• @revanthetrueemperor
    link
    English
    110 hours ago

    Hot take but if you need school to teach you how to pay your taxes there is something wrong with your taxe system.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    553 days ago

    Ok. So. Here’s my take.

    No high schooler is EVER gonna pay even the slightest bit of attention if we incorporate a “taxes and accounting” class. No shot.

    We learn certain general subjects like this in science mainly to learn critical thinking, analytical/logical reasoning skills, how to apply the scientific method (which, yes, can come in handy in many areas of life besides science).

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      143 days ago

      No high schooler is EVER gonna pay even the slightest bit of attention if we incorporate a “taxes and accounting” class. No shot.

      Ask any teacher who’s taught it and they’ll confirm. People just like to bullshit. They lie about not being taught things they were taught too. I’ll bet many had a lesson that went over tax brackets etc and they just ignored it

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      63 days ago

      Most of the people I know that complain about not being taught “real life skills” are absolute dumbasses that would have refused to pay attention anyway.

      I had also been told this about something before where the guy had poured water on a flat top grill. As it was boiling off be was like “man this is real life right here, if school taught things like this I’d have paid attention” and I was like they did idiot you just didn’t pay attention that’s literally just water boiling smh lol

    • Kalcifer
      link
      fedilink
      English
      63 days ago

      We learn certain general subjects like this in science mainly to learn critical thinking, analytical/logical reasoning skills, how to apply the scientific method (which, yes, can come in handy in many areas of life besides science).

      Given your previous claim:

      No high schooler is EVER gonna pay even the slightest bit of attention if we incorporate a “taxes and accounting” class. No shot.

      What makes you think that they’d be any more likely to pay attention to any other subject matter?

        • Kalcifer
          link
          fedilink
          English
          0
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          But, to me, that doesn’t really explain why it would make sense to teach things that wouldn’t be useful.

    • @JordanZ
      link
      English
      33 days ago

      We had a class like that but it was an elective. It had things like how to balance a checkbook. While I don’t use checks very often I do understand how to manage it. Think I’ve had the same checkbook for 15-20 years. Went over basic tax stuff and interest for loans and whatnot.

      I attended public school in a town my parents specifically chose for the schools though. City taxes are crazy because of it but I didn’t realize how much that mattered until I got into college.

      Having to peer grade anything in college was excruciating. Even simple stuff like the standard five paragraph essay was a nightmare. The start was something that kinda introduced the topic. Then the conclusion was next followed by a wall of text ramblings that was supposed to be the body?…ugh. So the five paragraph essay was now three and incoherent. The spelling was usually awful as well and It was typed. Like how is that even possible? The computers totally had spell check back then.

    • Kalcifer
      link
      fedilink
      English
      23 days ago

      […] No high schooler is EVER gonna pay even the slightest bit of attention if we incorporate a “taxes and accounting” class. No shot. […]

      Assuming that some high schoolers aren’t going to pay attention to the lesson, wouldn’t it still be better to at least try to teach something that has real life practical use rather than something that doesn’t? At least the people who do pay attention will gain something useful — it doesn’t make much sense to me to reduce the overall usefulness of what’s taught simply because some may not pay attention.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      02 days ago

      Well, I am unsure if I agree with that, as my business management class, which had pretty ordinary coursework about it without really anything ‘exciting’, had a vast majority of students paying tons of attention and actually learning, and half of the class was the stereotypical lazy bum students who acted macho and popular even though everyone hated them.

      Although, the people who failed that class failed to the most catastrophic degree, as everyone else was well above passing, certain students got an overall score from 10 to 30% in total for all assessments.

      I’m not too sure how standard this type of class is, so the success rate of accounting or other classes could be highly varied

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -33 days ago

      Ah yes learning critical thinking

      Here is a series of indisputable statements.

