Education shouldnt be compulsory........discuss.

[Imnotdutch]

This is a conclusion that I am slowly coming to.

In this country, as well as other 'developed' countries, everybody has the right to a high standard of education. The end result of this approach is that a lot of kids resent going to school and dont really see the point of it all. Maybe if they had to support themselves in the real world for a while they would see why education is important and make an effort in school.

I am almost jealous of teachers that teach in countries where education is a privilege that you have to earn. I think that everybody should have access to a good quality education, but it is their choice to turn up or not.........and if they dont maintain a respectable attendance record and work appropriately the right should be taken away.

I know this is poorly thought out.......but fuck it.......rip me apart.

 

[ohashi]

Too many stupid people as it is. Make it a personal choice, and it's over.

 

[Imnotdutch]

Too many stupid people as it is. Make it a personal choice, and it's over.

Maybe in the short term.........in the long term education would become valued and a desirable quality.........at least that is my guess.

 

[Lao Tzu]

once someone gets to college everything changes. I fail to see your point. If life ended at 18 then yes i'd agree but in college the situation you are describing (education is a tool of advancement and a privelidge) generally takes over for many people. Why do you think people spend $3000 a year and endless hours in class & studying in college? Because they know its a privlidge and necessary.

But i guess you're speaking of k-12 education. personally i see little point in what you learn there (then again i see little point in what you learn in college), because it is not extremely useful.

 

[Imnotdutch]

once someone gets to college everything changes. I fail to see your point. If life ended at 18 then yes i'd agree but in college the situation you are describing (education is a tool of advancement and a privelidge) generally takes over for many people. Why do you think people spend $3000 a year and endless hours in class & studying in college? Because they know its a privlidge and necessary.

But i guess you're speaking of k-12 education. personally i see little point in what you learn there (then again i see little point in what you learn in college), because it is not extremely useful.

I am talking about pre-16 education. In the UK this is compulsory education. After that you have a choice and to some extent have to prove your worth.

I would argue that even a moderate education in Maths, Science and English (or whatever language is the main language in the country) is very useful. Some of the other subjects are debatable though.

 

[danielson]

the more time i look around me, the more i realise how stupid the general population is (or can be). true, its not necessarily related to achademic ability but its almost guaranteed some little teenage shit will decide school is boring and a life iof drug abuse is more exciting, stick his pecker in some other teenage slut and end up having a family of 8 whlst resenting those in work even though he forsoke the same chances

i DO think that a basic appreciation of science, maths, english, history, limited geography, RE, languages and IT should be compulsuary. beyond that should it be needed manual skills/tradesmanship should be taught instead of filling the universities with students that don;t need a degree

it sucks because children dont have the desire to learn that they used to. my solution would be to move back to a style of schooling seen in the 50's (more military-ish). if done at a young age it would probably instill some valuies in these kids that will likely never get them at home

 

[tuc biscuit]

In my opinion there should be a lot more vocational subjects in schools, things liked skilled trades or a lot more IT etc. kids these days just aren't interested in a lot of the subjects.

 

[c-sharp minor]

In my opinion there should be a lot more vocational subjects in schools, things liked skilled trades or a lot more IT etc. kids these days just aren't interested in a lot of the subjects.

Some kids know they just are not suited to go to University and therefore they find what they are being taught in school to be rather pointless.

Teaching algebra and calculus to a potential meat-cutter is a waste of their time and public funds.

If public schooling had more practical applications for these kids they may appreciate it more.

 

[Lao Tzu]

the more time i look around me, the more i realise how stupid the general population is (or can be). true, its not necessarily related to achademic ability but its almost guaranteed some little teenage shit will decide school is boring and a life iof drug abuse is more exciting, stick his pecker in some other teenage slut and end up having a family of 8 whlst resenting those in work even though he forsoke the same chances

i DO think that a basic appreciation of science, maths, english, history, limited geography, RE, languages and IT should be compulsuary. beyond that should it be needed manual skills/tradesmanship should be taught instead of filling the universities with students that don;t need a degree

it sucks because children dont have the desire to learn that they used to. my solution would be to move back to a style of schooling seen in the 50's (more military-ish). if done at a young age it would probably instill some valuies in these kids that will likely never get them at home

why would you want military schooling? I sure as hell don't want that, esp if its mandatory. And what values would you instill? you can't coerce & brainwash people into valuing what you value because it will probably backfire.

i agree with making vocational eduation more hands on and easier/faster to do. What we currenty have is an education system where about 70% of what you learn has little to nothing to do with what you do with your degree and can be learned on a need to know basis while on the job. Even in specific fields this still holds true more or less.

