Teaching - worth exapnding upon?

hal · 07-07-2009, 11:19 AM

Hello Folks,
Just out of curiosity, are there any who feel that the rules for "Teaching" in GURPS 4e are curiously flat or relatively useless in game play? For example, suppose you have a player who takes the time to spend a single character point in "Teaching" only to discover that they don't have a skill level of 12+ required to act as teachers? Does that mean that the player character just wasted a point?

GURPS 4e goes so far as to mention various penalties to the teaching skill in the event that the character has certain disadvantages or finds themselves in circumstances that are less than Ideal. For instance, suppose you have a teacher who is a native of say, England. The teacher's spoken French is at the Accented level, and the teacher is attempting to teach the basics in Mathematics to the students who happen to be French speaking only. Technically speaking, the Teacher's skill level of 12 in teaching has just become worthless. The penalty for teaching if your language skill is at accented, is -1. That dropped the skill of 12 down to an 11.

So now what happens?

Me? I've noted the fact that GURPS has emplaced a set of guidelines where the following is true:

Self-study via books without a teacher: requires 400 hours per 1 character point.

Teaching/training via a teacher: requires 200 hours per 1 character point.

Are we to believe, that Teachers with a skill of 11 or less, are WORSE than self-study with books? What about self-study from a really CRAPPY text book?

How many of us have ever gone though the educational process of any of their respective nations, only to discover that with some teachers, the LOVE the topic they are studying, and are either well motivated to study, or conversely, have had really horrible teachers who have turned us off from any level of interest in the topic being taught? How many of us have ever had really GOOD teachers who made study relatively easy in a topic, while subsequent teachers made study difficult? I myself have had instances where I'd take a course in college, and do poorly in the course, only to take the course again, and have a better teacher who made it possible to pick up the material being taught.

In any event, one might consider that there are two basic components to the process in study:

1) Picking up the material required
2) remaining motivated to learn the material being presented.

GURPS 4e requires no "effort" on the part of the student where picking up new skills is concerned, and specifies that a Teacher's skill must be 12+ to qualify.

My proposal is this:

Good teachers can motivate their students such that they don't need to worry about sticking to the program. Such teachers can enliven the teaching process to the point where the students are eager to learn.

Poor teachers can disenhearten their students to the point where they either give up trying to learn, or they learn only at a minimal rate of learning.

Talents grant discounts in time required to study new material (ie gain character points in the skill being taught). Why not link the Teaching process to that proposed with TALENTS and with standard teaching rules (ie skill 12+ halves the time required time for self-study without a teacher)?

What is it about a skill 12+ that makes it the magical mystical "number" that separates an effective teacher from an ineffectual teacher based on the current rules as written?

My suggestion is this:

Professional teachers or talented teachers (ie anyone with a skill of 12+) teaching in a suitable environment conducive to study, gains a +2 bonus. Teachers with suitable teaching tools/aids, gain a further +2 bonus. A 12 skill modified by a +4 bonus, attains the highest possible level of success possible for a 3d6 skill roll in GURPS. So why not use that as a sort of bench mark?

For example? Suppose the "average" roll against a 16 on 3d6 is a 10, with a success by 6?

Self-study is 400 hours, while study under a teacher requires 200 hours. That is a discount of 100% (ie halving of time required). 100%/6 = 16% per level of success (give or take).

Now, is it possible for a student to learn the requisite material being taught, in less time than 200 hours?

Per GURPS, the answer is, yes. Someone who is talented, gains an additional 10% discount time per level of talent, up to a max discount of 4 levels of talent.

Now, how do we model the prospect of a poor teacher whose motivational skills turn students off from the topic being taught? If a successful teacher can motivate their students, might it not be said that a poor teacher might demotivate their students, and lengthen the time required to learn the topic at hand?

Why not make it then, that for every point a teacher fails their teaching roll by, they increase the time required to study the material at hand?

Hmmm. Ok, so perhaps we need a midway point between that of "self-taught" and that of a successful "Taught by teacher".

200 hours if taught by teacher
400 hours if not taught by teacher - self-trained.

What we need is a mid-way level benchmark - halfway between that of Taught by teacher successfully, and taught by teacher unsuccessfully (ie self-taught). So lets use the benchmark of 300 hours as the "aim-point" and see where it takes us.

A teacher who succeeds in teaching, grants their student a 20 hour discount for every point they succeed in their teaching roll, to a max of success by 5 (any successes higher than 5 are treated as 5).

A teacher who fails in teaching, grants a penalty of 20 hours per point they fail by. Failure may not be any worse than by 5.

See next post for an example of how to use the ad-hoc rules presented above...

