Is this an American thing? We did absolutely not have to memorize any of that thing. We had to understand the structure, why the rows and columns etc. But memorizing it serves no purpose.
With every class including tests and exams we were allowed to use a reference book. This book was pretty thick and contained a whole lot of info including the periodic table and all the info about elements you could ever need.
I think my education (keep in mind this was 25 years ago) was focused more on the why and less on the what. If you understand why something is the way it is, the reason behind it and how to use it, you know a lot more than just being a flesh book that can list a bunch of facts.
Our teacher offered extra credit to anyone who chose to memorize it. It was crazy too, I almost considered trying it since it didn’t seem that hard. The extra credit was enough to affect 20 percent of the grade. Then I realized most people who would try it are probably just smart enough to get an A already anyways, I know I was.
In my school extra credit like that was mostly for the smart people who dicked around a lot or had difficult home lives and missed tests. That way if you needed to shore up some grades you could get it done outside the normal study routine
I recall having a teacher who said that as long as a student was legitimately trying regardless of anything the teacher would always give them more extra credit so they could reach whatever grade they wanted to aim for. You could tell he legitimately loves teaching kids and would light up whenever a kid who had been struggling finally understood something.
I had a teacher that the first day told us “my ratio of approved students is 99% and I’m not gonna lower it because of you”. A great teacher.
The next year the one that gave us the same thing told us “how many of you didn’t pass last year?”. Nobody answered because everyone passed. “This year won’t be the same” was his reply. A SHITTY teacher. The worst one I’ve had in all my live.
It’s easier to verify rote memorization than actual understanding so naturally shitty schools focus on the former at the expense of the latter. Most American schools are shitty by academic standards.
There were so many dumb things I had to memorize. Periodic table. Solar system moon and planets. Multiplication table.
Even worse is the people who see memory as intelligence because of that BS. I remember working at a office and the boss made Steve, the guy who knew 15 digits of Pi, his right hand man. Steve is currently still working there. Congrats Steve your superior memory apparently can’t get you out of your deadend job.
If you haven’t already, you should watch Mystery Team specifically for the character of Duncan “Boy Genius” who absolutely fits this characterization to a T.
I always hated that they made us relearn the parts of speech every year in middle school and high school English. Surely by now it’s sunk in, I thought.
But then the CHUDs started losing their minds about pronouns.
On the flip side, most American engineering degree programs do not rely on rote memorization, and instead heavily emphasize problem solving (especially these days), because, you know, computers and the internet exist, and faculty tend to understand that fact.
While it is true that rote memorization is a terrible thing for schools to focus on, I find it interesting that the discussion immediately jumped to “America bad” with a presumption it was a unique American practice. The many comments from around the world show it seems to be a more widespread practice.
It’s American Exceptionalism at work. Unlike the rest of the world, we have no healthcare, we use Fahrenheit, and we put on our pants one leg at a time.
I had to memorize it in university. And I didn’t even study chemistry, but “engineering science”. As a matter of fact: I actually always disliked chemistry.
In America, we didn’t have to truley memorize it. For tests we had a reference packet that included the table.
That being said we did have to memorize a few major ones.
Its also important to recognize education is a state by state thing, not federal. The curriculum in Texas can be different than the one in Florida. Even teacher to teacher, I could see one class having to memorize it while the one next door doesn’t.
In my highschool we had an English teacher who was super into the Beatles. Like “the second half of the year was literally just learning about the Beatles and it made up like 60% of your grade”. I used to like listening to them but not so much after that year. To this day I don’t know how they got away with that
In Canada even in university I don’t think it was expected to be memorized.
My prof did offer extra credit to anyone who could sing the entire element song in front of the whole class, which was very fun, and some people nailed it.
My highschool teachers did the same.
I’ve always liked those efforts to make bohring content engaging
When I was doing my Chemistry class in like 6th grade (Eastern European btw), we had to memorize it as one of our first assignments lol. Ofc, we didn’t need to know the full table but progressively learn the first 30-50 elements over the span of few months.
In the UK we had to memorise up to 20 (Calcium), but that was alongside knowing how the elements are grouped and orbits of electrons etc. for GCSE chemistry (age 14-16, end of secondary school)
My school was barely 15 years ago, but we also had a thin book handed out to us in 7th grade or so that contained charts and references for pretty much everything in a very condensed form. Periodic tables, formulas for math and physics, chemical and physical attributes for a bunch of materials, … And the entire ASCII table for some reason.
That was in Germany during the 00s and I still have that book, and three or four copies I stole over time.
In Spain we did have to memorize it. Truly idiotic. People just invented mnemonic phrases to get through the exam and that’s it. It served no educational purpose whatsoever.
Also had to memorise it, and though its been ages, i can get the properties of some elements just by remembering +/- where on the table it is. So idk, sounds like a educational purpose :')
Of the four levels of learning, rote memorization is the lowest, easiest to achieve, easiest to test, and least useful. The student can demonstrate the ability to repeat a memorized phrase verbatim, or given a couple seconds to think about it they can rephrase it in their own words using their mental thesaurus. Multiple choice and short answer questions test rote memorization, which happen to be easy to grade, machines can do it. Rote memorization will have little effect on the student’s overall behavior, if it’s all you teach and test for you’re not a teacher you’re just cosplaying as one.
And we have a book that you can use at every chemistry, biology, math and physics exam with a lot a formulas, glyph explenations, periodic table, material properties etc…
Brazil here, we had to, me and my friends even made some vulgar funny songs (to teenagers at least) to help memorize it, I had a pretty bad chem teacher.
In my US chemistry undergrad program, we were required to memorize ~40 elements that were frequently used. We had reference material available to us in the test packets, but the test time given was so low that if you hadn’t memorized those elements, you didn’t have time to finish the test.
