undefined | Better HN

0 pointsgameman1443y ago0 comments

> Why even send students to school, if test scores are "totally" in the control of the student?

Because the tests measure knowledge, and schools are intended to impart knowledge.

As an analogy, my physical fitness is totally in my control: if I work out more, I'll build more muscle. But you'd never say "Why are you even going to the gym if your fitness is within your control?" If my local gym is really trash or I can't afford one, I can still do pushups on my own or go for runs, but nobody would argue based on that that gyms are worthless.

Likewise, schools are (or should be) built for students to learn. Students can learn in other ways, too, and any kind of learning will be measured on these tests.

The fact that other means of learning exists, though, doesn't mean that schools aren't important or useful.

0 comments

lapcat3y ago

> As an analogy, my physical fitness is totally in my control: if I work out more, I'll build more muscle. But you'd never say "Why are you even going to the gym if your fitness is within your control?"

This isn't a good analogy. A gym is a mere building. I wasn't referring to schools as mere buildings, the walls, the halls, the roofs. I was referring to schools as the places where the students meet the teachers.

> Students can learn in other ways, too, and any kind of learning will be measured on these tests.

How successful do you expect most children would be with entirely self-directed learning? No teachers, no tutors, not even parents. That's what I meant. I wouldn't expect that to work well, with only rare exceptions. Students — who by definition and nature lack experience, lack knowledge, are ignorant — need guidance, and thus the quality of the schools, the quality of the teaching is crucial. Nothing is totally in the control of the student, nor should it be, for the student's own good.

gameman144OP3y ago

> A gym is a mere building.

> I was referring to schools as the places where the students meet the teachers.

I think for any gym with personal trainers, this is still a pretty one-to-one analogy.

> How successful do you expect most children would be with entirely self-directed learning? No teachers, no tutors, not even parents. That's what I meant.

Ah, I think I might have been missing your point here -- essentially does it boil down to "If tests are all that we're measuring, what's the point of all the grading and process that schools go through", to which the answer is presumably "Tests aren't all that matters"? If that's the case, we probably agree here (in that learning is the thing that matters, and schools might perform a lot of functions which don't map to test scores, but might map to better learning).

LMK if this is still off base, though.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse