TED Conversations

Maxwell Felman

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Why don't we teach kids and young adults, the newer fields of study that better relate with today's current industries?

Would it not be more effective to teach our children the academics that are more related to the current technological capabilities that our society offers? Should there be an academic course "make-over" every decade or so, to remain relevant with the economy's current state? Wouldn't these newer-academic courses give children the skills that are better suited for today's society?

Related Talks:
0
Share:
progress indicator
  • thumb

    Feyisayo Anjorin 50+

    • 0
    Feb 7 2013: Kids should be thought the basics; the very foundation on which the body of knowledge we are now proud of, is built.
    From the basics they would proceed to learn more in higher institutions and as they grow older.
  • thumb

    Gail . 50+

    • 0
    Feb 6 2013: Sure, I guess - I'm not sure what specifically you are referring to. But there should also be newer fields of study taught that better relate with what science is now suggesting about how the world works.

    You can be a genius in math or computer science, but if you don't know your own history and if you do not have a high EQ, you become functionally uneducated. Better we should teach "love of learning" in our schools, and have teachers or volunteers at hand to support children's innate curiosity.

  • george lockwood 20+

    • 0
    Feb 6 2013: How do we identify these areas?
  • thumb

    Fritzie Reisner 100+

    • +1
    Host
    Feb 6 2013: While many basics remain basic, schools typically do incorporate new content. For example, newer computing technologies, new graphical media, and so forth are now built in to secondary schools, even in districts that are very financially stretched.
Showing all 4 comments