remember the number of techs I've hired that struggled with understanding the principles behind aligning a car because they squeaked by geometry and blew off trig. So I'm at the front end rack teaching basic math to help them understand why they're doing what they're doing to make the car go straight down the road. At those times, I want to smack their high school counselor and their high school teachers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
889 Posts
Good points and is exactly what I'm driving at when I say that the teachers should provide scaffolding. Concrete examples of real world necessity for what they are learning helps many kids achieve better learning, by simply establishing relevance.

I can't remember the number of techs I've hired that struggled with understanding the principles behind aligning a car because they squeaked by geometry and blew off trig. So I'm at the front end rack teaching basic math to help them understand why they're doing what they're doing to make the car go straight down the road. At those times, I want to smack their high school counselor and their high school teachers.
See, me, I never bothered learning geometry or trig because they have absolutely no value to me. I'd learn them when needed. You call that basic math but, I'm not able to wrap my head around it because it's useless theory to me (part of the ISTP personality).
 

·
MOTM May 2011
Joined
·
14,041 Posts
See, me, I never bothered learning geometry or trig because they have absolutely no value to me. I'd learn them when needed. You call that basic math but, I'm not able to wrap my head around it because it's useless theory to me (part of the ISTP personality).
I hear you...ISTJs struggle with the same need for relevance. One of my geometry classmates signed my year book, "good luck to the guy who never does his geometry homework!" I really didn't do my homework, because I didn't see the need or relevance. Plus, it was the simplest class--I did almost no homework and passed with a "B." Now, trig was a different story. I worked for that grade.:tongue:

To me, that is where we need to have teaching professionals that understand the need for relevance so that kids get the best education. Kids often say, "I don't need math...I'm gonna be a music major," not realizing that music IS math. If the teacher could tap into that interest, the math then becomes relevant.

I've often thought that the best education might be to take a group of twenty kids and build a house from the dirt up. Make 'em go through the whole planning process, government process, to moving the dirt, to framing, and wiring and then to a finished product, and finally going through the selling of the home to the new buyers, including all of the legal documents. I think there is a wealth of learning to be had if the right teacher would take it on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
737 Posts
Abstract ideas are important and need to be taught to encourage a higher level of thinking in the student.

Certainly schools, classes, teaching methods can and should be structured toward achieving the best results for the student(s) being taught.

Abstract ideas can be taught to sensors, just as they can intuitives. It is up to the teacher to provide the scaffolding necessary for the student to achieve success.

This also goes deeper than simply being sensors or intuitives, as learning styles differ for many within either camp. One of my kids (an intuitive) learns best kinesthetically, while another (a sensor) learns best via auditory methods. Yet my daughter (another intuitive) learns more easily by logical methods. Of course they all use multiple learning styles, but these were their preferred methods.

Good question. We need more teachers that truly understand their role in the education process. Too many times, the teacher lectures, assigns homework and sits back expecting learning to occur. And it does, to a degree--but this teaching style seldom sees the light bulbs going off, the amazement in the eyes, when true learning occurs. Get in there and get your hands dirty and see what happens when you interact with the child rather than talking at them. A perfect example of this is the "Yawp" segment of "Dead Poets Society." The kid is inspired to do more than he ever thought he could. That is the sign of a great teacher.
Well said. I agree with you wholeheartedly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,721 Posts
I hear you...ISTJs struggle with the same need for relevance. One of my geometry classmates signed my year book, "good luck to the guy who never does his geometry homework!" I really didn't do my homework, because I didn't see the need or relevance. Plus, it was the simplest class--I did almost no homework and passed with a "B." Now, trig was a different story. I worked for that grade.:tongue:

To me, that is where we need to have teaching professionals that understand the need for relevance so that kids get the best education. Kids often say, "I don't need math...I'm gonna be a music major," not realizing that music IS math. If the teacher could tap into that interest, the math then becomes relevant.

I've often thought that the best education might be to take a group of twenty kids and build a house from the dirt up. Make 'em go through the whole planning process, government process, to moving the dirt, to framing, and wiring and then to a finished product, and finally going through the selling of the home to the new buyers, including all of the legal documents. I think there is a wealth of learning to be had if the right teacher would take it on.

