Is STEM mostly rote memorization?

[Archaeopteryx]

Do grad school students remember everything they were taught in college all the time? | Quora

 

[essentialsaltes]

I had never thought of it that way before, but it sounds right. My experience has been that the way that math, biology, geology, physics, etc. are taught is mechanical and, well, like the above source says, a lot of rote memorization. And a lot of repetition. I always quickly lose interest.

Like others, I quite disagree. Some of the problem is what is age appropriate. When kids don't have much capacity for analytical thought, there's no point trying to teach them to think, so science may turn out to be stamp-collecting (to allude to Rutherford's unkind witticism about sciences that aren't the best science).

I mean, in early biology, we all colored in our cells, so the Golgi Apparatus was blue, and the ectoplasmic reticulated python (or whatever) was orange.

But by high school, science classes should be turning into critical thinking, applying tools, thinking. To determine the odds of a blue-eyed and brown-eyed couple having blue eyed children... you have to understand how to analyze the problem and apply the rules of genetics. It's not about memorizing the answer.

STEM can be taught as rote memorization, and that is when it is awful. I am reminded of Feynman's observations of physics education in Brazil, which is well worth a read. To cut to the chase: "After a lot of investigation, I finally figured out that the students had memorized everything, but they didn’t know what anything meant."

Eudaimonia: "No, STEM isn't primarily about memorizing things. That's a charge that would be much more apt for a history class, which is liberal arts."

Since my spouse teaches history, I'll have to stick up for it. Similarly to the sciences, when kids are young, all you learn is 1066, 1215, 1453, 1492, 1776. But later on -- hopefully in high school, maybe not til college -- students learn to understand not just what happened and when, but why. To think critically about original sources; to compare conflicting sources, etc.

 

[LOVEthroughINTELLECT]

It's not about memorizing the answer...

Nobody has defined "rote memorization", so I do not know what anybody has in mind, including the source quoted at the beginning of the thread.

I do know that never at any level--elementary, secondary, college--have I been given the opportunity to do any STEM work other than producing answers on homework assignments and tests to problems written by somebody else. A major part of it was showing all of the steps in solving the problem in addition to producing the correct answer. Since I had no appreciation for the relationships between the things in the questions/problems it was all memorization. Not memorizing the answer like, "The capital of Texas is Austin". Memorizing formulas, procedures, techniques, etc. and then regurgitating all of it onto a test the best that I could. Again, since I had almost no appreciation of the material I was just memorizing things that I did not really understand. It is what I had to do to survive. There was absolutely no freedom.

Contrast that with, say, a paper I wrote for an introductory college Geography class about the non-West. I had to choose the topic of the paper. I had to produce a thesis. I had to find sources. I had to write everything from scratch. I ended up making a lot of discoveries, like how it is not just Third World countries that import a lot of waste--some European countries can also be thought of as dumping grounds because they import a lot of waste. Or the paper I wrote for a 200-level introduction to world politics in the Political Science department. Again, a lot of freedom. I came up with a hypothesis before I did any research: the countries of the Global South do want development, but they want it to come from within. I found sources from three different, culturally unique regions expressing that sentiment: yes, they do want development, but they want it to happen their own way, not to be forced to emulate the West.

I have never experienced anything like the latter two projects in STEM academic work.

If you look at the quote at the start of this thread it uses the words "think freely".

And please, no more posts saying that somebody wants STEM to be taught like humanities courses. Nobody has ever said that. The source quoted at the beginning of the thread is saying that we need the humanities, not that STEM needs to be taught like the humanities. And the only thing that I have ever said is that much needed appreciation could be developed if STEM material was presented in reference to its place in intellectual culture/history more often.

Just because there is not a lot of freedom--just because you are following a script of formulas, procedures, techniques, etc. (or it feels like it, anyway)--does not mean that there cannot be appreciation. There was not much freedom in the two Economics courses I took. It was a lot of memorization. But the material was presented with appreciation of its place in the academic world, business world, political world, etc. It wasn't just a bunch of material that was presented with little context and felt random.

 

[SuperCloud]

That would be the opposite of dogmatic then.

