Wow is my generation really this dumb?

[CoolP 283]

Well, the other part of me actually applauds to, is amazed or simple baffled by the creativity of some of those 'bad writing' college folks. All thanks to, or because of, the Internez.

 

Boreded Ceiling Cat makinkgz Urf n stuffs

1 Oh hai. In teh beginnin Ceiling Cat maded teh skiez An da Urfs, but he did not eated dem.

2 Da Urfs no had shapez An haded dark face, An Ceiling Cat rode invisible bike over teh waterz.

3 At start, no has lyte. An Ceiling Cat sayz, i can haz lite? An lite wuz.4 An Ceiling Cat sawed teh lite, to seez stuffs, An splitted teh lite from dark but taht wuz ok cuz kittehs can see in teh dark An not tripz over nethin.5 An Ceiling Cat sayed light Day An dark no Day. It were FURST!!!1

Source.

[BillW 210]

I gave up on grammar lessons long ago. I went to a high school class reunion and a friend said :" I seen where you retired." I said : You saw that I retired?" His response was: "No! I really seen it" I thought it was just Rural Texanese, but I've heard this all over the U.S.. Then I heard it very often in Ireland. That explained it. A simple carry over from the Irish immigrants.I guess it all depends on which version of the English language you choose to use. 

[ViperPilot 81]

Ah haav bin foloin dis thured evur sence ah mayd mah furst cawmint. Sum verry inturisting reeplys, fer shure.

 

Sumteyems it mayks me wundur, thogh... ah ken mayk mah poynt jest fayne; et jus luk funy wen et's ryten.

 

:huh:

[Bjoern 1,157]

sascha, on 02 Oct 2013 - 10:10 PM, said:Hmmmm, I'll say you are barking completely up the wrong tree. Where to begin replying?Firstly, saying that developing a gravitational wave detector (ground- or land-based) compares to developing MSFS planes is like saying it is like building a real plane - except that a large-scale astronomical observatory usually is lots more complicated than your average airplane...I suggest you look it up in the web.

Of course I know that the subject is very different, but even when "just" making a plane, I have to:- Work things out for myself- Build a coherent whole- Troubleshoot when something is not workingThat's why I said "same skills".

 

QuoteSecondly, an international research community is in almost no way comparable to a large conpany. It is open to new ideas per definition and it is a very unforgiving environment for people not pulling their weight or working their own agendas.

It's not any different working for a company, believe me. Everyone's out for fame, fortune and promotions.

 

QuoteI'd say you did not read my post properly, my colleague stated that he would press the like button BEFORE reading an item. This is also what I wrote.

You've mentioned button placement."While I thought it was very natural to have them below each article on the grounds that you only share and like stuff you have read yourself, he thought the best place was at the top of the page because [...]"

 

QuoteClearly this is a dangerous habit in a research environment where you have to second- and third-guess each step, not shoot off in a direction based on your first impression.

If the article isn't relevant to his reserch and he isn't in the mood, why should he bother reading it?

 

QuoteBy the way, research results are not really distributed in social media.

Academia.edu begs to differ.

 

QuoteStrangely enough, there IS such a thing as assimilating knowledge to draw conclusions. If your personal store of knowledge is not great, you will look at the facts and not see patterns, probably not even recognize the facts themselves.

Isn't that why scientific writing was invented? To state facts, patterns and conclusions in the most unbiased way possible?

 

QuoteThis is very apparent in research. If you are trying to develop a piece of technology you need to know a lot of the facts (laser technology, quantum physics and so on) before you can even understand the problems involved, never mind build a superior laser..II believe that the term generally used in this context is 'in-depth knowledge'.

Yeah well, the age of in-depth knowledge is clearly over.Nowadays, you'd probably have to hire someone with asperger's syndrome if you wanted in-depth knowledge about quantum mechanics and lasers.

 

QuoteAnother point which is grossly underestimated in modern education IMO is the acquisition of random knowledge by being forced to read through books to find items you need. Looking up things in the web tends to only bring up results matching your search criteria little chance of stumbling across interesting new lines of thought.