      Mitochondria are membrane-bound organelles found in most eukaryotic cells, and they are often referred to as the ‘powerhouses of the cell’ because they generate adenosine triphosphate (ATP), the cell’s primary energy currency, through a process called oxidative phosphorylation. They have a double-membrane structure, with the inner membrane folded into cristae to increase surface area for energy production. Mitochondria contain their own circular DNA, which is separate from the nuclear DNA, and this allows them to produce some of their own proteins. They are believed to have originated from a symbiotic relationship between ancient eukaryotic cells and free-living prokaryotes, a theory known as the endosymbiotic theory. In addition to energy production, mitochondria play roles in cell signaling, apoptosis (programmed cell death), and calcium homeostasis.

      Have you learned critical thinking yet?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        14
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        I’m not sure how you think critical thinking works. Do you have some sort of magical logic flow that doesn’t requiere some base understanding of facts?

        Guy trying to sell quartz as “energy enhancing crystals” -> no understanding as to how body energy works -> might be legit, let’s give it a try

        Guy trying to sell quartz as “energy enhancing crystals” -> knowing that available body energy is dictated by ATP and has nothing to do with crystals -> this smells like a scam

        Critical thinking is about being able to apply knowledge of what you know to what you are currently being told. You need some basis of real, provable facts for it, which is why if you had a bio course, you also likely had some lab component to it as well.

        Sure, I hear you cry, but all of that information isn’t something I need to know basically ever! Well, you’re correct, but a fun thing about learning is that the deeper you cut into a subject, the more you remember. You probably wouldn’t remember much if the entire unit only said “mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell”.

        And doing these deep cuts to reinforce the basics of understanding work. There is a reason that “mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell” is a meme, and it’s because everyone remembers that part, not nessessarily the part that they have their DNA that is always inherented from your mother and is referred to as mDNA.

        I hope this helps you to think critically against the continued push against critical thinking, particularly to the claim that what you learned in school has nothing to do with doing it.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          13 days ago

          The mitoncondria meme is a byword for useless knowledge.

          Learning a series of science trivia will simply not teach you the structure of critical thinking.

          Reciting a series of science fact is not a critical thinking activity, it is rote memorization of trivia.

          Yes, effective critical thinking relies on a wealth of knowledge, but critical thinking is a set of applied skills about finding “your truth”. These skills simply cannot be acquired by downloading a series of establishmebt vetted facts.

          If anything, critical thinking would be better learned by teaching flat earth theory, without any disclaimer. You needs exposure to real false information at a minimum.

          You need to learn healthy distrust of authorities. Something I have not encoutered once in 15 years of dreadful, boring and painful schooling.

      • Trafficone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        43 days ago

        I see what you’re getting at, and you’re not wrong to think about how the lessons we teach kids from the minds and skills we want them to have. There’s positives and negatives to the liberal arts education, and it could be said that it is just as much of what is left out then what is kept in. The choice to teach about mitochondria and not the Krebs Cycle is odd from a scientific perspective, but if you know about endosymbiosis then it’s a lot harder to accept that all organisms appeared independently a few millennia ago. But once you view a liberal arts education from this perspective then you see these biases everywhere. For example, how many world history classes talk about the Tamil Kings, or the Warring States period of China? It’s a lot easier to other a region you don’t know the history of.

        So we have to ask, what purpose should education serve? What knowledge and skills should we expect people to have by the time they reach adulthood? Add what is the best way to disseminate those?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          13 days ago

          The stated goal of high school level education is to create well roubded individuals. But individuals that know about mitochondria but not how fucked up the tax code is and how to survive all the finance predators? That know about Christopher Columbus but not how to change the tires on their cars ? That is not a well rounded to me. You have to know how to live before learning about biology trivia.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    49
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    It would probably make more sense to ask the bio teacher for sex ed than economics.

  • Captain Aggravated
    link
    fedilink
    English
    133 days ago

    If we’re going to scrap something from high school to add a tax lesson, let’s ditch some literature. Over four years my graduating class studied 5 shakespeare plays and a handful of sonnets. Surely we could have cut out Much Ado About Nothing and The Tempest if we still have Romeo & Juliet, Hamlet and Henry V.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      223 days ago

      Reading comprehension is more important than ever … And you want to cut the classes that teach it? Why?

