In general, how long does it take to become experienced at a job

[chained to desk]

I was thinking,in a hypothetical (impossible)situation where someone just gets a job without a resume, any related college courses, or any experience at all in the field, about how much time would they need in on-site training until they are competent?

Possible examples:
cook
botanist
librarian
salesperson of some sort
computer programmer
engineer
doctor

These are just a few job examples, but my guess is they all have
at least one thing in common: They don't take 12 YEARS to learn.
Imagine if people below 18 could get training for jobs (maybe online?)they are interested in and start making some actual money if they are accepted instead of waiting years and years to enter the "real world." The government already spends a lot of money on education, instead of making it about useless shit we could have the (not forced) opportunity to learn how to do work that actually pays off instead of having to look forward to the utter hellscape of student loan debt in the future.

It'd be pretty nice to enter the "real world" at magic age 18 with a job and some actual savings instead of getting a worthless piece of paper, then waiting another 4 years to get another worthless paper and finally start looking for a job while in debt.

[Kirby]

Schools in some places have paid apprenticeships. In North America they tend to be limited to trades like plumbing but elsewhere many fields are available.

[xcriteria]

(07-01-2014 08:46 PM)chained to desk Wrote:  I was thinking,in a hypothetical (impossible)situation where someone just gets a job without a resume, any related college courses, or any experience at all in the field, about how much time would they need in on-site training until they are competent?

Possible examples:
cook
botanist
librarian
salesperson of some sort
computer programmer
engineer
doctor

Very good question. It would depend on the profession and what you mean by "competent" -- there are really a range of levels of competency and expertise, depending on the field (and the specific job you're doing.)

But, that's certainly a question we could spend some time exploring and unpacking on a per-career basis, since ultimately finding a path do earning a living doing work you can (and want to) do is one of the key paths out of school-as-usual.

This guy Malcom Gladwell has written about research suggesting it takes "10,000 hours" to become an expert at a given field of endeavor... but I think that number is misleading on many fronts. That's a whole topic to get into, but as an example of a counter-argument, this guy Josh Kaufman has a book about how much you can learn about a given area in just 20 hours.

(The real answer, of course, will depend, but here's Jonathan Fields interviewing Kaufman for his Good Life Project series.)



Watch on YouTube

(If there are parts of the video that jump out at you, mention them with timestamps in a reply... I've found that to be a good way to facilitate discussion about longer videos with lots of points in them.)

(07-01-2014 08:46 PM)chained to desk Wrote:  These are just a few job examples, but my guess is they all have
at least one thing in common: They don't take 12 YEARS to learn.

Totally agreed. And when things do take many years to learn, school-as-usual often doesn't provide much of that learning!

(07-01-2014 08:46 PM)chained to desk Wrote:  Imagine if people below 18 could get training for jobs (maybe online?)they are interested in and start making some actual money if they are accepted instead of waiting years and years to enter the "real world." The government already spends a lot of money on education, instead of making it about useless shit we could have the (not forced) opportunity to learn how to do work that actually pays off instead of having to look forward to the utter hellscape of student loan debt in the future.

Exactly. This is probably my biggest criticism of school-as-usual, and definitely my biggest personal frustration with it. And, this is all a criticism many people agree with, especially in the 21st century world we're living in these days.

I came across this connected learning promo video the other day, and it sums up the problem and solution through the lens of what various people are calling connected learning:

Hidden stuff:

Watch on YouTube

I can link many more talks and videos if you'd like, about how out-of-date school-as-usual is, and how it was really built for a very specific era in history (the 20th century, for which it was hardly perfect, either.) It's like countless people are referencing that in their talks and articles... and the question is, what to do about it now.

(07-01-2014 08:46 PM)chained to desk Wrote:  It'd be pretty nice to enter the "real world" at magic age 18 with a job and some actual savings instead of getting a worthless piece of paper, then waiting another 4 years to get another worthless paper and finally start looking for a job while in debt.

Definitely. This is actually the vision a lot of people have for how to do education differently... and I think one of the key blocking factors is getting parents to buy into and want such a process for their kids... enough to get in on the conversations about making it happen. (And, likewise with more students, as well as educators who aren't happy in school-as-usual, but have no other route to a paycheck.)

Big Picture Learning is one model of doing education in a more "relevant to life" way... it's still a bit like school, but they have the outline of a better way to do things than how most schools work:

A Simple Ed Reform Solution - Connect School Life to Real Life

One teacher with Big Picture training set up small, in-person learning environment based on some of those ideas, but arguably even more based on connecting people directly with doing work related to their interests, and earning money from it: iLearn (that went from vision to reality between 2012 and 2013.)

And there are so many other examples of innovative things people are doing... but they're still rather unusual. The good thing is, things are changing, and a lot more people are thinking about how they may launch replacements to traditional school... spaces and environments (online and in-person) where people can use their time well on the path to learning life-relevant skills, lessons, literacies, portfolios or "bodies of work" and so on.

I think what we need to do is adapt what you said, @chainedtodesk, and some of the bits of what's out there, into a presentation for parents (and better content for the School Survival front page) that gets people thinking and talking about these questions, and looking for answers.

Check out Summer of Connected Learning, and maybe post what you posted here in there... or I can do it if you like. (That's the G+ community I set up to get people thinking about and acting on similar kinds of questions... what does it take to just go and learn the things that one wants to learn?)