Okay, technically true. The point is--as Thomas Kuhn pointed out--people in the sciences are not entirely objective. They bring in their politics and subjective views into science. If they are taught the only way to reach Point A is to keep turning left then that exactly what they will do. The person that turn right will be ridiculed. In large part he or she will be shunned in the sciences. Whatever data they have supporting their contention will largely be ignored. Kuhn coined the term "paradigm shift." And that shift he would suggests moves slowly. This why I used the terms "heretic" and "dogma."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Kuhn

 

[SuperCloud]

But by high school, science classes should be turning into critical thinking, applying tools, thinking. To determine the odds of a blue-eyed and brown-eyed couple having blue eyed children... you have to understand how to analyze the problem and apply the rules of genetics. It's not about memorizing the answer.

That's not critical thinking. That is more specifically analytical thinking utilizing probability mathematics.

Critical thinking is deciphering from Leonardo Da Vinci's Last Supper Painting if his "Apostle John" was an effeminate looking male or a woman. Delving into the sexual orientation of Da Vinci and how if at all it found expression in his art work is critical thinking.

STEM has little bearing on that. English courses will ask their students to think about these things. Critical thinking is developed through contrast and comparisons. Usually utilized in essay form. It's the social sciences like sociology that does more contrast and comparison from day one in class with students. Physical (biological) anthropology does a lot of contrast and comparison between species and apes and early hominids. It compares and contrasts the skeletal and facial features between men and women too. So called gracile vs. robust.

 

[SuperCloud]

^Addendum to post #65.


So, this is "critical thinking," taking this thread here on an overweight woman in a bikini: http://www.christianforums.com/thre...-actually-say-these-things-seriously.7895961/

Knowing what I do from biological anthropology I can see the woman has a gracile face. Less robust facial features than most men. According to the contrast and comparison in biological (physical) anthropology, there is little to no differences in the facial and skeletal characteristics of prepubescent boys from that of girls.

So, with "critical thinking" I can surmise that this woman--like nearly all young women--looks in the face like a 14 year-old boy if not a 10 year-old boy. Because the more young males do physically mature, the less like girls they look in the face.

Using "critical thinking" one can speculate as to why Americans (the nationality) get all emotionally invested in the frequent complaints of relatively attractive looking women, like the one in the video (who undoubtedly receive a lot of positive male attention) over the minority of men that give them negative attention? Versus who Americans are rather emotionally autistic towards when the massive number of women on sites like Backpages that post up "No Black Men"?

That's "critical thinking." Not the punnet square.

Now, due simply to emotions and feminist ideologies or white knight conservative syndrome it doesn't matter how long a person has spent in STEM. They almost certainly will deny young women--like the one in the video--have facial features like younger males that have not yet developed more robust facial features. So, there is not much "critical thinking to be learned in STEM.

 

[SuperCloud]

Wikipedia says John Alite only briefly attended college and on a baseball scholarship.

The former mob boss of Milwaukee had a bachelor's degree and supposedly was a pianist. He had some refinement and dressed impeccably like an Old School mobster. This cop in the book In mention below went to university, spoke several languages, and had a grasp of European life outside of the USA. In contrast to Alabama's infamous "Bull" Connor who never even graduated from high school but rose to control the police in Birmingham, Alabama.

Education, higher education does not stop a person from committing sin, even if they are refined to whatever degree. Nonetheless, the arts, music, and humanities can probably help to polish certain characteristics on people, even if the commit adultery, murder, or steal for a living.

http://mafiahistorymilwaukee.blogspot.com/2014/06/new-yorks-joe-bananas-meets-milwaukees.html

But prior to that meeting, Balistrieri, head of organized crime in Milwaukee, met with a man identified as Pete, a soldier in the Bonanno family.New York’s “Joe Bananas” meets Milwaukee’s “Mad Bomber” Balistrieri

Balistrieri was upset with a relative of Pete, a member of the Bonanno family who had been causing Balistrieri problems. The dispute had gone on for nearly two years, which Balistrieri felt was disrespectful to him.



The FBI secretly taped the meeting. The dispute was the first order of business.



Balistrieri: “First, we’ll take up Mr. Bonanno’s matter. Last time we were here, I was called to Chicago and told to do something with Mr. Bonanno.

“Well, I’m both disturbed and disappointed. ... See, I represent the family here, and there’s a certain dissatisfaction with your brother-in-law, and naturally in Milwaukee the family comes first and everybody else is secondary. he could be my own brother, and if he doesn’t go along with the rules, if he doesn’t follow what the family dictates, then I can’t help him either...

“But your brother-in-law hasn’t respected nobody ever since he has been in Milwaukee. He’s done very well for himself. He has completely disregarded everybody, (and) anybody....pertaining to the family, he has been aloof from. So, naturally, we ... I granted permission to give this man a warning, and Mr Bonanno interceded...