 

[Imnotdutch]

In my opinion there should be a lot more vocational subjects in schools, things liked skilled trades or a lot more IT etc. kids these days just aren't interested in a lot of the subjects.

So just because a student does not express an interest at a young age means that they should never give it a chance?

I think there should be more vocational courses that can be started after age 13 or 14..........once some basic skilss have been established. However, I think the current core subjects should be maintained for anybody who attends school.

 

[Mandinka2]

I was raised on a farm , spend a few summers picking stones out of 100 acre fields and then you realise pretty quickly just how valuable education is. The solution to this particular woe is simple: higher education should be made MOST available to the most gifted students with students constantly vying for position to secure supremacy. This is how it is in real life and waht would happen: low and behold the little brats would start slogging their guts out to compete against each other , not just at the end of sixth form or whatever grade the U.S. has before college but EVERY year, then they will be competing against their mates who they will be only too happy to put one over on. This sort of streaming would probably require bigger schools than currently exist but I think it would produce excellent results , at the bottom tier there would be a cut off below which students would be ejected , albeit effort would be highly rewarded and truancy severely punished.
Also I'm convinced that Europe should introduce a profitable prison system whereby inmates are farmed out to the highest bidder and worked like slaves . Then they won't be so eager to buttfuck each other and shoot smack in their veins coupled with the knowledge that they are making the State money might encourage them to get a fucking life when they get out.

 

[c-sharp minor]

So just because a student does not express an interest at a young age means that they should never give it a chance?

I think there should be more vocational courses that can be started after age 13 or 14..........once some basic skilss have been established. However, I think the current core subjects should be maintained for anybody who attends school.

That is actually the system that is in place here at this moment.

Though, it is usually when a student is faring so poorly in his regular academic studies that he chooses to opt for this course of action.

 

[Mandinka2]

So just because a student does not express an interest at a young age means that they should never give it a chance?

I think there should be more vocational courses that can be started after age 13 or 14..........once some basic skilss have been established. However, I think the current core subjects should be maintained for anybody who attends school.

I agree with you Dutchie , maths and science ability determines to a significant extent the future potential for an economy to exploit its workforce and expand.

 

[tuc biscuit]

So just because a student does not express an interest at a young age means that they should never give it a chance?

I think there should be more vocational courses that can be started after age 13 or 14..........once some basic skilss have been established. However, I think the current core subjects should be maintained for anybody who attends school.

I was actually gonna say that this should be introduced around that age (13-14), 'cos not everyone is academic, but kids may get excited about a class on say.....the running of a car engine or making a cabinet etc.

I went to a top Grammar school and most of the kids there weren't interested in most of the subjects and viewed them as useless (compulsary latin until 4th year).

 

[c-sharp minor]

I remember my first sex-ed class.























From then on I knew my calling in life was to be Governor of California.

 

[Imnotdutch]

In the Uk we do have some vocational courses available. However, in many schools they are used to remove trouble makers from schools for a few days a week. Sad but true. They also have to do a substantial number of academic subjects.

More places need to be made available for deserving kids........and those that wont behave told to fuck off. I am very strongly against keeping kids in school if they show a sustained reluctance to make an effort.

That is actually the system that is in place here at this moment.

Though, it is usually when a student is faring so poorly in his regular academic studies that he chooses to opt for this course of action.

 

[tuc biscuit]

Also I'm convinced that Europe should introduce a profitable prison system whereby inmates are farmed out to the highest bidder and worked like slaves . Then they won't be so eager to buttfuck each other and shoot smack in their veins coupled with the knowledge that they are making the State money might encourage them to get a fucking life when they get out.

Damn man, that is a good idea. Perhaps they should have to pay off their costs in prison after they get out by the government taking some of their wages or reducing their benefits. Perhaps they could be employed by local councils to do all ths shitty work that no-one else wants to do and all their wages would be paid to the government as payment for their prison costs.