Haha, no! The crap I have to dig through when googling a even specific term...Also, there's still the possibility of crosslinking to make people acquire different knowledge. (This is also called "The Wikipedia tab avalanche".)

 

QuoteAs I wrote, my wife teaches language classes. It is necessary to practice a language by reading and yes, looking up words you don't know. But you need to learn the words! By heart, yea, and also the grammar, otherwise you end up talking BS.

The problem with learning by heart is that you tend to waste energy on learning stuff you'll never need.It's much better to learn within a context and practice, practice, practice. Not by muttering isolated words or sentences to yourself but by having real conversations or writing a short story or something.And just reading to practice a language gets you nowhere. It's equally as important to write and speak it.My ability to read spanish (because it is similar to french) got me nowhere on a vacation because I couldn't speak it (and the Spaniards seem to be awfully averse to speaking English, despite being asked to in Spanish).I agree on the grammar. It's the most important foundation of them all.

 

QuoteHeck, as I wrote my wife would be happy if her students looked up things in the internet! But these days, some seem to to go into class and come out with a perfect grasp of the German language (which is quite difficult)..Note that my wife is Russian and so it is quite an achievement to become so proficient in German (she has no German roots, it is a foreign language to her) to teach it at a German university. So she understands how to learn and teach a language.

They should clone her and send her to every school in the country then, because a lot of teachers don't teach the language very well.

[january 19]

One has to wonder at the connection between unemployment data versus popular lack of language (both spoken & written) and math skills.

january

 

 

 

[sascha 314]

Quote

 

Quote

I'd say you did not read my post properly, my colleague stated that he would press the like button BEFORE reading an item. This is also what I wrote.

You've mentioned button placement.

"While I thought it was very natural to have them below each article on the grounds that you only share and like stuff you have read yourself, he thought the best place was at the top of the page because [...]"

You obviously did not read the post again!

 

This is what it says:

While I thought it was very natural to have them below each article on the grounds that you only share and like stuff you have read yourself, he thought the best place was at the top of the page because he would press the button right away on the basis of "this looks cool" and would not bother to read the item first.

 

After this discussion I am not surprised about any dumb stuff anymore!

 

If you read to the end of the first paragraph you will clearly see a statement about READIN HABITS.

 

This is exactly the kind of attitude I deplored ie read the first part of something and go off commenting because you believe you understood the whole. Then, instead of checking you pick up a bit in the statement that seems to support YOUR point of view and cut off the quote before we come to the relevant bits for the discussion.

 

Meaning: I did indeed mention buttons, but the whole reason for my amazement about this was my colleagues justification for placing the button at the top: He would not bother to read an article but share it on the basis of "cool factor"!

 

A core statement you entirely failed to pick up in both posts...

 

 

Quote

 

Quote

Clearly this is a dangerous habit in a research environment where you have to second- and third-guess each step, not shoot off in a direction based on your first impression.

If the article isn't relevant to his reserch and he isn't in the mood, why should he bother reading it?

Indeed, but then he should probably not hit the like button, eh?

 

Anyway we were talking about the institutes own research anyway!

 

Sascha

Quote

 

Quote

By the way, research results are not really distributed in social media.

Academia.edu begs to differ.

Quite right, I forgot about that entirely!

Quote

 

Quote

Strangely enough, there IS such a thing as assimilating knowledge to draw conclusions. If your personal store of knowledge is not great, you will look at the facts and not see patterns, probably not even recognize the facts themselves.

Isn't that why scientific writing was invented? To state facts, patterns and conclusions in the most unbiased way possible?

Yes, but sometimes I wonder if it is worth the bother these days if people then go on and not read it ...

 

Well, the point I was trying to get across is that you'd better have some core understanding based on knowledge and not have to look up everything when you are in a disassembled detector up to your waist ...

Quote

 

Quote

This is very apparent in research. If you are trying to develop a piece of technology you need to know a lot of the facts (laser technology, quantum physics and so on) before you can even understand the problems involved, never mind build a superior laser.

.