“And, at that time, I most courteously granted Mr. Bonanno the favor of, er, forgetting what had been started with the understanding that I would be available to Mr. Bonanno at any place to talk again.

“Because, I mean, I never fight with Tucson, with New York...”



Bonanno had homes in New York and Tucson.



Balistrieri continued: “In your brother-in-law’s case, I think that maybe since he got a clearance, his attitude, er, his demeanor is even worse than it was before. He completely disregarded everybody.

‘I’d be here all night telling things that he had done, and I got quite disturbed about it. so I called Mr. DiBella. As a matter of fact, we had two or three conversations with Mr. Dibella.”


[According to the FBI transcript of the meeting, Balistrieri was referring to John DiBella, who was in charge of the Grande Cheese Co. in Fond du lac, WI. Dibella was said to be “a very close friend” of Bonanno.

[Bonanno’s wife, Faye, held 150 shares of stock in Grande Cheese at the time, but there was no indication if the cheese firm was at issue in the dispute.

[In a conversation taped after the meeting with Pete, Balistrieri said “That cheese company in Fond du Lac ... belongs to Milwaukee, and it’s under my jurisdiction.”

[Officials said there was no indication that the current management of Grande Cheese was involved in organized crime.]

Balistrieri: “I got troubles. Nobody has more troubles than I have. I feel very disturbed ... I’ll tell you something Pete. Your brother-in-law is in trouble over here!

“These messages aren’t carried out the way they’re supposed to do. I mean, that’s pretty dangerous.”

Pete: “I’m 61 years old. If I’d worry about these dangers I’d go and drown myself. I got my superiors. I can’t go over their heads ... .”



After Pete left the meeting, Balistrieri said that if Bonanno came to talk to him he would refer him to a meeting with Chicago mobsters. however at a later meeting that was also tape recorded, Balistrieri reported that Bonanno had stopped in Milwaukee to see him.



Mentioning that Bonanno was at “Angelo’s house,” Balistrieri said “he made no gesture to talk to me. He just kept on talking and then it got late.



“We went in like a little room and Mr. Bonanno talked for at least 20 minutes, Mr. Bonanno said ‘I never use the word tired, but I’m tired from speaking so long.’

“I said, “You’ve been speaking for 4 hours and now that I wanted to say something, you’re tired” ... I said “I’m not satisfied.”

“‘Well’, he says “I’m tired.I’d like to postpone this thing until another time.’ ... he don’t want to talk about it. I gotta go back to Chicago and tell them what happened, see? When I go back and tell chicago what happened, they don’t like it too much.”

Then again… from the book The Milwaukee Mafia: Mobsters in the Heartland by Gavin Schmitt.

Page 81-82

Detective Dieden was perhaps the most interesting and colorful member of the Milwaukee Police Department. He was born in October 1885 as Louis Pierre Dieden in Marsla-Tour, France on the German border and immigrated in 1902, boarding with John McKinney in the 16th Ward. He was a very refined man, studying sociology at the University of Minnesota and Wisconsin. He achieved a reputation as a painter and music lover when he was not fighting crime. Dieden was also a cunning card player, eventually becoming the president of the North American Skat League. At one point he toured Europe by bicycle with Floyd Bjornstjerne Olson, the governore of Minnesota. Dieden joined the police force in February 1912 and immediately became useful in the Third Ward—he understood English, French, German and Italian… By March 1919, he was promoted to detective.

For background of his beat:

In 1924, there were 6000 Italians in the Ward—that comes to six hundred per square block! Two years later, Italian consul Angelo Cerminara estimated that Milwaukee had 20,000 Italians with 80% (the Sicilians and South Italians) being in the First and Third Wards and 20% (the North Italians) being in Bay View. The Third Ward Italians had begun the migration to the First Ward (the former Polish District) in 1918, in search of better housing conditions.

A 1926 study from sociologist John Landesco showed a possible reason that gang murder in Milwaukee was far less common than in Chicago. Besides the obviously lower population, Milwaukee actually enforced its laws and was apparently less susceptible to corruption—perhaps murder was less likely to happen in Milwaukee if gangsters thought they would actually serve time. Landesco found that 48% of all felony charges were dropped at preliminary hearings in Chicago; outlaw Milwaukeeans only received this benefit 17% of the time. A reasonable 36% of felony cases ended in convictions in Milwaukee, while only 15% of Chicago cases did. The biggest problem in Milwaukee was to identify criminals; if that could be achieved, justice was more or less guaranteed.

