The Problem with Rote Learning (2 Viewers)

[Magical Kebab]

1500 if you've got the speed to write, but more realistically around the 1000-1200

Id say a solid 1000 is good to go.
Technically from what ive heard, 800 can still get u 19-20

 

[enoilgam]

To be fair, there are some things you just *have* to memorise

Like ATM I'm studying anatomy as one of my subjects in uni and a lot of it is just pure memorisation of where such and such is located and what it is called. Some aspects of certain hsc courses probably have similar parts to them. I don't think rote learning is inherently bad. However, I think rote learning entire concepts that have a logic behind them is inferior to critical thinking

This sums up my view. Rote learning is just one of many tools which you use in education. There are situations where it is the most effective tool available and others where it is either wholly inappropriate for the task or there are other, more effective tools available. So I think it is all about knowing how to gain maximum efficiency and effectiveness by selecting the tool most appropriate for the task.

Like, when preparing for an economics essay, you would probably rote learn some facts and statistics. Then, you would need to use critical thinking skills to gain a comprehensive understanding of how the different economic theories apply to real life and where the statistics fit in to support the response.

 

[Sy123]

This sums up my view. Rote learning is just one of many tools which you use in education. There are situations where it is the most effective tool available and others where it is either wholly inappropriate for the task or there are other, more effective tools available. So I think it is all about knowing how to gain maximum efficiency and effectiveness by selecting the tool most appropriate for the task.

Like, when preparing for an economics essay, you would probably rote learn some facts and statistics. Then, you would need to use critical thinking skills to gain a comprehensive understanding of how the different economic theories apply to real life and where the statistics fit in to support the response.

Rote learning statistics and facts is trivial, there is nothing there to understand, its just a figure. There is a difference between memorising stats to memorising process.

 

[enoilgam]

Rote learning statistics and facts is trivial, there is nothing there to understand, its just a figure. There is a difference between memorising stats to memorising process.

True, but I guess, everyones definition of rote learning varies.

 

[Sy123]

True, but I guess, everyones definition of rote learning varies.

The point still stands however, that most 'types' of rote learning at HSC level is bad for the purpose of education, and the syllabus/exam style should change to accommodate less rote learners.

 

[RivalryofTroll]

Rote learning will be inevitable, but it should always result in a mediocre mark.

Well, all comes down to the test.

If the test favours people are careful and knows all the typical questions needed, then us rote learners are favoured (hard work and grit paid off).

If the test favours people who can think outside the box then you critical thinkers are favoured.

We cannot control how tests are made.

 

[RivalryofTroll]

This sums up my view. Rote learning is just one of many tools which you use in education. There are situations where it is the most effective tool available and others where it is either wholly inappropriate for the task or there are other, more effective tools available. So I think it is all about knowing how to gain maximum efficiency and effectiveness by selecting the tool most appropriate for the task.

Like, when preparing for an economics essay, you would probably rote learn some facts and statistics. Then, you would need to use critical thinking skills to gain a comprehensive understanding of how the different economic theories apply to real life and where the statistics fit in to support the response.

I've been trying to get this point through for ages.

But even rote-learners can realise economic theories to use then memorise them for the essay section of the test.

 

[enoilgam]

Another point to consider with the current syllabus is that for many subjects, they have to cater for everyone. Like, in extension subjects they can make them more difficult, but with most regular subjects, they often have to design the syllabus so that it isnt too difficult for most students. The by-product is often a course which is easier to rote learn.

 

[RivalryofTroll]

Another point to consider with the current syllabus is that for many subjects, they have to cater for everyone. Like, in extension subjects they can make them more difficult, but with most regular subjects, they often have to design the syllabus so that it isnt too difficult for most students. The by-product is often a course which is easier to rote learn.

Yep, so it has to be fair to both roters and non-roters.

Also, I think rote-learning occurs mainly due to COMPETITION.

If you can memorise something your competitor cannot then you are ahead of them in the race.

Like I'd think there's more rote learning in Adv Eng compared to Extension 1 English because adv is probs more competitive due to larger competition.

 

[enoilgam]

Yep, so it has to be fair to both roters and non-roters.

I meant as in students with a range of abilities.

 

[GoldyOrNugget]

In my opinion, teaching critical thinking should be the whole purpose of a school education. Admittedly, this isn't compatible with our current system that's designed to allocate university admissions, because people who are less gifted critical thinkers don't deserve to be overlooked. I think the HSC is a reasonably effective means of deciding uni admissions, it that it rewards hard work (whether it be rote-learning or not), but I don't think that's a good model for schooling in general; and it's a pity that the previous 5 years of high school are aimed at optimising results for the HSC too.

 

[Sy123]

Well, all comes down to the test.

If the test favours people are careful and knows all the typical questions needed, then us rote learners are favoured (hard work and grit paid off).

If the test favours people who can think outside the box then you critical thinkers are favoured.

We cannot control how tests are made.

The examiners can definitely control how tests are made, and they can make it more difficult for rote learners to get a good mark hence making them go mediocre.

I've been trying to get this point through for ages.