As a high school math teacher myself (albeit a young one, I've only been teaching it for four years), I totally see where you're coming from. However, I have to add some of my own input.

(This is going to be really hard to say without going on and on for pages, and plus I don't want to derail the thread...but I'll do my best to give the general idea).

On one hand, I totally agree with you. The US education system (and maybe some other countries') teaches high school math in a totally abstract way that doesn't appeal to most kids. They're never taught how it's useful, it isn't useful to a lot of them, and so it's no wonder they hate it and view it as a total waste of time.

Here's the issue I have: you're putting all of the emphasis on the teacher. Now, as a parent and community member, I can totally understand why you do that, since teachers are who you interact with, they're the ones with direct contact with your children, and they're the ones who have the most impact on your child. Parents all of the time go directly to the teachers.

But the whole side of the coin that most parents never see is how extremely bound and restricted we teachers are from doing a good job. I'm almost tempted to say that the politics of education are set up in a way to actually actively, forcefully prevent students from actual learning. I don't like conspiracy theories, but the more I teach the more it feels like everything is set up to turn kids into a mindless, drone population who doesn't think but can perform basic, mindless functions and does what they're told.


In North Carolina it's horrible. The way the standardized testing is set up is absolutely ridiculous. Kids have to pass on big test at the end in order to pass the class...they could be doing just fine in the teacher's eyes, but if they fail the test, they fail the class. And they make the test ridiculously hard, and then curve it. So the whole semester we're forced to teach to the test so that most of our kids won't fail.

That's not to mention that my job and which classes I teach are completely based on the test results of my students. My principal is obsessed with it, and she is because our district imposes that on her, because our state imposes that on the district.

And the whole thing snowballs. These kids are taught these mindless test taking habits since elementary school, so it's already been ingrained into them by the time they get to me. In my Algebra 2 class there are kids who don't know tons from Algebra 1! It's natural for everyone to forget it, but after I teach it again it should come back. If a kid fails a test I give on Algebra 1 material after I've retaught it...what else can I do with them the rest of the semester.

And getting most kids to actually think, to actually do something real...is like pulling teeth. They have been so ingrained into doing mindless work that it's a fight to get them to do something where they actually have to think for themselves. Again, this is natural to a degree, but when there are so many other pressures (a horrible set up where they have 90 minute classes, social and technological distractions, not to mention an inconsistent and ineffective discipline system), and it gets almost exhausting just to get through a day of teaching them the mindless techniques, much less fighting battles that are better for kids in the long run but mean absolutely nothing in my boss's eyes.


Now, don't get me wrong...I do know that good teachers can work with kids despite the system, and I really for the most part try my best to do that. And I'll be honest that I could potentially do more than I am...but already everything is so mentally and physically exhausting that I would be pushing myself even harder than I am.

And to be even more honest, I myself don't even know how to make the ins and outs of geometry and algebra relevant and interesting. Part of it is that there are so many tiny little details that the kids need to know for the test (instead of understanding the overall concepts so they could be put to use), and part of it is simply that no one has ever taught me any of it! High school, college, and teacher education programs never ever bother to do that, and certainly none of my bosses know it. I'd have to spend tons of time learning how to do all of that, and come up with the activities all on my own. And as much as it would be nice to, it's simply not worth the effort as long as I know that it won't help these kids past the test, which is what ultimately students, parents, politicians and my bosses all care about the most.

And I know some people think that if you're not making learning important and relevant to kids that you shouldn't be teaching.


But I guess what I'm saying is...you keep putting emphasis on the teacher, as if a "good teacher" can magically take a group of kids and inspire them to actually love math and know how to apply it. But honestly...our whole system is set up that so that even for teachers who love kids, want to help them out in life, want to teach them something real, want to get that satisfaction of actually showing kids how math is so vital and interesting....it's almost impossible.


