this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2023
537 points (98.0% liked)

Funny

6738 readers
375 users here now

General rules:

Exceptions may be made at the discretion of the mods.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 29 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 53 points 10 months ago

See, if we just removed students, the school would function perfectly!

[–] Stanwich@lemmy.world 16 points 10 months ago

I think the millwrights in our plant went to this school.

[–] paddirn@lemmy.world 16 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (3 children)

This gets pointed out everytime a variation on this graphic gets posted, but it can work if the gears are on different planes, like they’re not all grinding up with one another. So maybe two gears are actually touching, but you’ve got a shaft going from the center of one of those connecting to another gear that’s actually touching the conflicting gear. Or it could be one of the gears is actually wide enough that it’s spinning two of the other ones, but those two aren’t touching.

[–] RattlerSix@lemmy.world 24 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I would argue that we have to be constrained by what is actually shown by the illustration and what is implied by it. It is implied that they all work together at the same time and if we're just making up things that aren't shown like an extra plane, we can make up anything.

[–] Peppycito@sh.itjust.works 5 points 10 months ago

A planetary gear set would have illustrated the point without breaking the laws of assumption.

[–] ech@lemm.ee 10 points 10 months ago

Because the point of the illustration is that all of the gears are directly interacting with each other to achieve something. That gears don't work that way either didn't occur to the original creator, or they just didn't care.

[–] 0x4E4F@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 months ago

Why not just use a chain to circle them all 🤷... it's even more fun to see that than this.

[–] Xariphon@kbin.social 11 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It's a perfect illustration, really.

Remove the Students and parents and teachers can have their authoritarian circlejerk without hurting anyone.

Remove the Parents and maybe Students can actually have a direct voice in things that affect them without the meddling of people not involved in the system.

Remove the Teachers and... well, the same really. Facilitated self-directed learning without stifling bureaucracy and exposure to bullying is the best of all worlds.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 32 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Sorry, but are you claiming that the best-case scenario is an education system without…teachers

[–] fork@endlesstalk.org 12 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Good rule of thumb for watching education political discussion is that a large portion of the population will blame the teachers.

It's always the teachers fault for them. Full stop.

Not the parents, not the incredibly apathetic or combative kids, not the administration running the school, not the politicians making up random standards, nope, none of those guys. Just the person trying to figure everything out with your kids a few hours a day. They're the ones causing all the issues.

Let's fire them all, pay them less, make them work overtime, and then the problem will be fixed!

There's a reason over half of teachers leave the profession before year 5 and are high on rates of anxiety, depression, and risk for substance abuse.

[–] GratefullyGodless@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

Let's not forget the flip side, where when things are going well, the administrators, parents, and politicians are quick to take credit, and give minimal recognition to the teachers doing the actual work.

[–] duviobaz@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 10 months ago

Braindead. Home schooling is a detriment to students sanity

[–] propaganja@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

If teachers refers to our current style of teaching in public education, then maybe.

[–] Chakravanti@sh.itjust.works 11 points 10 months ago (1 children)

You're missing that metal jam rod labeled "republicans" who have blatantly claimed to do exactly that.

[–] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 19 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

That's the gear labeled "parents."

It should absolutely be the role of public education to give kids a fighting chance at escaping crazy at home. Some kids will have parents who are more qualified on certain topics than teachers, but an effective education system should not assume that all or even most parents are competent. That should be a bonus, not a requirement to educate children.

[–] Chakravanti@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 months ago

Parents should be an addendum not blatantly jamming the whole thing by setup from...yeah...done said enough all ready. Anyone that don't understand gear but old enough to be hear needs to go back to a school that wasn't sabotaged.

[–] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 8 points 10 months ago

The problem is clearly the administrators who built it.

[–] Crow@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago (2 children)

True, with a good education system and good teachers, the parents should not be involved.

[–] ech@lemm.ee 9 points 10 months ago (1 children)

What are you talking about? Home life is incredibly critical to a students success in school and life. With literally no communication, that situation would deteriorate fast.

[–] propaganja@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

With literally no communication, that student has bigger things to worry about than grades, like why are Mommy and Daddy shutting me out?

[–] ech@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Way to completely miss the point of discussion here.

[–] propaganja@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

I wasn't trying to be serious, if that wasn't clear.

[–] hessianerd@lemm.ee 9 points 10 months ago

You are absolutely insane. You can't drop your kid off at school like they are a car in need of an oil change. There are 1000 things parents do or don't that effect if the kid can even listen in class, let alone learn.

[–] spudwart@spudwart.com 6 points 10 months ago

It would be so funny, if it weren't so sad.

[–] Luke_Fartnocker@lemm.ee 5 points 10 months ago

There should be a lever in that diagram labeled "engineering instructor".

[–] DanglingFury@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Believe it or not, a heart looks very different from how it is typically drawn. It wouldn't function at all if it looked like how we drew it

[–] naeap@sopuli.xyz 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

A drawn "heart" is a reference to either a female ass, breasts, or vulva - at least something I currently vaguely remember tells me that

[–] Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca 4 points 10 months ago

It's evocative of those things for sure. There's also the theory that the heart symbol is shaped like a mildly poisonous seed that induced infertility. This might be a myth though, as the plant doesn't exist today.

The heart symbol may also actually be a simplified representation of a real heart. A heart is a complex shape that you alnost never see. If priests can be so bad at drawing cats, I can totally believe that the heart was simplified so much.

[–] lntl@lemmy.ml 3 points 10 months ago

it works as designed!