07-07-2009, 11:19 AM	#1
hal Join Date: Aug 2004	Teaching - worth exapnding upon? Hello Folks, Just out of curiosity, are there any who feel that the rules for "Teaching" in GURPS 4e are curiously flat or relatively useless in game play? For example, suppose you have a player who takes the time to spend a single character point in "Teaching" only to discover that they don't have a skill level of 12+ required to act as teachers? Does that mean that the player character just wasted a point? GURPS 4e goes so far as to mention various penalties to the teaching skill in the event that the character has certain disadvantages or finds themselves in circumstances that are less than Ideal. For instance, suppose you have a teacher who is a native of say, England. The teacher's spoken French is at the Accented level, and the teacher is attempting to teach the basics in Mathematics to the students who happen to be French speaking only. Technically speaking, the Teacher's skill level of 12 in teaching has just become worthless. The penalty for teaching if your language skill is at accented, is -1. That dropped the skill of 12 down to an 11. So now what happens? Me? I've noted the fact that GURPS has emplaced a set of guidelines where the following is true: Self-study via books without a teacher: requires 400 hours per 1 character point. Teaching/training via a teacher: requires 200 hours per 1 character point. Are we to believe, that Teachers with a skill of 11 or less, are WORSE than self-study with books? What about self-study from a really CRAPPY text book? How many of us have ever gone though the educational process of any of their respective nations, only to discover that with some teachers, the LOVE the topic they are studying, and are either well motivated to study, or conversely, have had really horrible teachers who have turned us off from any level of interest in the topic being taught? How many of us have ever had really GOOD teachers who made study relatively easy in a topic, while subsequent teachers made study difficult? I myself have had instances where I'd take a course in college, and do poorly in the course, only to take the course again, and have a better teacher who made it possible to pick up the material being taught. In any event, one might consider that there are two basic components to the process in study: 1) Picking up the material required 2) remaining motivated to learn the material being presented. GURPS 4e requires no "effort" on the part of the student where picking up new skills is concerned, and specifies that a Teacher's skill must be 12+ to qualify. My proposal is this: Good teachers can motivate their students such that they don't need to worry about sticking to the program. Such teachers can enliven the teaching process to the point where the students are eager to learn. Poor teachers can disenhearten their students to the point where they either give up trying to learn, or they learn only at a minimal rate of learning. Talents grant discounts in time required to study new material (ie gain character points in the skill being taught). Why not link the Teaching process to that proposed with TALENTS and with standard teaching rules (ie skill 12+ halves the time required time for self-study without a teacher)? What is it about a skill 12+ that makes it the magical mystical "number" that separates an effective teacher from an ineffectual teacher based on the current rules as written? My suggestion is this: Professional teachers or talented teachers (ie anyone with a skill of 12+) teaching in a suitable environment conducive to study, gains a +2 bonus. Teachers with suitable teaching tools/aids, gain a further +2 bonus. A 12 skill modified by a +4 bonus, attains the highest possible level of success possible for a 3d6 skill roll in GURPS. So why not use that as a sort of bench mark? For example? Suppose the "average" roll against a 16 on 3d6 is a 10, with a success by 6? Self-study is 400 hours, while study under a teacher requires 200 hours. That is a discount of 100% (ie halving of time required). 100%/6 = 16% per level of success (give or take). Now, is it possible for a student to learn the requisite material being taught, in less time than 200 hours? Per GURPS, the answer is, yes. Someone who is talented, gains an additional 10% discount time per level of talent, up to a max discount of 4 levels of talent. Now, how do we model the prospect of a poor teacher whose motivational skills turn students off from the topic being taught? If a successful teacher can motivate their students, might it not be said that a poor teacher might demotivate their students, and lengthen the time required to learn the topic at hand? Why not make it then, that for every point a teacher fails their teaching roll by, they increase the time required to study the material at hand? Hmmm. Ok, so perhaps we need a midway point between that of "self-taught" and that of a successful "Taught by teacher". 200 hours if taught by teacher 400 hours if not taught by teacher - self-trained. What we need is a mid-way level benchmark - halfway between that of Taught by teacher successfully, and taught by teacher unsuccessfully (ie self-taught). So lets use the benchmark of 300 hours as the "aim-point" and see where it takes us. A teacher who succeeds in teaching, grants their student a 20 hour discount for every point they succeed in their teaching roll, to a max of success by 5 (any successes higher than 5 are treated as 5). A teacher who fails in teaching, grants a penalty of 20 hours per point they fail by. Failure may not be any worse than by 5. See next post for an example of how to use the ad-hoc rules presented above...