 

[c-sharp minor]

In the Uk we do have some vocational courses available. However, in many schools they are used to remove trouble makers from schools for a few days a week. Sad but true. They also have to do a substantial number of academic subjects.

More places need to be made available for deserving kids........and those that wont behave told to fuck off. I am very strongly against keeping kids in school if they show a sustained reluctance to make an effort.

Yes.

The vocational schools here are very rough. Most of the hard-to-handle kids are sent there. Some feel they are one step away from Youth Detention facilities.

I very much agree with what you've been saying.

 

[Lao Tzu]

I was raised on a farm , spend a few summers picking stones out of 100 acre fields and then you realise pretty quickly just how valuable education is. The solution to this particular woe is simple: higher education should be made MOST available to the most gifted students with students constantly vying for position to secure supremacy. This is how it is in real life and waht would happen: low and behold the little brats would start slogging their guts out to compete against each other , not just at the end of sixth form or whatever grade the U.S. has before college but EVERY year, then they will be competing against their mates who they will be only too happy to put one over on. This sort of streaming would probably require bigger schools than currently exist but I think it would produce excellent results , at the bottom tier there would be a cut off below which students would be ejected , albeit effort would be highly rewarded and truancy severely punished.

what do you mean, that higher education should be limited? that is a terrible idea this is an information age you can't keep people out of college and prevent them from obtaining the skills they need to make a living wage. All you end up doing is creating an artificial shortage of skilled workers and a large pool of people who want to be skilled workers but are not allowed. Its a poor idea. Luckily here in the US virtually anyone who applies to college gets in, but to get into a specific program or to graduate you have to do the work.

 

[danielson]

why would you want military schooling? I sure as hell don't want that, esp if its mandatory. And what values would you instill? you can't coerce & brainwash people into valuing what you value because it will probably backfire.

i agree with making vocational eduation more hands on and easier/faster to do. What we currenty have is an education system where about 70% of what you learn has little to nothing to do with what you do with your degree and can be learned on a need to know basis while on the job. Even in specific fields this still holds true more or less.

i meant military in terms of structure and disclipine...conservative with boundries clearly enforced. so not n actual military school but like any school found in the 1950's....mandatory PE classes, mandatory X-country runs, chores, uniformity, enforcable discliplen and IF necessary, caning. maybe the last one is a little hard in practise, particularly if the government wont do anything to the styudent who stabs his teacher because they told him to shut up, but kids need this treatment. the kind of harsh physical labour you see in a farm environment is exactly where id like to send those kids who are in 'youth detention centres'

the government needs to stop sending 1000's to universioties and then make the people it really needs to go to teriary educaton pay. it should promote the vocational courses, or we will have a cracked water main and a 1000 PR consultants with degree's in art history to fix it

 

[Mandinka2]

Damn man, that is a good idea. Perhaps they should have to pay off their costs in prison after they get out by the government taking some of their wages or reducing their benefits. Perhaps they could be employed by local councils to do all ths shitty work that no-one else wants to do and all their wages would be paid to the government as payment for their prison costs.

Yep , and I'm convinced that a lot of them would find useful employment after their stint , they'd be clean and CAPABLE of making a decent wage. I also agree with you that they should be made to recoup the costs of their incarceration , I mean 1000 men working 12 hour shifts could build a railway line from London to Glasgow in six months I reckon. They'd even be grateful I'd bet at the end of it ,taken from a life of misery with heroin adn have a fresh start in life. Those with education would have opportunities to make use of the skills they have learned but they must prove that they can do it , every day wasted should be regarded as a cost they must recoup to the state.

 

[Imnotdutch]

I'm all for turfing out kids that consistently underperform witohut good reason. I think they should get one chance to repeat a year.........after that get rid of em. Make em pay for an education if they really want one.

I was raised on a farm , spend a few summers picking stones out of 100 acre fields and then you realise pretty quickly just how valuable education is. The solution to this particular woe is simple: higher education should be made MOST available to the most gifted students with students constantly vying for position to secure supremacy. This is how it is in real life and waht would happen: low and behold the little brats would start slogging their guts out to compete against each other , not just at the end of sixth form or whatever grade the U.S. has before college but EVERY year, then they will be competing against their mates who they will be only too happy to put one over on. This sort of streaming would probably require bigger schools than currently exist but I think it would produce excellent results , at the bottom tier there would be a cut off below which students would be ejected , albeit effort would be highly rewarded and truancy severely punished.
Also I'm convinced that Europe should introduce a profitable prison system whereby inmates are farmed out to the highest bidder and worked like slaves . Then they won't be so eager to buttfuck each other and shoot smack in their veins coupled with the knowledge that they are making the State money might encourage them to get a fucking life when they get out.