II believe that the term generally used in this context is 'in-depth knowledge'.

Yeah well, the age of in-depth knowledge is clearly over.

Nowadays, you'd probably have to hire someone with asperger's syndrome if you wanted in-depth knowledge about quantum mechanics and lasers.

Fortuanately that is not the case.

 

And after a couple of months on the job, young scientists quickly start filling in gaps, as well.

Quote

 

Quote

As I wrote, my wife teaches language classes. It is necessary to practice a language by reading and yes, looking up words you don't know. But you need to learn the words! By heart, yea, and also the grammar, otherwise you end up talking BS.

The problem with learning by heart is that you tend to waste energy on learning stuff you'll never need.

It's much better to learn within a context and practice, practice, practice. Not by muttering isolated words or sentences to yourself but by having real conversations or writing a short story or something.

There is only a problem if you learn USELESS things by heart.

 

If you had learned a lot of stock phrases by heart before visiting Spain, you would have gotten along famously.

They should clone her and send her to every school in the country then, because a lot of teachers don't teach the language very well.

I agree, but she gets a lot of opposition in her faculty because of her practical methods, which are deemed "unscientific"/

 

But she is the only trained teacher in her faculty, the others are all "Germanisten" who have a very theoretical approach to language taching.

 

Her students love it however, because they really learn to speak the language.

 

Regards,

Sascha

[Captain_Barfbag 31]

That's where the antiquated teaching methods come into play. Why spend hours in forcing yourself to learn something by heart if you can simply look it up on the web or use the library's online catalogue to find bits of relevant literature?

 

 

Somewhere in your education, you should learn using those "antiquated" teaching methods. It's not so much what you're putting into your head, but how you're organizing it, and how well you can retrieve it. That's the education. It doesn't really matter if it's Shakespeare or history or football playoff results. At the same time, I am very happy to have Shakespeare and history and scores at my command, wherever I am, without a computer in front of me. They all help me to analyze and reply to the information I take in every day, "to the last syllable of recorded time."

 

Firstly, saying that developing a gravitational wave detector (ground- or land-based) compares to developing MSFS planes is like saying it is like building a real plane - except that a large-scale astronomical observatory usually is lots more complicated than your average airplane...

 

Having spent 15 years initimately involved with the details of one of those large-scale atronomical observatories, it's more complicated than a Cessna, yes, but on a par with a modern jetliner. It may look bigger and more "awesome," to be sure, but both deal with high-tolerance components, delicate hydraulic mechanisms dealing with large, massive systems, and of course lots of high-tech gear. An observatory will likely have a lot of hand-built, one-of-a-kind components, but at the same time it doesn't have the man-rated reliability requirements of an aircraft.

[lthendrix 25]

Hi folks if you think the younger generation is getting less intelligent look in the mirror if you have children  and listen to the television read through the lines... the ones on your face and what the tv sells  there might not be a real detrimental outcome of a less intelligent population .... if your the only one with a brain....

[sascha 314]

 

 

Having spent 15 years initimately involved with the details of one of those large-scale atronomical observatories, it's more complicated than a Cessna, yes, but on a par with a modern jetliner. It may look bigger and more "awesome," to be sure, but both deal with high-tolerance components, delicate hydraulic mechanisms dealing with large, massive systems, and of course lots of high-tech gear. An observatory will likely have a lot of hand-built, one-of-a-kind components, but at the same time it doesn't have the man-rated reliability requirements of an aircraft.

No argument from me there!

Sascha

Hi folks if you think the younger generation is getting less intelligent look in the mirror if you have children  and listen to the television read through the lines... the ones on your face and what the tv sells  there might not be a real detrimental outcome of a less intelligent population .... if your the only one with a brain....

I think most here agree that young people are less intelligent - but some of us believe that education has taken a wrong turn in some countries.

 

Sascha

[CoolP 283]

I think most here agree that young people are less intelligent - but some of us believe that education has taken a wrong turn in some countries.

Is that really what you had intended to write, Sascha?

