What’s the retention rate of rote learning ? Has there ever been tests done?
You are not open to learning.
Study is study. There is no surity of a learning effect taking place.
This is why you struggle so much in life sid.
1 Like
You learn how to do things from the teacher and then practise the things you learned by doing homework. I think my experience of learning maths could be different to many others though as when I was in school I was lucky to be in a very small higher level maths class so we got a lot of personal attention from the teacher if we needed it
1 Like
Any time you learn, you’re studying.
You don’t even know what study is. 
No you just practice. Some people retain it that way, but it can be lost relying on just that. How you learn is highly individual.
But no evidence to say homework develops it anyway better than no homework. And no homework makes life alot better for a general education experience.
What we know about learning has moved on significantly since we were in school.
You’re too ignorant for words.
Carry on
You really missed out.
You’d have been a mathematical genius had you not had that homework to do.
“Carry on” is an appropriate choice of words for you, because you’re such an obvious spoof on pretty much any topic you wade into.
2 Likes
he is reckless
the bizarre thing is that his style is unattractive & apart from short term wins in meaningless games the year after the WC it has been an utter failure yet certain sections of the rogbee fanbase are happy with him
You should have said for the laugh: “No evidence to say practising skills makes you better at sport than not practising. And no practising makes life a lot better for a general sporting experience.”
It’s hardly surprising that rugby football supporters are dimwitted. But the rugby football media in Ireland are no more than glorified cheerleaders for the most part. They’ve cosy relationships with the IRFU, the players and coaches and always search for excuses for losses while overplaying victories. There’s no cold, rigorous and neutral analysis and they’re afraid to call it like it is. The notable exception, of course, is George Hook who came out and called Joe Schmidt Ireland’s worst ever coach.
So you think nothing is learned in the classroom?
Hook is a parent and a grandparent, maybe he called out schmit for being reckless with peoples lives or did he call him out for his failure in the “World Cup”
Bundyaki will be available soon iirc. One of the best centres, if not the best at pro 12 and HC level. He can do both.
I would have thought it’s fairly obvious that children learn both in and out of the classroom, pal.
That’s why they i) go to classes to be taught by a person who knows what they’re talking about and can explain things to them and ii) do homework to practise the understanding of what they learn in class.
No. Doing it in the class with the person who knows alot about it is far more effective than letting them to their own devices or getting “help” from a clueless and helpless parent who then forks out even more money to a 3rd party to take more time away from the kid doing what could be done in the classroom. This all puts unnecessary stress on both oarents and children when they could be doing better things like playing, exploring or simply hanging out with friends and family. The more is better approach is long aince disproved in almost all walks of life.
There is plenty evidence out there that subjects like maths are better learned in smaller chunks than traditionally done and worked on then within the classroom. We do it wrong here. Thats the bottom line.
Your anology made no sense in conjunction with your argument which in itself is seemingly just a time filler for your closeted life.
I agree with a lot of this. Study in Ireland basically means rote learning.
It shouldn’t.
As long as the third level entry system is points based and competitive, it will do, and in a country of nepotism, gombeenism, and lowryism, it will have to stay points based.
1 Like
Take that logic to it’s conclusion, and nobody would ever do anything by themselves without supervision.
Now that’s a recipe for a rather closeted life.
There is plenty of “evidence” for pretty much everything you can think of. Ironically you’re probably the best advert yourself for supervision - you really should be supervised when you use the INTERNET given that you clearly lack the critical filters to distinguish between real evidence and “evidence” you want to believe - hence your beliefs in theories such as “big pharma” having a cure for cancer but suppressing it.
Your reliance on having to make ad hominem attacks to try and win the argument is noted, as always.
I never said big pharma have a cure for cancer.
I said people, doctors included, have found methods of curing cancer or have had very successful trials blocked by big pharma.
But your side tracking is a sure sign you are a busted flush here.
“People”.
Cool, mate, declare the other person a “busted flush” to declare you’ve won an argument.
Class debating skills.