Analog clocks are like cursive, there isn't any real world benefit so it seems like we should spend that effort on one of the many other things that schools could teach.

[–] johannesvanderwhales@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They look nice. Some of them anyway, not specifically school clocks which I mentally associate with "when is this day going to fucking end?" But reading a clock is not a difficult skill that takes a long time to teach.

[–] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It's somewhat easy to teach, but also it's not a useful skill. If someone likes how analog clocks work, then they can learn it on their own time, since it's easy.

[–] nightofmichelinstars@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 month ago

on their own time

Nice

[–] vga@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I feel like there's a bit of a difficulty difference. One requires basic spacial understanding. The other requires hundreds of hours of practice to become good. Nevertheless, learning both is a good idea for different reasons. Activating your brains via fine hand coordination is a great activity for children.

As a comparison, think about how much writing chinese children have to learn in school. They don't come out as exactly poorly educated, rather vice versa. Then again, the competetiveness in chinese schools is pretty brutal, at least if I can trust what my chinese colleagues have told me.

[–] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca -2 points 1 month ago

I shouldn't say there is no value in learning cursive or analog clocks, I just want to say that analog/cursive is being taught in place of more valuable lessons.