Landesco’s study goes hand in hand with another survey done in Popular Science. They found that Chicago murder rates were approximately five times what they were in Milwaukee. Milwaukee was on about the same level as Newark, but far more deadly than London or any city in Germany. No place anywhere in the world was as bloody as Chicago, earning it the dubious distinction of being “first in violence, deepest in dirt,” in the words of journalist Lincoln Steffens.

 

[RedPonyDriver]

<<But I remember a thread on Shakespeare. So many people were adamant Shakespeare needs to be taught in high school. I don't think so. Number one, very few people learn anything from reading Shakespeare and can apply it to life, use it to discern motivations and so on.

............

Don't get me wrong here, I've taken biology exams made of multiple choice, an exam of like 30 or 50 questions covering something like 5 chapters in a biology book. Rote memorization is not the only thing used in such cases as you're really forced to think analytically and use the "tools" you've learned.>>

Rote memorization is not an alternative to thinking analytically. It is a tool that makes thinking analytically more efficient.

And the lack of a broad education which includes humanities among the STEM curricula have tended to yield highly trained technicians who are social barbarians.

And your VA patient had been watching "House" as if it were a videotape of reality. Had he been required to read Shakespeare in high school, he might have been able to identify it as fantasy. ;-)

Regarding the bolded above...it's obvious you don't know much about the college level STEM curriculum. I had to take humanities classes. I think I took Art History/appreciation and Western Civ along with some other classes...we considered them baloney classes. I had to read Hamlet and Macbeth in high school.

Now...what is a "social barbarian" to you? Someone who doesn't like art museums or classical music? Or is it someone who can't hold a conversation about anything outside their narrow interests? If it's the former, then I am a social barbarian. If it's the latter, then I don't qualify. While it's true that if you get a bunch of engineering types together in a room, the odds are pretty high that we aren't going to be talking about Monet vs. Manet, etc...we'll probably talk about sports, latest outside projects, the latest sci-fi movie, stuff like that...but that's where our interests lie. We do eat with forks and knives, usually don't belch at the table and have been known to even shower, use deodorant and wear clean clothes!

I've also noticed over the years that certain personality types are drawn to certain professions. STEM tends to attract the geeks, the misfits, some on the Autism spectrum. We'll admit we're a little "odd", and we're pretty proud of it. Personally, small talk isn't my forte, I'm a little odd and an introvert.

And we're not "trained"..."training" connotes something like "training" your dog. I've trained my dogs to sit, stay, heel, comply with simple commands. Umm...STEM types are not known to be "trainable" either...we can be TAUGHT...but "trained"...nope, ain't happening!

 

[fatherjimparker]

I've met more than one artist, musician, even actor who was a "social barbarian."

Nah. They're just liberals.

 

[fatherjimparker]

<<No, I'm not conflating anything. As I said, rote memorisation is rarely sufficient for gaining high-level proficiency. >>

Of course it isn't. It enables higher level proficiency.

<< I didn't imply that it wasn't necessary however. In other words, rote learning is necessary but not sufficient for developing expertise.>>

Ah! Now rote memorization is NECESSARY.

Thank you.

 

[fatherjimparker]

<< Now...what is a "social barbarian" to you? Someone who doesn't like art museums or classical music? Or is it someone who can't hold a conversation about anything outside their narrow interests?>>

More or less, I'd say the latter.

A liberal education (arts, sciences, literature, history, philosophy, mathematics) introduces a student to a wide variety of subjects. What the student gleans from the exposure is, of course, up to the student.

<< I've also noticed over the years that certain personality types are drawn to certain professions. STEM tends to attract the geeks, the misfits, some on the Autism spectrum. We'll admit we're a little "odd", and we're pretty proud of it. Personally, small talk isn't my forte, I'm a little odd and an introvert.>>

Sounds like "SBSD." (Social Barbarian Spectrum Disorder)

<< And we're not "trained"..."training" connotes something like "training" your dog. I've trained my dogs to sit, stay, heel, comply with simple commands. Umm...STEM types are not known to be "trainable" either...we can be TAUGHT...but "trained"...nope, ain't happening! >>

Oh, I disagree. Any woman with focus can train a STEM-type husband to put the toilet seat down and to wash his hands when he's done. (Though it is best done early in the relationship; in the "puppy" stage.)

Rote memorization is a form of training. (As in multiplication tables) It facilitates higher learning and teaches (hopefully) the concept that discipline is necessary for creativity.

