Going to take a break for a second on Digg and tech topics.
This past evening my wife and I watched an episode of a new game show courtesy of Mark Burnett, the same chap who founded Survivor. Its called “Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader?” Basically its a game show wherein contestants try and move up a money ladder by answer grade school level questions (but naturally, only up to grade 5). The allure and fun is that as an audience, you can take great glee in what the contestants don’t know — and giggling in a self assured way about how obviously delayed some people might be. In spite of the fact that some of them were apparently quite bright in school (a news bar details that some contestants were “honor” students in elementary school).
However, the real issue that I found was a much sadder one. And that is the premise about exactly why adults can’t answer elementary, grade-school, type questions, and therefore, why not everyone wins a million dollars (if you answer all the questions correctly).
The premise is that in grade school, children are forced to learn specific rote-type knowledge that has very little bearing in your adult years.
Questions this evening were things like “What is the largest type of bear?”, “How many states border the Pacific ocean?” and “What percentage of the world’s surface does the ocean cover?”
As an adult, my answer to many of these was “who cares!” While the “Are you Smarter” is a gameshow whose outward premise is that some adults are *not* smarter than 5th graders, the real answer is that the knowledge that is required to answer these questions has nothing to do with intelligence or “smarts”.
And if this kind of knowledge is the kind that most children are STILL learning in school — and that is the memorization of arcane and / or useless facts in an age where Googling it will provide an answer, I fear for the state of public education, and more importantly, the ability of North American children to compete on a global scale.
March 2nd, 2007 at 12:55 am | Permalink
[...] Why you’re not smarter than a 5th grader…or as we Canucks say, a kid (hopefully a kid) in grade 5. [...]
March 2nd, 2007 at 10:00 am | Permalink
I can vouch for this. I think it’s important to know what the biggest bear but not know any way to defend against large bears. Which one could save my life or fill my head with random trivia? Oh right we need to know the random trivia.
March 2nd, 2007 at 6:39 pm | Permalink
you say “in an age where Googling it will provide an answer”…
I wonder.. do we really want to have a world where dependence on computers is so complete? What do those kids do who are so dependent on tech that they cannot find information any other way? And what happens to their learning when that access is not there?
The issue of what constitutes trivia vs “useful” information is really rather large and relative to where people live, but the underlying issue, IMHO, is how are we wiring kids to learn? Is it rote, or is it in a way that lends itself to kids continuing to learn as they grow older? Some of it may be about capturing interest… maybe one of those kids learning about the largest bears will grow up to be a biologist, learning about cloud types might inspire a future meteorologist, etc.
Just because we find some facts trivial as adults does not make them trivial to ALL adults.
March 2nd, 2007 at 10:09 pm | Permalink
AJ — you make some good points, but in the “future”, the ease of access to any and all information at one’s fingertips is only going to increase, not decrease.
But having access information doesn’t make one wise. Being able to understand it, manipulate it, and put it into context does.
My wife made the same opinion about using those bits of trivia as a stepping stone to encourage further learning about a given topic — and as a gateway to future interests, and possibly a profession.
I think that’s fine if that’s how its being used; I suspect, however, that many biologists and meteorologists didn’t get their start at learning facts in a classroom — but other experiences outside of it.
Cheers
t
March 3rd, 2007 at 12:03 am | Permalink
I think you are probably right that these isolated examples are not by themselves creating the next generation of great thinkers. I also think the reality is that we are looking at the situation in an extreme vacuum. Without real context of how the lesson is being given, in what context, leading to what, etc, we can only speculate about these “trivial” facts and their lessons.
And as to the ease of accessibility of information as we go forward, that is probably quite true. But I would again argue that the ease of use is meaningless if people do not even have an intellectual starting point, a way to understand the question in order to search for the answer. I’d like to think, putting on my rose colored glasses for a moment, that the facts are being taught in a way that helps kids develop analytical thinking - what is the question and how do they know how to find the right answer?
There’s going to be an increasing generation gap on this count, I am sure. I am very tech savvy and a heavy web/email user. But when my 9 year old nephew asked me a question about sharks while we were watching a video, I went to a book to find the answer. I am not sure he would have thought to go to a book, or known how to look for the answer on the web.
Technology will be of no use if the kids do not have the ability to form the questions in the right way. For example, will a kid looking for information about which bears are largest be able to distinguish real bears from stuffed bears from gay bears? Trivial facts are not so trivial when they aid in making distinctions in the search for answers.
March 3rd, 2007 at 4:03 pm | Permalink
In speaking with teachers who are friends, there are a few who are concerned with this focus on testing.
Interestingly, they said there is more flexibility with the lower ages. But as the ages increase, it becomes more and more regimented and testing-based in Ontario.
March 3rd, 2007 at 4:03 pm | Permalink
[...] I was inspired after reading Canadian blogger, Tony Hung’s short diatribe on who’s really smarter - the kids or the adults? Tony, if you don’t know, is an editor at the prominent new media site, BlogHerald. I’ve had the privilege to meet him, and trust me, he’s one smart dude! But I digressed since the question remains, who ARE the smart ones? What does it mean to be smart? Is it just about random trivia or knowledge? After all, adults were able to create a show like that to make money! Aha…. now that money comes into play, that’s my lame segway to discussing financial smarts! [...]
March 5th, 2007 at 1:09 am | Permalink
[...] Tony Hung is fearful and tells us why the current education that children are still receiving will in future prevent them from competing globally. And sadly, this is how the education system is in Singapore. [...]