Our general chemistry class was one of the hardest classes you could take and much of the grading seemed unfair. Very minor mistakes that could propagate throughout your calculations would lose full points. There was never enough time for exams: you were expected to be very sure of how to run your calculations, there wasn’t extra time for you to be unsure or have to redo an entire question because you messed up. It truly sucked.
That said, it was very effective at graduating competent chemists. I didn’t trust any of the biologists, nurses, pharmacists, etc. to do even basic unit conversions unless they took that class. You can often tell well into someone’s professional career if they went through such a rigorous training program because many of the calculations and principles we learned in this class are ones we use daily. I run into PhDs in biology fields who don’t know the difference between molar and molarity, ones who are inconsistent at converting masses to mols, etc.
It’s embarrassing to reach that point in your career and lack these basic skills. I’ll hear, “yeah, but they aren’t chemists, so it’s not so important that they know these things.” If that’s so, then why do they need to do it as part of their job? Skills like these are agnostic to degrees and positions, it’s like learning basic arithmetic for most scientists.
I fucking hated that class and the professor for putting us through that, but that faded quickly with time. He made the rest of our education easier and prepared us well for the work that was ahead.
It’s a thing with some teachers in some places. The quality of education in the US is hugely variable, because standards and curriculum are largely left up to local school systems with widely different funding and priorities.
I’m a biochemist and I think the periodic table is easy to memorize. “Hydrogen, blah blah blah, carbon, nitrogen, oxygen” and that’s it. Wait, hold on, sodium and chlorine are also on there somewhere…
It’s been a decade since I took chemistry, and I did not get very good marks in it, but it seems like the elements at the bottom of the table (with exception to Uranium and Plutonium) are just hanging out while the top elements do all the work.
Fluorine is extremely rare in biological systems. (I was going to say “never” but I looked it up and apparently there are a couple of exotic compounds that have it.) However, fluorine is a component of many man-made drugs and poisons. Halogens are generally not incorporated directly into bio-molecules (with exceptions, the chief one being iodine in thyroid hormones) but chlorine plays an essential role in all living things as a free, negatively charged ion.
Some heavier, metallic elements in the form of ions are necessary for the function of many enzymes, but biological systems can’t work with chemically bound metals the way that human technology can. I looked up what the heaviest element with a biological role is and the answer is apparently tungsten (although I’ve never come across an enzyme incorporating tungsten during the course of my work) but even heavier metals can act as poisons by taking the place of lighter, catalytically active metals in enzymes.
It can be fun to look at the Wikipedia article of some weird element that never seems to be mentioned and see what strange uses humans have actually found for it.
My undergrad biochemistry course was taught team taught by a microbiologist and a molecular biologist because the biochemist got fired for sexually harassing a few students.
The molecular biologist was a cool guy and taught concepts. I got an easy A in that section.
The next few weeks were taught by the microbiologist. That asshole wanted us to memorize a ton of different pathways on our second midterm (cyclic acid, fermentations, photosynthetic, MAPK etc…). Something like 20 total. I took an F on that one.
Luckily the final was a standardize test that all universities in the state used that year. So I ended up with a B.
I don’t understand the “memorize the pathways” style of teaching.
I’m not one of those people who says “Why memorize anything when you can look it up?” That doesn’t generally work because (1) you need to know that a fact exists at all before you can look it up, (2) a lot of problem-solving is done by your subconscious, which of course can’t look up anything, and (3) often you can’t see the big picture until you have learned enough of the pieces, even though learning the pieces seems like arbitrary memorization while you still don’t know enough of them.
However, I still don’t see any point in memorizing lists of arbitrary alphanumerical protein names. Knowing the pathway’s purpose, inputs and outputs, and any key intermediates is sufficient. I can’t think of any scenario where a pathway isn’t the focus of your research but being able to recall the names of all the enzymes and the order in which they act (as opposed to looking them up) is useful in practice.
(But maybe I’m the one who is ignorant of the practical applications of that knowledge… All I can say is that there has been no need for it during the course of my career so far.)
I used up all my taste acquisition credits coming around on coffee and tolerating alcohol at all. I have zero fucks left to give when it comes to training myself to like hops. The bitter little cancerous-asshole-looking motherfuckers may be necessary but I sure as hell don’t want the entire experience shaped by them.
Luckily I had a teacher that thought it was bullshit we had to memorize the whole table and “forgot” to cover the wall-sized poster of the periodic table during the exam
Yeah I’m vaguely remembering something similar. I have these faint whispers of a memory of my teacher forgetting (or probably, “forgetting”) to cover something on the wall during a memorization test.
Most chem PhDs don’t even know the whole thing lol. We had to memorize just the symbols in high school, but positions weren’t required. In my grad-level inorg course, the first test was a blank table that we had to fill in, but even then the f-block and transactinides were not required.
It’s understandable, in an environment where they don’t control all the information that readers have access to, propagandists have to use framing techniques from PR, Marketing and Politics to push out a certain impression of trustworthiness and maximizing empathy towards one side, since they can’t just use outright lies without getting caught like propagandists in places like Russia can (mind you, the NYT has definitelly been caught repeating IDF lies).
At least this time around they didn’t use the trick of the Passive Voice (for example: “Massive strikes land in Lebanon”).
That propaganda trick is a pretty common one in the “reporting” of these news sources when they talk about Israeli bombings of civilians in Gaza (which are generally reported as “deaths in Gaza” as if they were just due to natural causes rather than being murders).
Mind you the “verbatum” and undisputed quoting of IDF claims on the title as exemplified here is also a pretty commonly used propaganda techniques by these newsmedia outlets.
lemmy.world
Newest