Skip to main content

Learning Geography

We frequently see "man on the street" segments on various channels of how ignorant Americans are about geography.  We're not discussing where Burkina Faso is on the map but where the heck is Iowa? Many, too many Americans just don't know.  The why is simple; it is simply not taught well in the schools. 

Here's how I taught my kids the states and the world years ago.  I posted a map of the USA on the wall near the breakfast table.  This map contained only the states without names.  Every morning while the kids were scarfing up their corn flakes, I would point to various states and ask what state it was.  By and by, they knew every state, including the little ones. This took years.  So, repetition over  years does work.  Indeed, this is the way for example that math is taught, though in a more formalized way.

So, let me make a suggestion to teachers for grades K-8.  Every morning, show the map of the USA without names.  Point to states and ask the class which it is.  Begin with the local state, move to its neighbors and then beyond. Some kid will always know, but which kid it is may vary.  In a single school year, a teacher can cover this map at least four times.  The process takes two minutes - max. Now multiply this effect over eight years.  The good students will learn them all, and these mini-lessons will last a lifetime.  Even the dullest student will pick up a lot, and know something important, namely the lay of our Land.

This is "reinforced learning."   It is the way the coach teaches the team.

Speaking of two minute lessons, the teacher can also stage a "word of the day" event.  Give a word, give the definition.  Repeat two or three times a day.  Reinforce throughout the week. This does work.  At this age student brains are sponges and they learn despite their best efforts not to. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Accepting Fake Information

Every day, we are all bombarded with information, especially on news channels.  One group claims it's false; another calls it the truth. How can we know when to accept it or alternatively how can we know it's false? There are several factors which influence acceptance of fake or false information. Here are the big four.  Some just don’t have the knowledge to discern fact/truth from fiction/fact/false*. Some fake information is cleverly disguised and simply appears to be correct. Some fake information is accepted because the person wants to believe it. Some fake information is accepted because there is no other information to the contrary. However, the acceptance of  information  of any kind become a kind of  truth , and this is a well studied topic. In the link below is an essay on “The Truth About Truth.” This shows simply that what is your point of view, different types of information are generally accepted, fake or not.   https://www.linkedin.com/posts/g-donald-allen-420b03

Your Brain Within Your Brain

  Your Bicameral Brain by Don Allen Have you ever gone to another room to get something, but when you got there you forgot what you were after? Have you ever experienced a flash of insight, but when you went to look it up online, you couldn’t even remember the keyword? You think you forgot it completely. How can it happen so fast? You worry your memory is failing. Are you merely absent-minded? You try to be amused. But maybe you didn’t forget.   Just maybe that flash of insight, clear and present for an instant, was never given in the verbal form, but another type of intelligence you possess, that you use, and that communicates only to you. We are trained to live in a verbal world, where words matter most. Aside from emotions, we are unable to conjure up other, nonverbal, forms of intelligence we primitively, pre-verbally, possess but don’t know how to use. Alas, we live in a world of words, stewing in the alphabet, sleeping under pages of paragraphs, almost ignoring one of

Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious?

  Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious? I truly like the study of consciousness, though it is safe to say no one really knows what it is. Some philosophers has avoided the problem by claiming consciousness simply doesn’t exist. It's the ultimate escape clause. However, the "therefore, it does not exist" argument also applies to "truth", "God", and even "reality" all quite beyond a consensus description for at least three millennia. For each issue or problem defying description or understanding, simply escape the problem by claiming it doesn’t exist. Problem solved or problem avoided? Alternately, as Daniel Dennett explains consciousness as an account of the various calculations occurring in the brain at close to the same time. However, he goes on to say that consciousness is so insignificant, especially compared to our exalted notions of it, that it might as well not exist [1] . Oh, well. Getting back to consciousness, most of us have view