 

As for the other post(er)s, I think we should be clear about whether we're talking about methods or 'useless' contents. There seems to be a mixup of some kind at times. Learning to learn indeed is important.

[lthendrix 25]

............with a brain....a brain.... abrian...........

[january 19]

The best definition of intelligence i've come across is simply- "The ability to adapt readily."

One wonders if the young of today are so dependant on "hardware" that they are losing the ability to survive (adapt) without it.

There is no substitute for logical thinking - espec. the ability to do fast, if only simple, mental arithmetic computation for daily decision comparisons.

Such as- how does job offer A, with a weekly salary, compare with B at a monthly salary? Or C with an hourly rate?

Ah well, in the absence of logic capability, those job offers are unlikely in the first place.

january 

[molleh 451]

Ah, the age old "kids these days" discussion. Everybody always likes to think their generation was superior to the subsequent ones because they worked harder, they didn't have it so easy, and so on and so forth. This will never, ever change.

 

Here's some food for thought, though. Many schools around the U.S. are reporting record freshmen enrollment this fall. More people than ever are feeling the pressures of the modern economy and are actively trying to give themselves a better chance. Nonetheless, the costs of tuition continues to rise while wages stagnate. A study I read a couple of years ago found that tuition costs as a percentage of family income (assuming the family pays for a student's tuition) went from something like 15% 40 years ago to 90% now. My four year degree at an average Midwestern school is going to run something like $45,000. That's insane compared to what post-secondary education used to cost (inflation adjusted, of course.) Meanwhile the gap between the upper- and lower-classes continues to widen at an alarming rate - and no, that can't just be chalked up to "the working class just needs to work harder, then!"

 

There are definite impacts from the educational system. While listening to NPR a few days ago, I heard mention of a study that looked at recent SAT scores and something like 60% of test takers didn't score well enough in math to be considered ready for college. School budgets go down, teachers face lower pay and benefits, and prospective teachers see less and less incentive to go into the educational field in the first place. How can we place blame on kids for this?

 

I don't debate issues very well, but I guess what I'm trying to say is - let's look at things in context and with perspective. I know it's hard to do a lot of the time, but it's just not helpful or accurate to toss today's generation under the bus, calling them 'dumb' and irresponsible. Stupid and lazy people have been around since, well, people. 

[BillW 210]

Ah, the age old "kids these days" discussion. Everybody always likes to think their generation was superior to the subsequent ones because they worked harder, they didn't have it so easy, and so on and so forth. This will never, ever change.

 

Here's some food for thought, though. Many schools around the U.S. are reporting record freshmen enrollment this fall. More people than ever are feeling the pressures of the modern economy and are actively trying to give themselves a better chance. Nonetheless, the costs of tuition continues to rise while wages stagnate. A study I read a couple of years ago found that tuition costs as a percentage of family income (assuming the family pays for a student's tuition) went from something like 15% 40 years ago to 90% now. My four year degree at an average Midwestern school is going to run something like $45,000. That's insane compared to what post-secondary education used to cost (inflation adjusted, of course.) Meanwhile the gap between the upper- and lower-classes continues to widen at an alarming rate - and no, that can't just be chalked up to "the working class just needs to work harder, then!"

 

There are definite impacts from the educational system. While listening to NPR a few days ago, I heard mention of a study that looked at recent SAT scores and something like 60% of test takers didn't score well enough in math to be considered ready for college. School budgets go down, teachers face lower pay and benefits, and prospective teachers see less and less incentive to go into the educational field in the first place. How can we place blame on kids for this?

 

I don't debate issues very well, but I guess what I'm trying to say is - let's look at things in context and with perspective. I know it's hard to do a lot of the time, but it's just not helpful or accurate to toss today's generation under the bus, calling them 'dumb' and irresponsible. Stupid and lazy people have been around since, well, people. 

One of the more balanced and intelligent posts in this thread.

[WhiteKnuckle 11]

 

 

http://www.elevenplu...1 MathsTest.pdf

 

I gave my son this test today.  He is ten so has two years left before high school since we live in Australia.  He got 70% which is encouraging.