> Too much memorization is a bad thing, it's called over fitting.
It's not. It's just a skill that might become unused, like playing piano. Children who grow up in religious cults that emphasize memorizing the holy texts (Hasidic Jews, some Muslim sects) do surprisingly well on standardized tests. Even though they receive a fraction of instruction time.
> What I'd say is wrong with both the US and China is failing to teach how to think.
And I maintain that you can't learn how to think without grinding through facts, learning how to organize them in your mind.
This article does not appear to be supporting a point counter to what I said. It is also focused on the opinions on non-experts. In fact, the majority of the article is discussing how schools aren't "following the data."
I would be surprised if the dominant method was "memorize" for reading, as this would mean a curriculum that has little free reading.
I'm not too interested in what non-experts have to say unless there is quite compelling evidence. The average person quire frequently overestimates their confidence in how something should be done.
> It's not. It's just a skill that might become unused, like playing piano
I grew up playing piano and memorizing holy texts. Even participating in scripture competitions as well as music competitions. With the highest confidence I can assure you that no professional in either of these subjects believes that one should memorize without limit. In music they will use the words "without soul" while in scriptures they may say that you know the words but not the meanings.
I'll directly quote from the bible to demonstrate both at once:
> Therefore I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand.
Mathew 13:13[0]
I suggest reading the chapter in full, as it makes the point more explicitly.
I think both groups understand something important to language (which yes, I will argue that music is _a_ language): that the "words" (sounds) used are only tools to convey what is the deeper meaning inside. In music you seek to draw that out of the listener. In scriptures it is the same. The clearest cases of these may be proverbs, parables, koans, or fables. The words hold only what is at the surface. It is ironic you specifically mention Hasidic Jews, as they are deeply entrenched in the Kabbalah, which is famous for being entrenched mysticism. That there are hidden meanings in the scriptures. This isn't even uncommon in religion in general! I don't think it is hard to see this in music or any art. If you are in any doubt, please go visit your local art gallery and listen to one of the local artists. Even if you believe they are full of hogwash, it still illustrates that they are trying to convey something deeper. If you wish to get this lesson and learn a bit about Jewish mysticism at the same time I'd recommend A Serious Man[1] (a Coen brothers movie)
I must stress that language (of any form) has three key aspects: what is intended to be conveyed, the words and way the words are used (diction), and the way the person receiving interprets this. The goal is to align the first with the last, but there is clearly a lossy encoding and lossy decoding.
> I maintain that you can't learn how to think without grinding through facts
I'm not sure why you thought we were in disagreement. Perhaps you know the words but not the meaning. I hope your head does not feel too heavy from all the things you carry in your mind[2]
> This article does not appear to be supporting a point counter to what I said. It is also focused on the opinions on non-experts. In fact, the majority of the article is discussing how schools aren't "following the data."
In this case, "experts" who thought that "learning by playing" is better were wrong, as proven by data. Schools that use the traditional memorization-heavy approach of learning letter combinations do better.
The example is Oakland's schools, where teachers considered the traditional approach to be "colonizing". Test scores cratered as a result.
> I'm not too interested in what non-experts have to say unless there is quite compelling evidence. The average person quire frequently overestimates their confidence in how something should be done.
Yes. Reading is a prime example: https://time.com/6205084/phonics-science-of-reading-teachers... - connecting pictures of cats to the word "cat" is so much more fun than learning letter combinations.
> Too much memorization is a bad thing, it's called over fitting.
It's not. It's just a skill that might become unused, like playing piano. Children who grow up in religious cults that emphasize memorizing the holy texts (Hasidic Jews, some Muslim sects) do surprisingly well on standardized tests. Even though they receive a fraction of instruction time.
> What I'd say is wrong with both the US and China is failing to teach how to think.
And I maintain that you can't learn how to think without grinding through facts, learning how to organize them in your mind.