But even rote-learners can realise economic theories to use then memorise them for the essay section of the test.

In Economics we memorise stats and concepts, then the question is given and we must construct logical arguments. That is how it is, and how it should be.

Yep, so it has to be fair to both roters and non-roters.

Also, I think rote-learning occurs mainly due to COMPETITION.

If you can memorise something your competitor cannot then you are ahead of them in the race.

Like I'd think there's more rote learning in Adv Eng compared to Extension 1 English because adv is probs more competitive due to larger competition.

Here is the problem, rote learning gives people advantages, and in the FIRST PLACE it should definitely not give any advantage whatsoever. Because that is how the education system should be structured (this is what I am arguing). People don't rote learn as much in Extension 1 English because you have 1 hour to write an essay. In this time you have enough time to actually create a proper essay with a good deep thesis, unlike in Advanced where its a race against the clock to write down the basics.

 

[skyscraper]

Sorry for being the one out of the loop here, but what is rote learning?

 

[RishBonjour]

Sorry for being the one out of the loop here, but what is rote learning?

basically when you just memorise things without understanding how/why it happens (imo).

IMO if you rote learn you will do relatively well in HSC but almost never get full marks. e.g. I had many people in my year who didn't understand "parametrics" and hence didnt get the question given in 2012 3u paper which was very different from "find tangent etc" (but simple if you understand)

 

[Trebla]

If the test favours people are careful and knows all the typical questions needed, then us rote learners are favoured (hard work and grit paid off).

Just to clarify, "hard work and grit" does not imply rote learning (and vice versa). You can also work hard by actually trying to understand the material (which is generally more efficient).

 

[Eg155]

Rote learning, as Rivalry has said, would put rote learners at a disadvantage. At HSC level the education system is trying to cater for the learning abilities of all students.
Rote learners are challenged in the science exams though, especially biology irrc. Bio is a rote-learned subject don't get me wrong, but there are questions which are thrown in which require critical thinking and I guess that's what would separate a low band 6 from a high band 6.
Critical thinkers are both able to adapt to a rote-learning system and are also rewarded (usually) with being able to answer curve-ball questions, whereas their pure rote-learning counterparts are not.

On the note of making maths a prerequisite to do sciences- As you can see in my sig I do not do maths, but I still think this is a good idea. Perhaps a 'science-stream' mathematics course should be implemented in conjunction with the existing maths courses. Doing maths for prelim I didn't really like doing topics that were not really relevant to the sciences. A maths course with calculus and applied maths like some topics in the higher level maths (like 3u and 4u with applications in physics) would be good to facilitate critical thinking about the rote-knowledge based dot points in subjects like physics and chemistry; this way the student gains a more thorough understanding of what they are doing in their science subjects.
General should not really be considered as sufficient, it's just everyday maths.

 

[elissajean]

basically when you just memorise things without understanding how/why it happens (imo).

IMO if you rote learn you will do relatively well in HSC but almost never get full marks. e.g. I had many people in my year who didn't understand "parametrics" and hence didnt get the question given in 2012 3u paper which was very different from "find tangent etc" (but simple if you understand)

Rote learning is the memorisation of information from which point students can then begin to understand and engage with the information critically. I agree that it doesn't work as the dominant strategy in the HSC, but the original post suggested its removal from the school system in its entirety, not simply the HSC. This is a dangerous move - I believe the exact opposite needs to be done up until year 7 or 8. And in subjects like legal studies, History, etc. it's absolutely vital. In fact, in University, law students have to rely a great deal on rote learning or they have next to no chance of doing well.

 

[GOD_OF_HSC_2013]

Rote learning is a cancer towards education.

I definitely agree. It's absolutely disgusting that some people who attain 99.95 ATAR are rote-learners.
Critical thinking is a must. Hard-working people, who are incapable of higher thought process and have to resort to rote-learning, still should be disadvantaged because they only deserve a mediocre result.

 

[golgo13]

I definitely agree. It's absolutely disgusting that some people who attain 99.95 ATAR are rote-learners.
Critical thinking is a must. Hard-working people, who are incapable of higher thought process and have to resort to rote-learning, still should be disadvantaged because they only deserve a mediocre result.

But people learn differently, there's no one size fits all in studying. Like some people genuinely do better rote learning than trying to understand concepts, people who understand are just as capable of obtaining 99.95. Hard working people who rote learn should be no different to people who hard work to understand, the only difference is people who rote learn have less flexibility when questions are moved away from the generic style.

 

[GOD_OF_HSC_2013]

But people learn differently, there's no one size fits all in studying. Like some people genuinely do better rote learning than trying to understand concepts, people who understand are just as capable of obtaining 99.95. Hard working people who rote learn should be no different to people who hard work to understand, the only difference is people who rote learn have less flexibility when questions are moved away from the generic style.

No, you'd find that the OP and Moderators will disagree to this. People who rote-learn are promoting a bad-image to Australian education and thus should not be associated with critical thinkers. They are completely different.
Even if the rote-learner works hard, the critical thinker should be given the advantage. ALWAYS.