I think it's not just pace that is important. Sure we have brilliant people who could do good by going faster, but with the advent of the internet and libraries, there's not much stopping them. Let's not forget about the majority of regular people who aren't getting a good value from the school system.
I would argue that most high school students find their studies meaningless, but not because they are bored by the triviality. They think it's meaningless because they don't comprehend the practicality of it all. They get stuff just to get it done, to avoid getting spanked for bad grades, or to satisfy their ego. So our school system shoves these topics down the students, with the hope that shoving hard enough and enough times will do the trick. But from personal experience, I've found that when I revisit something that I once learned, I usually look it up in reference either from the internet or from a book. The interesting difference is that this time, when I truly comprehend the importance or relevance of it all, I learn it in much less time.
Teaching kids what they aren't ready to learn yet is inefficient. Standardized pace, rigid curriculum impede students from learning what they want, and at their own pace (which will probably always be faster than the standard pace if the student is interested).
This problem extends into university education. I think all students should learn like that, at their own pace, and take some evaluation, not necessarily a test (I have ADHD, so I'm biased against tests), at the end. Then we can have quantifiable knowledge without forcing students to go through a rigid curriculum at a set pace. This hopefully would also mean no more banking on getting into good universities, rejections, and entrance exams determining education worthiness. Education would truly be open and accessible to all.
I would argue that most high school students find their studies meaningless, but not because they are bored by the triviality. They think it's meaningless because they don't comprehend the practicality of it all. They get stuff just to get it done, to avoid getting spanked for bad grades, or to satisfy their ego. So our school system shoves these topics down the students, with the hope that shoving hard enough and enough times will do the trick. But from personal experience, I've found that when I revisit something that I once learned, I usually look it up in reference either from the internet or from a book. The interesting difference is that this time, when I truly comprehend the importance or relevance of it all, I learn it in much less time.
Teaching kids what they aren't ready to learn yet is inefficient. Standardized pace, rigid curriculum impede students from learning what they want, and at their own pace (which will probably always be faster than the standard pace if the student is interested).
This problem extends into university education. I think all students should learn like that, at their own pace, and take some evaluation, not necessarily a test (I have ADHD, so I'm biased against tests), at the end. Then we can have quantifiable knowledge without forcing students to go through a rigid curriculum at a set pace. This hopefully would also mean no more banking on getting into good universities, rejections, and entrance exams determining education worthiness. Education would truly be open and accessible to all.