[brainiac3397]

According to some dude, 10,000 hours of practice will make you skilled. When you factor in times you're not spending on work when you're at work, it takes a bit longer.

I guess it'd depend on the person. If you know what you're doing, experience is gained at a slightly faster rate(or you at least gain a cetain degree of experience from the time spent learning)

[MrAnonymous]

Note: this post will talk about computer programming.

In order to learn programming, you must learn a "programming language." Programming can be used to make applications (games especially) or compute algorithms. You can learn a programming language for free without going to college. Also, learning a programming language can be short and easy, depending on what you pick. Here's a list of programming languages. For more details on the topic of programming, privately message me.

[chained to desk]

(07-02-2014 04:56 AM)xcriteria Wrote:  

(07-01-2014 08:46 PM)chained to desk Wrote:  I was thinking,in a hypothetical (impossible)situation where someone just gets a job without a resume, any related college courses, or any experience at all in the field, about how much time would they need in on-site training until they are competent?

Possible examples:
cook
botanist
librarian
salesperson of some sort
computer programmer
engineer
doctor

Very good question. It would depend on the profession and what you mean by "competent" -- there are really a range of levels of competency and expertise, depending on the field (and the specific job you're doing.)

But, that's certainly a question we could spend some time exploring and unpacking on a per-career basis, since ultimately finding a path do earning a living doing work you can (and want to) do is one of the key paths out of school-as-usual.

This guy Malcom Gladwell has written about research suggesting it takes "10,000 hours" to become an expert at a given field of endeavor... but I think that number is misleading on many fronts. That's a whole topic to get into, but as an example of a counter-argument, this guy Josh Kaufman has a book about how much you can learn about a given area in just 20 hours.

(The real answer, of course, will depend, but here's Jonathan Fields interviewing Kaufman for his Good Life Project series.)



Watch on YouTube

(If there are parts of the video that jump out at you, mention them with timestamps in a reply... I've found that to be a good way to facilitate discussion about longer videos with lots of points in them.)

(07-01-2014 08:46 PM)chained to desk Wrote:  These are just a few job examples, but my guess is they all have
at least one thing in common: They don't take 12 YEARS to learn.

Totally agreed. And when things do take many years to learn, school-as-usual often doesn't provide much of that learning!

(07-01-2014 08:46 PM)chained to desk Wrote:  Imagine if people below 18 could get training for jobs (maybe online?)they are interested in and start making some actual money if they are accepted instead of waiting years and years to enter the "real world." The government already spends a lot of money on education, instead of making it about useless shit we could have the (not forced) opportunity to learn how to do work that actually pays off instead of having to look forward to the utter hellscape of student loan debt in the future.

Exactly. This is probably my biggest criticism of school-as-usual, and definitely my biggest personal frustration with it. And, this is all a criticism many people agree with, especially in the 21st century world we're living in these days.

I came across this connected learning promo video the other day, and it sums up the problem and solution through the lens of what various people are calling connected learning:

Hidden stuff:

Watch on YouTube

I can link many more talks and videos if you'd like, about how out-of-date school-as-usual is, and how it was really built for a very specific era in history (the 20th century, for which it was hardly perfect, either.) It's like countless people are referencing that in their talks and articles... and the question is, what to do about it now.

(07-01-2014 08:46 PM)chained to desk Wrote:  It'd be pretty nice to enter the "real world" at magic age 18 with a job and some actual savings instead of getting a worthless piece of paper, then waiting another 4 years to get another worthless paper and finally start looking for a job while in debt.

Definitely. This is actually the vision a lot of people have for how to do education differently... and I think one of the key blocking factors is getting parents to buy into and want such a process for their kids... enough to get in on the conversations about making it happen. (And, likewise with more students, as well as educators who aren't happy in school-as-usual, but have no other route to a paycheck.)

Big Picture Learning is one model of doing education in a more "relevant to life" way... it's still a bit like school, but they have the outline of a better way to do things than how most schools work:

A Simple Ed Reform Solution - Connect School Life to Real Life

One teacher with Big Picture training set up small, in-person learning environment based on some of those ideas, but arguably even more based on connecting people directly with doing work related to their interests, and earning money from it: iLearn (that went from vision to reality between 2012 and 2013.)

And there are so many other examples of innovative things people are doing... but they're still rather unusual. The good thing is, things are changing, and a lot more people are thinking about how they may launch replacements to traditional school... spaces and environments (online and in-person) where people can use their time well on the path to learning life-relevant skills, lessons, literacies, portfolios or "bodies of work" and so on.

I think what we need to do is adapt what you said, @chainedtodesk, and some of the bits of what's out there, into a presentation for parents (and better content for the School Survival front page) that gets people thinking and talking about these questions, and looking for answers.

Check out Summer of Connected Learning, and maybe post what you posted here in there... or I can do it if you like. (That's the G+ community I set up to get people thinking about and acting on similar kinds of questions... what does it take to just go and learn the things that one wants to learn?)

I guess one of the big things keeping compulsory school around is people believing what they hear in that "everybody needs college degree otherwise they'll become homeless/have shitty lives."Eventually more and more people end up questioning this though as degrees become worth less and less. If school was voluntary, I think the government would HAVE to make it worth going to, or students would just find better stuff to do.

Also, if 18-year olds could leave home while already having a good amount of savings+a job (since they've had many years to find one or make their own business) the term " wage slave" could eventually dissapear from the English language, since even the laziest of kids would at least start "real life" with no money, but not less than nothing(college debt).