Ok for adults. Terrible for children.
this post was submitted on 28 Sep 2024
-35 points (21.3% liked)
Ask Lemmy
26778 readers
1320 users here now
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Yeah, that's why universities have lectures for people who already know how to do most of their learning on their own while children's class sizes favor more reasonable teacher to student ratios of like 20 and learning suffers when there are more.
I wish I'd learnt how to learn before I went to university.
So the teacher has to prepare 6-8 different lesson plans every day and be knowledgeable enough and comfortable enough to teach every subject themselves?
All while trying to keep 100 kids focused and on task?
0 out of 10.
I think that your score is too high. It should be lower..
Discussions or lectures, sure. Education without TAs to provide more attention, terrible.
What this means in grade school.
5-10 kids bored because the lesson is far too slow.
5-10 kids actively disrupting the class.
10-15 kids actually learning despite interruption.
30 kids learning some parts of the lesson, would benefit significantly from reduced distraction or increased attention.
20-25 kids that aren't getting it and need significant attention to understand the lesson.
10-15 kids that are hopelessly struggling and have no chance of learning in such an environment.
0
My kids are autistic, so this would be a -11/10 for them.
(Assuming young students, since you said "all classes")
How likely will a teacher be able to control a class of a hundred? Will any student that needs attention to handle their education ever receive it? What happens if an incident occurs and the teacher needs to leave to deal with it? If a child leaves the room crying, does the teacher abandon 99 kids or leave a child crying?
How long will it take for the class to give presentations? How long will it take for the teacher to mark tests? Do you imagine the teachers will be fairly compensated for the added workload, or do you think it's a cynical ploy to hire fewer teachers?
So, in short, it's a terrible idea. Zero out of ten. Criminal neglect of children, inhumane work conditions for the teachers, and just shit logistically.
In college, I had classes with a bigger ratio. 1:300, 1:400. It can be done, but they had grad students help with grading.
5/10. Not good, not bad, it's just a fact of life.
For younger kids? 0-2 out of 10. They need the structure.
If discussing 1:100 there is no individual attention, so why not 1:1,000 or 1:100,000 or just YouTube videos one can watch at their own pace.
In my college lectures of 1:200, there were still separate sessions of 20 students or fewer, led by grad students working for the professor, to offer more individualized help. If that doesn't happen and it's just a lecturer talking to a crowd, the ratio is irrelevant.
0/10
What age are you referring to?
0 More friend possibilities, but also much more bullying, because no teacher would be able to work reasonably with such a large collective. The teacher would be totally overpowered by the students, so the quality of the education would be minimal.
Do you know anything about what makes an effective school? Smaller class sizes is good schools 101.
the teacher will be fine, if the goal is just lecturing. students, on the other hand, will need more that sheer willpower if they want to absorb anything lectured.
i think the sweet spot should be lesser than 40 as I had my struggles learning in a class of 40ish.
I don't think that's feasible for a single person
ideally it would be tailored to the student. money being no object, those lacking self regulation or other issues requiring greater guidance should be able to receive those services while those more suited to self-teaching could be given those opportunities.
but we dont value education
Firstly, the more students there are, the less time the teacher can devote to them individually. When there's a comprehension problem, it's really in the interaction that things can be sorted out: understanding why the person doesn't understand, explaining from different angles, etc.
And all the time spent with one person leaves the rest of the group on its own, which can very quickly dissipate all the group's attention, with a few whispered personal discussions turning into hubbub.
What's more, the larger the group, the easier and more tempting it is for weak and shy students to hide in the crowd. In a small group, the teacher should regularly check that no one is left behind. With 100 people, this is strictly impossible.
Finally, I don't believe in the argument that the more people you have, the more friends and studying partners you can find. Socially, we get together in small groups (between 2 and 6, roughly speaking) no matter what's going on. I think that beyond this limit, there's a diminishing return (unconsciously): a new person brings less than reinforcing the group's cohesion. If the group gets any bigger, it's going to reshape itself by affinity into smaller, tighter-knit groups.
Rating: I don't believe in rating system. If I say 3/10, can you change 20% of your idea to reach 5/10? What's 20% of an idea ? Would 5/10 be good enough? Can you change 70% of an idea to reach perfection? In this case, why don't we live in a perfect world?
Even gym class?