 

[Lao Tzu]

i meant military in terms of structure and disclipine...conservative with boundries clearly enforced. so not n actual military school but like any school found in the 1950's....mandatory PE classes, mandatory X-country runs, chores, uniformity, enforcable discliplen and IF necessary, caning. maybe the last one is a little hard in practise, particularly if the government wont do anything to the styudent who stabs his teacher because they told him to shut up, but kids need this treatment. the kind of harsh physical labour you see in a farm environment is exactly where id like to send those kids who are in 'youth detention centres'

the government needs to stop sending 1000's to universioties and then make the people it really needs to go to teriary educaton pay. it should promote the vocational courses, or we will have a cracked water main and a 1000 PR consultants with degree's in art history to fix it

what is your goal by instituting such reforms? do you think the kids will walk out patriotic and educated? read up some on overseas child rehabilitation centers, they follow the advice you seem to support (although they take it to extremes, several end up being closed because they violate the host countries human rights laws, and these are in countries like Jamacia, Costa Rica or Mexico) and sometimes the kids walk out just as fucked up as before. Sometimes worse. Then again alot of the time they reform.

Besides the majority of kids are not that bad. they are superficial, dumb, petty, and disinterested in education sure. But i don't think that canings will solve anything. Besides, like i keep saying, it doesn't matter. ONce someone enters the 20s their view on education changes drastically.

your last paragraph made no sense, i don't know what tertiary education is in england. Here in the US you mainly have k-12, then college which consists of 1, 2 or 4 year degrees, then you have grad school with its masters and doctorates.

 

[Mandinka2]

what do you mean, that higher education should be limited? that is a terrible idea this is an information age you can't keep people out of college and prevent them from obtaining the skills they need to make a living wage. All you end up doing is creating an artificial shortage of skilled workers and a large pool of people who want to be skilled workers but are not allowed. Its a poor idea. Luckily here in the US virtually anyone who applies to college gets in, but to get into a specific program or to graduate you have to do the work.

I think you misunderstood what I meant , my suggestion is that the most productive students receive the most advanced schooling , and conversely the least advanced (i.e. violent/reckless etc.) turfed out. Of course most people will not reach the upper echelons but it serves both state and student best in this manner , I see nothing wrong with having some students complete degree level courses at high school in the manner of Sir William Pitt or Poisson or any other one of the raft of highly able students. It would motivate the teachers as well as the students , they would be all competing , it would be beautiful.

 

[atlantabiolab]

why would you want military schooling? I sure as hell don't want that, esp if its mandatory. And what values would you instill? you can't coerce & brainwash people into valuing what you value because it will probably backfire.

This is actually false, Communist countries are perfect examples. The children are the most impressionable and thus very receptive to propaganda.

In a mandatory public education setting this is problematic as you assert, for there is no recourse if one feels that the education is inconsistent with one's personal views. In a private education system, free market system, this is less of an issue, for you can choose your school based on such issues.

i agree with making vocational eduation more hands on and easier/faster to do. What we currenty have is an education system where about 70% of what you learn has little to nothing to do with what you do with your degree and can be learned on a need to know basis while on the job. Even in specific fields this still holds true more or less.

Vocational skills are essential parts of a society, but they should be secondary to a foundation of basic education, such as math, language, history, etc. Instead we have a curriculum which wastes time in trying to get 1st and 2nd graders to learn to use a computer and can't realize why these kids can't read or do basic math. We try to ride on the back of technology to often, instead of working with the necessary basics before attempting to work on the incidentals.

 

[Imnotdutch]

your last paragraph made no sense, i don't know what tertiary education is in england. Here in the US you mainly have k-12, then college which consists of 1, 2 or 4 year degrees, then you have grad school with its masters and doctorates.

The British government is intent on sending a large proportion of british kids to university in the false hope that in will generate income. We also encourage just about anybody to go into post 16 education for no good reason. The post 16 courses at my school are fuill of kids who got a D or lower.......very few did better than that.

