Teh question is: does starting people of with paint by numbers lead to the eventual creation of good artists?
Or simply lots of people who are expert at painting by numbers?
I don't think there is a definitive answer to that. It is a question that has raged in education circles for decades.
Whether it was 'The New Math' or 'Phonetic (developmental) Spelling' or a raft of other attempts to simplify the teaching process, they all rely upon the presumption that eventually, the 'proper' knowledge will take hold and supplant the teaching aid in the minds of those so educated.
But there is an old adage that it is far harder to unlearn your bad habits that it would have been to learn the right way to start with. And history shows that to be the case.
Another old adage is: those whom ignore history, are destined to repeat it.
| [reply] [Watch: Dir/Any] |
| [reply] [Watch: Dir/Any] |
A cute saying does not make it so.
So true. Maybe this is more convincing.
Or even this:
A Plan for the Improvement of English Spelling
For example, in Year 1 that useless letter c would be dropped to be replased either by k or s, and likewise x would no longer be part of the alphabet. The only kase in which c would be retained would be the ch formation, which will be dealt with later.
Year 2 might reform w spelling, so that which and one would take the same konsonant, wile Year 3 might well abolish y replasing it with i and Iear 4 might fiks the g/j anomali wonse and for all.
Jenerally, then, the improvement would kontinue iear bai iear with Iear 5 doing awai with useless double konsonants, and Iears 6-12 or so modifaiing vowlz and the rimeining voist and unvoist konsonants.
Bai Iear 15 or sou, it wud fainali bi posibl tu meik ius ov thi ridandant letez c, y and x — bai now jast a memori in the maindz ov ould doderez — tu riplais ch, sh, and th rispektivli.
Fainali, xen, aafte sam 20 iers ov orxogrefkl riform, wi wud hev a lojikl, kohirnt speling in ius xrewawt xe Ingliy-spiking werld.
Mark Twain
| [reply] [Watch: Dir/Any] |