      • Captain Aggravated
        link
        fedilink
        English
        83 days ago

        I’m unconvinced that Shakespeare is a particularly good exercise in reading comprehension given the vocabulary, phraseology, spelling and grammar is 500 years out of date.

        I remember reading Hamlet out loud in class, and that was the last of the plays we studied so we had read some Shakespeare before, and every other thing you’re running into a sentence that doesn’t work or a word that is NEVER said except in Hamlet like 'contumely" or ‘orisons’ and you just get a room full of teenagers saying words one by one taking none of it on board.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          83 days ago

          If anything, learning to understand words from a text without knowing their definition makes it better for that

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          32 days ago

          I’d argue it does the opposite for literacy. You tell some teenager with a third grade reading level to read “thou prithy foresooth bout thy they thou thumb” and they are going to completely check out.

        • Kalcifer
          link
          fedilink
          English
          63 days ago

          I’m unconvinced that Shakespeare is a particularly good exercise in reading comprehension given the vocabulary, phraseology, spelling and grammar is 500 years out of date.

          Hrm I’d argue that regardless of the parlance used in the work, it’s still an exercise of reading comprehension, as one is still comprehending the work while reading it.

          • Captain Aggravated
            link
            fedilink
            English
            13 days ago

            as one is still comprehending the work while reading it.

            Especially in something like Shakespeare’s case I don’t think that’s necessarily true, because 1. a lot of the vocabulary is just…not English anymore. Let me ask you: what part of speech is the word “contumely”? Is it a noun? An adverb? An adjective? 2. Not all of the information is there. Shakespeare only ever wrote down the dialog not the stage directions because he told that stuff to his actors in person. Comprehending the play by reading the dialog alone is difficult because the context is missing.

            The gravedigger in Hamlet is in the habit of saying “argal.” Because he heard someone literate say “ergo” and he uses it right, as a synonym of “therefore” but he doesn’t pronounce it right. It’s an interesting bit of characterization because it shows the gravedigger maybe should have had a chance at some school. I realized this watching the Kenneth Branaugh production years later when I found it in an old stack of VHS tapes, not in 12th grade listening to my classmate Jeremy try to read it without having it explained to him first. He kept pronouncing it “ARgul” rather than “arGALL” so he never heard himself say the joke.

            Perhaps my English teacher could have done a better job conducting this lesson but was this really a useful exercise in reading comprehension?

            • Kalcifer
              link
              fedilink
              English
              1
              edit-2
              18 hours ago

              […] I don’t think that’s necessarily true, because 1. a lot of the vocabulary is just…not English anymore. […] Comprehending the play by reading the dialog alone is difficult because the context is missing. […]

              I think you may be missing the point that I was trying to make. I agree with you that I think Shakespeare can be difficult to read, but, regardless of that, trying to comprehend it is still trying to comprehend it. If one is practicing their reading comprehension, no matter the difficulty of the material, imo it could still be said that they are improving their comprehension. Now, it could be that there is material that is more efficient at improving one’s reading comprehension ability than Shakespeare, but I think that’s a separate argument.

              • Captain Aggravated
                link
                fedilink
                English
                16 hours ago

                no matter the difficulty of the material, imo it could still be said that they are improving their comprehension

                Nope, that’s not how education works. Due to the Principle of Effect, lessons which are too confusing can do more harm than good. If, as some other commenters have suggested, students are arriving to 12th grade English class reading at an elementary school level, handing them a copy of Hamlet isn’t going to accomplish anything, it’ll just frustrate them, convince them that they really can’t do this and they’ll just give up. Even honors students who are reading at advanced levels might start second guessing themselves.