Sorry for the rant, and I totally know where you're coming from. And I totally agree with you on how education should be if our main concern is actually teaching kids and preparing them for life. I also totally understand why you put so much emphasis on the teacher, because teachers are on the frontlines. But as someone who overall does my best and wants the same thing you do, I can't help but point out all of the things in our whole entire system that are preventing teachers from doing exactly what you're saying, because it's frustrating how people in the system create it like this and then let the teachers on the bottom of the totem pole take all of the flack from the community...they really like doing that.


(And yes, there are plenty of horrible teachers out there too, don't get me wrong. But maybe if our system was better there would be a lot more people interested in taking the job and they could afford to weed out the bad ones).


(By the way, here's one link that talks about the whole issue a little bit, a friend recently sent this to me):

http://www.ted.com/talks/sir_ken_robinson_bring_on_the_revolution.html
 
  • Like
Reactions: spifffo and niss

·
MOTM Jan 2012
Joined
·
6,514 Posts
To me, that is where we need to have teaching professionals that understand the need for relevance so that kids get the best education. Kids often say, "I don't need math...I'm gonna be a music major," not realizing that music IS math. If the teacher could tap into that interest, the math then becomes relevant.
It is such a travesty that music is one of the first things that schools cut when budgets are tight. Music is applicable to many of the other courses. It enhances like you said math, but also reading and language comprehension, creativity and imagination, hard-work and self-expression.

Twelve Benefits of Music Education

It is beneficial for both sensors and intuitives.
 

·
MOTM May 2011
Joined
·
14,041 Posts
It is such a travesty that music is one of the first things that schools cut when budgets are tight. Music is applicable to many of the other courses. It enhances like you said math, but also reading and language comprehension, creativity and imagination, hard-work and self-expression.

Twelve Benefits of Music Education

It is beneficial for both sensors and intuitives.
I am with you on all except 7 & 12.

Seven is too absolute...I love the song by Chicago, Colour My World, but every time I hear it, I can't help but notice the flautist is a little flat. However, it wasn't enough to keep the song from becoming very popular. There's a lot more gray in the world (including music) than I think we realize.

Twelve is too open ended...and everything can be compared to something.

Mebbe I'm too nit picky.:mellow:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
889 Posts
I hear you...ISTJs struggle with the same need for relevance. One of my geometry classmates signed my year book, "good luck to the guy who never does his geometry homework!" I really didn't do my homework, because I didn't see the need or relevance. Plus, it was the simplest class--I did almost no homework and passed with a "B." Now, trig was a different story. I worked for that grade.:tongue:

To me, that is where we need to have teaching professionals that understand the need for relevance so that kids get the best education. Kids often say, "I don't need math...I'm gonna be a music major," not realizing that music IS math. If the teacher could tap into that interest, the math then becomes relevant.

I've often thought that the best education might be to take a group of twenty kids and build a house from the dirt up. Make 'em go through the whole planning process, government process, to moving the dirt, to framing, and wiring and then to a finished product, and finally going through the selling of the home to the new buyers, including all of the legal documents. I think there is a wealth of learning to be had if the right teacher would take it on.
Funny you mention music. I'm a professional drummer and have been playing for 22 years, starting in sixth grade band. I can also play guitar and bass guitar. To the link that Madhatter posted, I feel that music has taught me more about thinking than most any other individual class.
 

·
MOTM Jan 2012
Joined
·
6,514 Posts
I am with you on all except 7 & 12.

Seven is too absolute...I love the song by Chicago, Colour My World, but every time I hear it, I can't help but notice the flautist is a little flat. However, it wasn't enough to keep the song from becoming very popular. There's a lot more gray in the world (including music) than I think we realize.

Twelve is too open ended...and everything can be compared to something.

Mebbe I'm too nit picky.:mellow:
Uh...I actually didn't read it all, I skimmed it...haha. (Does this fit into the topic about sensors and only what is necessary?...maybe. :cool:) I just typed "benefits of music class in school" into Google, and picked the first link that I saw, to back up what I was saying.

I agree with you on 7. Whenever I played in band, I would cringe at the obvious mistakes we made during the performance, but no one who didn't have the "ear" noticed. And I think that 12 is a tad over-dramatic.

And being nit picky is not always a bad thing.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top