But to return to my initial question. Should people be instructed from the earliest age to understand things in the world around them or should they be left to their own inclinations (or lack of inclinations) to learn useful things?
Here is a typical page taken from the book I mentioned. It is a book written for children. Possibly primary school age children.
How much need would there be for a forum such as this if primary school age children these days were taught subjects with the same degree of detail and complexity in an interesting format that encourages them to enjoy the process of learning?
I would have loved to have been taught that at primary school or even later, @Stulti. I hope the tide is turning and that the level of detail you describe is now being taught in schools. @wild edges, have you any thoughts on this?
Sorry to witness the demise of the forum. 😥😥😥😡😡😡I am Spartacus
I think both are good - sharing botanical knowledge in schools and growing hands on with someone who inspires you. Often it's the pictures we remember. Hearing stories from so many gardeners, humble and grand, the longing seems usually to be given to them by a mum, grandad, a kindly old gaffer. For me, I poured over books of flowers, birds and pixies as a kid, but it was nature itself that hooked me in - messing about in the garden from very early on. My aunt growing potatoes and parsley for the family. Cowslips, plum blossom, finding hedgehogs, apple wood smoke. I started a little garden at my primary school, on waste land, when I was about seven, bringing some pots of strawberries to grow, and happily (and rather oddly) it's still there and tended, nearly 50 years later. 😁
Very admirable. And did your lessons or books or informal instructions involve the mention of protoplasm for example? As here in the 1897 book.
There are so many opportunities for informal learning offered by television and the internet these days that are missed. Who on Gardeners World for example has ever mentioned protoplasm or cell structure as the cause of plant problems?
So much of what we are offered is pure entertainment. Subjects involving words of more than one syllable are avoided. As a result people take up gardening as adults without ever having been told about chlorophyll (mentioned on a later page) of this childrens book.
There are so many opportunities for informal learning offered by television and the internet these days that are missed. Who on Gardeners World for example has ever mentioned protoplasm or cell structure as the cause of plant problems?
So much of what we are offered is pure entertainment. Subjects involving words of more than one syllable are avoided. As a result people take up gardening as adults without ever having been told about chlorophyll (mentioned on a later page) of this childrens book.
I do agree, personally. The BBC was set up for educational purposes and has pretty much gone over purely to idiot entertainment and it does break my heart. Such is the commercial world we now live in.
I would say that the above is one reason I do love Chris Packham and Springwatch etc. He is entirely delighted, not to say dedicated, to discussions of cell structures, protoplasm and how chloropyhll works. As such, the BBC have seen fit to cut one of the three watches as not being funky enough. The shows have been criticised for being too concerned with climate change and species decline. Get too serious and immediately charges of being "preachy" and "worthy" start to fly - with Packham or GW or anywhere, as if education is to harsh for delicate ears.
I think of the positive learning impact TV could be having - and the internet. But it doesn't do to dwell on this. Too depressing.
Posts
I was also surprised to see a flag on your post .... might be someone has hit the wrong thing.
Bee x
A single bee creates just one twelfth of a teaspoon of honey in her lifetime
But to return to my initial question. Should people be instructed from the earliest age to understand things in the world around them or should they be left to their own inclinations (or lack of inclinations) to learn useful things?
Here is a typical page taken from the book I mentioned. It is a book written for children. Possibly primary school age children.
How much need would there be for a forum such as this if primary school age children these days were taught subjects with the same degree of detail and complexity in an interesting format that encourages them to enjoy the process of learning?
There are so many opportunities for informal learning offered by television and the internet these days that are missed. Who on Gardeners World for example has ever mentioned protoplasm or cell structure as the cause of plant problems?
So much of what we are offered is pure entertainment. Subjects involving words of more than one syllable are avoided. As a result people take up gardening as adults without ever having been told about chlorophyll (mentioned on a later page) of this childrens book.
Death threats to his family, dead crows hung on his gate, malicious emails and now the need for a bodyguard.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/25387601/chris-packham-bodyguard-threatening-emails/
The evolution of Mankind? I think not.