                Shakespeare’s work was all written ~400 years ago, reading a Shakespeare play is an exercise in translation as much as comprehension. Take a copy of Hamlet to a 16 year old, open it to a random page, point to a line and ask a teenager to read it. They’ll probably stumble through it. Ask them what it means and they won’t have taken it on board.

                It may have more of a value in teaching the history of the English language than a reading comprehension exercise.

                In 11th and 12th grade English class we mostly focused on themes and such; it was treated more as an art appreciation course than communication practice. And art appreciation should be elective rather than required. If we’re really honest with ourselves, the reason we teach Shakespeare in high schools is because English teachers like it, and English teachers majored in English in college because they like it, and there’s exactly one job an English degree qualifies you to do: Teach high school English class.

                Hell, replace Shakespeare lessons with descriptive or persuasive writing classes.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              5
              edit-2
              3 days ago

              not in 12th grade listening to my classmate Jeremy try to read it without having it explained to him first. He kept pronouncing it “ARgul” rather than “arGALL” so he never heard himself say the joke.

              Perhaps my English teacher could have done a better job conducting this lesson but was this really a useful exercise in reading comprehension?

              My money is on “your teacher didn’t know the joke either”.

    • Kalcifer
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      What exactly would you want to remove, and what would you propose in its stead, and why?

      • Captain Aggravated
        link
        fedilink
        English
        03 days ago

        Surely we could have cut out Much Ado About Nothing and The Tempest

        The only subject that was required for all four years when I was in high school was English, and senior year English was all British literature, so we got Chaucer, Shakespeare, the Bronte’s, shit like that.

        Honestly I think later high school English classes do more to beat any love of reading teenagers have out of them by force feeding them dire dour old ugly hateful and just plain obsolete shit written by damaged people who lived in a world before the invention of epidemiology so sometimes your neighborhood would die of cholera because someone’s pit toilet leaked into the ground water.

        Make English 4 if not English 3 electives rather than required. Replace them with a semester of driver’s ed, taxes, fire safety, how to safely refrigerate chicken, I can think of a lot of shit that would benefit the world more than having teenagers read a Skakespeare play they don’t get aloud.

        • Kalcifer
          link
          fedilink
          English
          118 hours ago

          Make English 4 if not English 3 electives rather than required. Replace them with a semester of […] how to safely refrigerate chicken

          Imo, this is something that can be taught in a basic foods/cooking class, or a home economics class (which has at least been taught in the past [1] — I haven’t found any current data).

          References
          1. “Why is home economics not taught in schools anymore?”. Author: Cortney Moore. FOX Business Network. Published: 2020-06-16T17:44Z16:44Z. Accessed: 2024-12-11T05:17Z. https://www.foxbusiness.com/lifestyle/home-economics-not-taught-schools.
            • ¶2.

              […] in 2013, the number of students enrolled in a home economics class was a little over 3.4 million, which were taught by more than 27,800 teachers […]

        • Kalcifer
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          18 hours ago

          Make English 4 if not English 3 electives rather than required. Replace them with a semester of […] fire safety […]

          I disagree that this should be in some form of course. I think that this can be taught in a short afternoon visit by a fire department — it may even be already.

          • Captain Aggravated
            link
            fedilink
            English
            15 hours ago

            I am convinced beyond internet argument that you wouldn’t be better off eliminating a semester of English Literature class from the end of high school and replace it with a semester of “living in the world” lessons that might just be a week of driver’s ed, that field trip to the fire department, some first aid, just cram a semester full of basic adulting skills.

            We used to call this “Home Economics” but that got stigmatized as the cake baking class girls took while the boys were in shop class, and then women doing housework became a politically charged issue so we deprecated even that.

            But give it four years and we won’t have a public education system in this country at all anyway, so all this does is vindicate my decision to not have children.

        • Kalcifer
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          18 hours ago

          Make English 4 if not English 3 electives rather than required. Replace them with a semester of driver’s ed […]

          I disagree. Imo, there isn’t any point to teaching driving skills to students. Imo, I also don’t believe that it would be entirely ethical.