 

[fatherjimparker]

Do grad school students remember everything they were taught in college all the time? | Quora

That's odd! I haven't used algebra even once today.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

<<No, I'm not conflating anything. As I said, rote memorisation is rarely sufficient for gaining high-level proficiency. >>

Of course it isn't. It enables higher level proficiency.

<< I didn't imply that it wasn't necessary however. In other words, rote learning is necessary but not sufficient for developing expertise.>>

Ah! Now rote memorization is NECESSARY.

Thank you.

What do you mean by "now rote memorisation is necessary"? I never stated or implied that it wasn't necessary, so why do you continue to pretend that I hold a different position?

 

[RedPonyDriver]

<< Now...what is a "social barbarian" to you? Someone who doesn't like art museums or classical music? Or is it someone who can't hold a conversation about anything outside their narrow interests?>>

More or less, I'd say the latter.

A liberal education (arts, sciences, literature, history, philosophy, mathematics) introduces a student to a wide variety of subjects. What the student gleans from the exposure is, of course, up to the student.

<< I've also noticed over the years that certain personality types are drawn to certain professions. STEM tends to attract the geeks, the misfits, some on the Autism spectrum. We'll admit we're a little "odd", and we're pretty proud of it. Personally, small talk isn't my forte, I'm a little odd and an introvert.>>

Sounds like "SBSD." (Social Barbarian Spectrum Disorder)

<< And we're not "trained"..."training" connotes something like "training" your dog. I've trained my dogs to sit, stay, heel, comply with simple commands. Umm...STEM types are not known to be "trainable" either...we can be TAUGHT...but "trained"...nope, ain't happening! >>

Oh, I disagree. Any woman with focus can train a STEM-type husband to put the toilet seat down and to wash his hands when he's done. (Though it is best done early in the relationship; in the "puppy" stage.)

Rote memorization is a form of training. (As in multiplication tables) It facilitates higher learning and teaches (hopefully) the concept that discipline is necessary for creativity.

Excuse me? What's the dis on that one? That's called MANNERS and it would be up to mama to TEACH the little boy...I don't "train" men either.

Your little crack about "SBSD" is not cool.

Regarding the "liberal education"...I really don't think I want someone with a "liberal" education designing bridges or operating on my loved ones.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Regarding the "liberal education"...I really don't think I want someone with a "liberal" education designing bridges or operating on my loved ones.

Why not? Having a liberal education doesn't preclude expertise in one particular area.

 

[LOVEthroughINTELLECT]

Will people even be designing bridges or performing surgery much longer?

Supposedly robots / artificial intelligence will be doing most of that before too long.

 

[SuperCloud]

Will people even be designing bridges or performing surgery much longer?

Supposedly robots / artificial intelligence will be doing most of that before too long.

Not likely. Especially with the surgery part. Too many nuances. I once thought this though. I had two female PA students laughing at me (not necessarily in a bad way).

 

[fatherjimparker]

Excuse me? What's the dis on that one? That's called MANNERS and it would be up to mama to TEACH the little boy...I don't "train" men either.

Your little crack about "SBSD" is not cool.>>

Awwww, gee whiz, mom........ :-(

<< Regarding the "liberal education"...I really don't think I want someone with a "liberal" education designing bridges or operating on my loved ones.>>

A person having a bachelor's degree is not likely to be called upon to design bridges or perform surgery.

A liberal education (in the classic sense) is not and end but a broad foundation for further study in a specific field such as engineering or medicine.

 

[LOVEthroughINTELLECT]

Not likely. Especially with the surgery part. Too many nuances. I once thought this though. I had two female PA students laughing at me (not necessarily in a bad way).

"Much of what physicians do (checkups, testing, diagnosis, prescription, behavior modification, etc.) can be done better by sensors, passive and active data collection, and analytics. But, doctors aren’t supposed to just measure. They’re supposed to consume all that data, consider it in context of the latest medical findings and the patient’s history, and figure out if something’s wrong. Computers can take on much of that diagnosis and treatment and even do these functions better than the average doctor (while considering more options and making fewer errors). Most doctors couldn’t possibly read and digest all of the latest 5,000 research articles on heart disease. And, most of the average doctor’s medical knowledge is from when they were in medical school, while cognitive limitations prevent them from remembering the 10,000+ diseases humans can get..." Source: Technology will replace 80% of what doctors do.

 

[Dave-W]

What does the OP question have to do with ethics or morality?