[adamnemecek]

The idea of a person chewing things for you is stupid. People should go at their pace. I’ve found that out of the six plus hours that you spend in school, only a small fraction is spent productively. So much is wasted on administrative matters.

I also found the switching between subjects to be really annoying. Like what if I want to spend half a day a week on the single subject as oppposed to an hour every day. Context switching overhead is real.

I want a desk and a textbook. I need a teacher only when I get stuck.

I also find that if you aren’t extroverted school is hell. It might be hell if you are extroverted too but it’s double hell if you aren’t.

[noxToken]

> I want a desk and a textbook. I need a teacher only when I get stuck.

Kudos to you for being a self-starter, but that barely described me. I have the ability to learn on my own, but if I didn't have an instructor yammering at me, then I was much more likely to spend the time in an unproductive manner.

I didn't have Wolfram|Alpha when I was in high school. TI-8x was my cheatsheet iff I knew how to get it to tell me what I wanted. If W|A had been a thing alongside self-study, I don't think I would have retained any information. I was a knucklehead. I figured that if I was doing the bare minimum to get an 'A' or a 'B', then I was doing it right. College was a rude awakening in that regard.

I do think that the US education system needs a bit of an overhaul. I don't think we have the manpower nor the funding to do it though. Public schools don't let students run at their own pace, because that would require a higher administrative burden than what schools already have. Technology has come a long way though. Digital lessons, the Internet, communication tools, grading tools, etc. have positioned us such that it would be much, much easier to implement these types of curricula. But that's still an uphill battle.

[adamnemecek]

> Kudos to you for being a self-starter, but that barely described me. I have the ability to learn on my own, but if I didn't have an instructor yammering at me, then I was much more likely to spend the time in an unproductive manner.

You need to go deeper. You didn't care about the subjects because you just didn't care. Nothing to beat yourself up over. It's more of a problem with the school than you. Kids start out super curious, that energy needs to be amplified, not wasted. But it really does feel like school is more about obedience than learning.

> I do think that the US education system needs a bit of an overhaul.

It really does. For one thing, too much emphasis is placed on "education" and not enough is placed on "skill". E.g. US has no vocational schools that exist in Europe e.g. for nursing or even programming. There are high schools where students are getting prepared for a particular job since the age of 14. In the US, to be a nurse, you need a bachelor's degree and a nursing degree. In many European countries, you need the high school and an associates degree.

[analog31]

In my experience, how I learned things depended on the subject. I needed the classroom environment in order to learn math and physics: The motivation to keep plugging away at it for 15+ years, and the interaction that teaches how to communicate ideas in those areas. Mathematicians and physicists seldom make things. We have to communicate and collaborate to get things done, when we're thrown into a typical commercial environment.

On the other hand, I easily learned electronics and programming on my own. In both subjects, a single introductory course got me started, then I was on my way.

I wonder if the appeal of HN to programmers is why there is a strong sentiment against traditional education, and in favor of self learning. Other than being easy, programming may simply lend itself to self learning for some reason.

Perhaps figuring out what makes programming easy to self-learn, would help us figure out how to teach other subjects better. Or we may realize that unless we want everybody to be a programmer, we may still need traditional education.

[adamnemecek]

> Other than being easy, programming may simply lend itself to self learning for some reason.

If programming is easy, you definitely aren't challenging yourself.

> Perhaps figuring out what makes programming easy to self-learn, would help us figure out how to teach other subjects better.

It's the fact that you are having a conversation with computer and you can explore things and get somewhat immediate feedback. These things are currently somewhat lacking for math and physics.

[analog31]

I think in terms of the training, it was easy. I learned to program in 1981. My mom was teaching CS, so I had a view of what programmers were learning, and I endeavored to learn the same things. Today, I'm aware of what an entry level programmer brings to the table. I'd say that the subject matter required for reaching that level is easy -- at least no harder than math, physics, or electronics.

On the other hand, you're right about challenging oneself. Reaching a higher level of expertise is definitely harder, but that's true of any subject. Meanwhile, my career moved in a different direction, and I only use programming as a tool rather than for developing commercial software.

[iliketosleep]

Very interesting point about the context switching. When I was a student I didn't consider such matters, but as an adult I recognise needless context switching as an enormous inefficiency. You're point about only needing a teacher when you get stuck is quite valid as well, especially in the age of high tech. Presentation of the information should be optimized and presented via recording. The duty of the teacher should be to facilitate learning by helping out where there are any problems. But with all the politics and tradition, the status-quo isn't about to change unfortunately. The upside is that there is room for huge improvement, hence opportunities exist.