          • Captain Aggravated
            link
            fedilink
            English
            15 hours ago

            How many hours of the average American’s life will be spent behind the wheel of a car?

            How many hours of the average American’s life will be spent examining 400 year old stage plays?

            If they get something wrong behind the wheel of a car, what’s the worst that can happen?

            If they get something wrong examining a 400 year old stage play, what’s the worst that can happen?

            I propose that teaching Shakespeare instead of more in depth driver’s ed isn’t entirely ethical.

        • Kalcifer
          link
          fedilink
          English
          118 hours ago

          Make English 4 if not English 3 electives rather than required.

          For clarity, are you saying that you don’t think that it should be mandatory that English, or any of its derivatives, be taught as a course to children?

          • Captain Aggravated
            link
            fedilink
            English
            18 hours ago

            I’m questioning the importance of literature class as I remember it taught in late high school.

        • Kalcifer
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          18 hours ago

          I think later high school English classes do more to beat any love of reading teenagers have out of them by force feeding them […] obsolete shit […]

          How are you defining “obsolete” in this context?

          • Captain Aggravated
            link
            fedilink
            English
            15 hours ago

            Much of the language Shakespeare uses is obsolete to a modern English speaker. Let’s start with his use of the archaic second person singular thee thy thou and move on from there to words we don’t use anymore like “contumely” or “orisons” and then arrive at metaphors that haven’t made sense since the industrial revolution. Shakespeare wrote in English v. 2.3.1, here in the 21st century we speak English v. 6.13.2.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          83 days ago

          When Americans already can’t read, you’re seriously suggesting doing away with requiring English for all 4 years? I understand wanting to change the material, but that just seems really heavy-handed and counterproductive.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            33 days ago

            If they can’t read by junior year of highschool I very much adoubt fucking Shakespeare is going to be the aha moment

              • Captain Aggravated
                link
                fedilink
                English
                15 hours ago

                Yes it very specifically is. The origin of this thread was someone asking me what I would cut out of the curriculum. Are you always this dishonest?

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                21 day ago

                Again (don’t know why you said again but ill add it too), if they cant read by junior year I doubt two more years of the same shit is going to help. Is illiteracy an issue? Sure. Should junior and senior year english be mandatory for every student because some of them struggle with reading? No, just make a class to help those kids.

                Without a tailored class your just sticking kids who cant read well with more advanced kids in the same class and by senior year that gap has probably grown substantially. How do you make a single class that can challenge good English students and also nurture people struggling with the fundamentals? You don’t. The high functioning kids are bored and unengaged and the struggling kids are stressed by how far behind they are, it doesn’t help anyone.

          • Captain Aggravated
            link
            fedilink
            English
            12 days ago

            If it’s that bad the problem is earlier than 12th grade and needs to be fixed there. I started flight school in 9th grade, I had no problem reading textbooks that said things like “Aerodynamics of maneuvering flight” in them.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    263 days ago

    Frankly, we should move on from the mitochondria and start talking about the immune system. I want pre-schoolers to know about the interleukins, goddamnit! Let the children in first grade recite a list of adjuvants! And somebody shootshoo away vaccine deniers!

    • I Cast Fist
      link
      fedilink
      English
      103 days ago

      We need to train more medics in the Team Fortress 2 university, so they can shoo AND shoot vaccines at vaxx deniers

    • Kalcifer
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      Instead of focusing on specific facts, what about focusing on honing the skills required to acquire and understand information?

  • JackGreenEarth
    link
    fedilink
    English
    634 days ago

    This idea is overused as heavily dependant on which school you go to. My school taught a finance course, and gave advice on job seeking and interviews.

    Also, mitochondria is usually taught at GCSE in the UK at least, which is not the last year of school. ‘Mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell’ is very much a meme, it might have been interesting to use any other piece of useless information taught in schools instead.

