I loved kindergarten and first and second grades which mostly seemed to be play. I think it was effective for me as far as creativity and socialization goes.
From third grade through high school I was bored with most of the material. A lot of it was not interesting and sometimes the pace was too slow.
At university, the work load was too high. I think if I had taken six years to complete the 4 year program, I would have been a lot better off. Too often I didn’t have the time to really dig into the material and explore related ideas (side quests). Instead I settled for memorization which was enough to do well on exams. My GPA at graduation did not reflect my command of the material.
Like Andy, I think an AI-powered course of learning could be great. The strength, I think, would be its adaptability. If while learning topic A I stumble across an interesting idea, it would have no problem with changing course and running down topic B.
I resonated with this urge to dig into the material a lot.
For me, two use cases of "digging" come up a lot: 1. I want to know how the concept I'm learning can connect with other concepts that I'm interested in (i.e., related concepts); 2. I want to know what other materials are available out there that can provide different perspectives (i.e., related resources). So I ended up building a map visualizing concepts (https://afaik.io/) where the proximity indicates relatedness and under each concept there are various resources attached.
In addition to those more "objective" connections, I think what AI could really help is to find a more "subjective" connection that's very user-specific and utilize those connections to build a personalized tutoring experience, hence the adaptability. For now, I think the barrier to realizing that level of adaptiveness is the high hallucination rate.
> At university, the work load was too high. I think if I had taken six years to complete the 4 year program, I would have been a lot better off. Too often I didn’t have the time to really dig into the material and explore related ideas (side quests). Instead I settled for memorization which was enough to do well on exams. My GPA at graduation did not reflect my command of the material.
This perfectly describes my experience too. My learning style is to 'ride the wave' of curiosity where i am obsessed with something and keep digging into it. Uni learning was antithetical to this learning style with strict schedules and tests. I got mostly As and some Bs by doing what you did but i didn't learn much of anything.
My son is somewhat like me and feel kind of sad to see him at a university to earn a living. I feel disappointed that i didn't provide him enough financial freedom to really gain enjoyment from learning istread of grinding at a uni.
I loved kindergarten and first and second grades which mostly seemed to be play. I think it was effective for me as far as creativity and socialization goes.
From third grade through high school I was bored with most of the material. A lot of it was not interesting and sometimes the pace was too slow.
At university, the work load was too high. I think if I had taken six years to complete the 4 year program, I would have been a lot better off. Too often I didn’t have the time to really dig into the material and explore related ideas (side quests). Instead I settled for memorization which was enough to do well on exams. My GPA at graduation did not reflect my command of the material.
Like Andy, I think an AI-powered course of learning could be great. The strength, I think, would be its adaptability. If while learning topic A I stumble across an interesting idea, it would have no problem with changing course and running down topic B.