<story><title>Finland to abandon school subjects in favour of phenomenon-based learning (2016)</title><url>https://curiousmindmagazine.com/goodbye-subjects-finland-taking-revolution-education-step/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>netjiro</author><text>I&amp;#x27;ve seen test numbers where the top 5% group learn around 5-10x faster than the 50% group. The numbers hold for short term recall, long term recall, problem solving, critical and creative thinking, etc.&lt;p&gt;There is no way &amp;quot;school&amp;quot; can equalise this. There is no reason to keep stuffing everyone in one box.</text></item><item><author>kstenerud</author><text>The problem stems from trying to make a one-size-fits-all solution. You can never fit everyone into the same box, but people like simple solutions so we keep trying.&lt;p&gt;In the 2nd grade, I had a teacher who recognized potential in some of her students and separated them from the rest of the class to engage in self-directed learning. There were three of us chosen. I achieved grade 5 level proficiency in a number of subjects, while the smartest kid reached grade 7 in almost all of them. The following year, I changed schools, and spent the next 3 years re-doing the same boring shit over and over. My protestations were countered with &amp;quot;Well, if you&amp;#x27;ve already done it, then it should be easy to do it again!&amp;quot; I learned my lesson, and my grades from that point on slipped from straight As to the minimum required to pass. I&amp;#x27;d only apply myself when doing my own projects (mostly programming).&lt;p&gt;Like in anything else, if you want to see success, you need to hire teachers who can recognize and focus potential, and then give them the leeway to do so based on their good judgment.</text></item><item><author>tremguy</author><text>Finn here. Results have been negative on this so far, at least for students before high school [1]. Most children at that stage aren&amp;#x27;t yet capable of self-directed learning. Problem is compounded by the distractive effect of digital equipment in class.&lt;p&gt;[1] &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;yle.fi&amp;#x2F;uutiset&amp;#x2F;osasto&amp;#x2F;news&amp;#x2F;finlands_digital-based_curriculum_impedes_learning_researcher_finds&amp;#x2F;10514984&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;yle.fi&amp;#x2F;uutiset&amp;#x2F;osasto&amp;#x2F;news&amp;#x2F;finlands_digital-based_cu...&lt;/a&gt;</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>danenania</author><text>I believe that in Japan, they deal with this disparity by asking the top students to help teach others in the class. It seems like an interesting approach in that teaching something well requires a much higher bar of understanding than doing well on a test, &lt;i&gt;and&lt;/i&gt; it’s an excellent way to reinforce knowledge for the one doing the teaching.&lt;p&gt;So the top students get a more difficult challenge than just coasting along, and the other students benefit as well. And, of course, it promotes teamwork and solidarity.&lt;p&gt;I’m sure there are downsides too. Perhaps it could create tension between the “teacher’s pets” and the others?</text></comment>
<story><title>Finland to abandon school subjects in favour of phenomenon-based learning (2016)</title><url>https://curiousmindmagazine.com/goodbye-subjects-finland-taking-revolution-education-step/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>netjiro</author><text>I&amp;#x27;ve seen test numbers where the top 5% group learn around 5-10x faster than the 50% group. The numbers hold for short term recall, long term recall, problem solving, critical and creative thinking, etc.&lt;p&gt;There is no way &amp;quot;school&amp;quot; can equalise this. There is no reason to keep stuffing everyone in one box.</text></item><item><author>kstenerud</author><text>The problem stems from trying to make a one-size-fits-all solution. You can never fit everyone into the same box, but people like simple solutions so we keep trying.&lt;p&gt;In the 2nd grade, I had a teacher who recognized potential in some of her students and separated them from the rest of the class to engage in self-directed learning. There were three of us chosen. I achieved grade 5 level proficiency in a number of subjects, while the smartest kid reached grade 7 in almost all of them. The following year, I changed schools, and spent the next 3 years re-doing the same boring shit over and over. My protestations were countered with &amp;quot;Well, if you&amp;#x27;ve already done it, then it should be easy to do it again!&amp;quot; I learned my lesson, and my grades from that point on slipped from straight As to the minimum required to pass. I&amp;#x27;d only apply myself when doing my own projects (mostly programming).&lt;p&gt;Like in anything else, if you want to see success, you need to hire teachers who can recognize and focus potential, and then give them the leeway to do so based on their good judgment.</text></item><item><author>tremguy</author><text>Finn here. Results have been negative on this so far, at least for students before high school [1]. Most children at that stage aren&amp;#x27;t yet capable of self-directed learning. Problem is compounded by the distractive effect of digital equipment in class.&lt;p&gt;[1] &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;yle.fi&amp;#x2F;uutiset&amp;#x2F;osasto&amp;#x2F;news&amp;#x2F;finlands_digital-based_curriculum_impedes_learning_researcher_finds&amp;#x2F;10514984&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;yle.fi&amp;#x2F;uutiset&amp;#x2F;osasto&amp;#x2F;news&amp;#x2F;finlands_digital-based_cu...&lt;/a&gt;</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>bonoboTP</author><text>A curious kid can pace themselves along with a the rest just fine. Are the topics taught too long for your talent? Then dig deeper in each. Say, you&amp;#x27;re learning about magnetism in physics class but you learn the requirements in half the time allocated. Then textbooks usually contain small print optional advanced topics or references, you can read additional stuff online maybe ask the teacher for further direction. Any topic has almost vast depth with specialists spending their career studying just a tiny section of it. You can never exhaust a topic. Don&amp;#x27;t just skip ahead to the next lesson as that will make things boring but engage each more deeply.&lt;p&gt;The reason to stuff everyone in one box is socialization. A group of students subjected to shared experiences will develop community and solidarity easier than every individual student bouncing in their own special way in the system.&lt;p&gt;It has even been observed that people can bond over a shared meal better than if everyone eats their own different food.&lt;p&gt;Overall a huge huge part of school is about socializing, with fellow students or against fellow students, obeying and rebelling against teachers, being honest or cheating to copy your homework, the dynamics of bullying and protecting from bullies, snitching on others or lying to protect minor wrongdoers, feeling guilt when you made the wrong decision, feeling proud for the right decision, discovering the difference of rules and morals, of friendship and togetherness and betrayal and loyalty, of acting tough or showing compassion, of romance and heartbreak, etc. So many lessons that aren&amp;#x27;t taught by teachers explicitly or asked on a test. But these add up to a stable individual later on who can draw from a rich well of experiences for later reference, even in adulthood. You can do a lot of low risk experimentation at that age. If people become atomized, dropped into a class full of almost strangers in each subject, there is no way to develop group dynamics of the above sort. Maybe you can do some of it with your sports team but you spend much less time with them than with a shared class.</text></comment>