    • @derekabutton
      link
      English
      254 days ago

      My favorite part of the “mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell” memes (especially when cited as useless info being taught in school) is that it’s grammatically incorrect. Mitochondria ARE because the word is plural, and any self respecting biology teacher knows that. The fact that this is cited as something drilled into students minds when people can’t even recite it back properly is hilarious.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        Because the “the” at the start was dropped

        “The mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell”

        So less “Lion is the king of the jungle” and more “The lion is the king of the jungle”, so I don’t think it is implied to be singular

        • @derekabutton
          link
          English
          23 days ago

          It’s not a deer/deer single/plural situation with mitochondria, if that is what you are getting at. The word mitochondria is not singular. To replace mitochondria with lion in your analogy doesn’t work because mitochondria is a plural word. Neither “Lions is the king of the jungle” nor “The lions is the king of the jungle” is correct. The singular version of mitochondria is mitochondrion. “The mitochondrion is the powerhouse of the cell” and “Mitochondria are the powerhouse of the cell” both work and could be the phrase, just like "The lion is the king of the jungle " and “Lions are the king of the jungle” are both grammatically correct.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      53 days ago

      Finances are taught in all schools in the UK, but statistics show that the majority of people don’t remember shit and then make financial mistakes their whole life. And then they complain they’re poor, lol.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    594 days ago

    Because the last five years have shown, that we have spend way to much time teaching people biology.

    • Kalcifer
      link
      fedilink
      English
      33 days ago

      Imo, it’s more an erosion of critical thinking rather than a lacking of specific biology facts.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    223 days ago

    But mitochondria is cool, it has its own dna because it used to be a separate organism. It fused with us, only to be made into a joke by us.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      93 days ago

      It also separates raw protons from hydrogen atoms and somehow turns it into spinny-motion, which it then turns into chemical energy with incredible efficiency. It’s a wild piece of biological machinery

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        23 days ago

        Ok but I need to learn about hone economics and employer labour relations so as not to get financially exploited all my life.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    30
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Lol. Mainstream economics is nothing but ideologically charged excuses for the status quo. And you wouldn’t learn heterodox econ in high school anyways.

    At least we do know how mitochondria works.

    • Kalcifer
      link
      fedilink
      English
      23 days ago

      Mainstream economics is nothing but ideologically charged excuses for the status quo.

      Would you mind defining exactly what you mean by “mainstream economics”?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      44 days ago

      This is what used to be taught in home economics class. Now it’s just sewing and baking.

      Knowing math isn’t always enough to navigate the oft poorly written tax forms.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        73 days ago

        Tax forms change. And some little shit complaining “why do we have to learn percentages? Teach us something useful like how to do our taxes.” would make for a better joke. And it would be more accurate.

    • @Maggoty
      link
      English
      -44 days ago

      I have never heard of an economy class in high school. And our math teacher did a tiny thing on compound interest in general when we finished a quiz early.

      So I don’t know what school you went to but it wasn’t the normal one.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        184 days ago

        the normal one.

        Apparently, not being American (I’m guessing) is considered “not being normal”.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          93 days ago

          I went to an American public school that taught economics. We also had a project for building a household budget.

          The county I grew up in was a little bougie, which rather explains it all.

        • @Maalus
          link
          English
          74 days ago

          I hear so many weird ass things from people in the US. Plenty of “why were we taught this and that” as if learning the countries in Europe is somehow some esoteric knowledge. And then I remember having to learn all the countries in the world, all of the US states, all of the capitals for 90% of the countries, all the seas, rivers etc. It’s really funny seeing people complain about the tiniest of things they had to learn as if it was med school.

        • @Maggoty
          link
          English
          24 days ago

          Well no. I freely admit I’m posting about the absolute slop that is American public education.

  • @T156
    link
    English
    94 days ago

    Right, because you would go to science class and learn economics.

    It’d be like asking your economics teachers why you’re not being taught English.

  • @umbraroze
    link
    English
    54 days ago

    I’m like “you guys didn’t discuss economics and taxes in school???” …I’m pretty sure we did at some point in both civic studies and some corner of math.