It makes more sense to give them skills that are useful.........instead of waiting for them to fail uni before they decide to get those skills.

 

[Mandinka2]

Besides the majority of kids are not that bad. they are superficial, dumb, petty, and disinterested in education sure. But i don't think that canings will solve anything. Besides, like i keep saying, it doesn't matter. ONce someone enters the 20s their view on education changes drastically.

your last paragraph made no sense, i don't know what tertiary education is in england. Here in the US you mainly have k-12, then college which consists of 1, 2 or 4 year degrees, then you have grad school with its masters and doctorates.

I think that you are reading Danielson's posts and taking an extreme interpretation , I have no doubt that he is not advocating canings or some such violence , however I have been witness to a good few full blooded fists from teachers in my time (but by decent honest men) and they were all extremely productive.

 

[Imnotdutch]

Vocational skills are essential parts of a society, but they should be secondary to a foundation of basic education, such as math, language, history, etc. Instead we have a curriculum which wastes time in trying to get 1st and 2nd graders to learn to use a computer and can't realize why these kids can't read or do basic math. We try to ride on the back of technology to often, instead of working with the necessary basics before attempting to work on the incidentals.

Agreed........basic skills should take priority.

 

[danielson]

what is your goal by instituting such reforms? do you think the kids will walk out patriotic and educated? read up some on overseas child rehabilitation centers, they follow the advice you seem to support and usually the kids walk out just as fucked up as before. Sometimes worse.

Besides the majority of kids are not that bad. they are superficial, dumb, petty, and disinterested in education sure. But i don't think that canings will solve anything. Besides, like i keep saying, it doesn't matter. ONce someone enters the 20s their view on education changes drastically.

your last paragraph made no sense, i don't know what tertiary education is in england. Here in the US you mainly have k-12, then college which consists of 1, 2 or 4 year degrees, then you have grad school with its masters and doctorates.

children are fat. PE makes them slim. these rehab schemes are started im assuming once the child has become a problem. they should be doing this shit straght away as its increasingly obvious the child isnt recieveing a good upbringng at home. i know of a school where the pupils are taught, and in the afternoon are expected to farm their own crops for their food. if you disclipline children you might stand a better chance of getting through to them. i can;t think of an alternative, and bits obvious we need one every time ou walk down the street

canings are really a last resort, as usually some kind of physcial punishment is enough to break someones will down. but ive seen it in schools where older boys would beat the younger trouble makers into shape when all the punishments the school gave them didnt work. the school stopped this during the 90's....as a result the school is now a shambles

here its GCSE till 16 in 8 subjects, A-levels in 3, a/s in 1-2 (which is a joke as they'cve apprenlty removed material from the A-level so more people have time to study ) then uni. our government wants 50% of the population to have gone to uni. they also want all uni students to pay full fees, including thos going into public services doing long degrees (dentists, doctors, nurses etc). its a fucking joke

we NEED stronger emphasis on educaton. anyone who saw last weeks 'wife swap' will see what society has decided is evolution and why we need to stop it!

 

[Lao Tzu]

yay im the center of attention. everyone is replying to my post.

My solution is encourage a college atmosphere in jr high & high school. This will hopefully eliminate the bullying and popularity problem which manage to distract from the educational aspect of school.

 

[Imnotdutch]

yay im the center of attention. everyone is replying to my post.

My solution is encourage a college atmosphere in jr high & high school. This will hopefully eliminate the bullying and popularity problem which manage to distract from the educational aspect of school.

How would you encourage that atmosphere?

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

I don't want to write a treatise here, but consider the following. Among US public schools (mandatory to age 16) the quality of the education typically follows the price of the neighborhood houses. Rich neighborhoods have better schools, even though governent spending is greatest at the worst schools.

Making something mandatory necessitates government intervention, and that leads to politicizing issues. Once issues get politicized, the focus becomes not maximizing the product, but maximizing the political value of the issue.

Thus you have public sector unions, quotas, and patronage. You have seniority based promotions and no merit pay for teachers. And, as mentioned above, there is a massive political divide whic ensures that the status quo will remain.

An example of politicization includes recent class-size amendments limiting the size of each class to perhaps 15. Within reason, class sizeis irrelevant; a good teacher can teach 30, and a bad teacher can't teach 5. Yet in our system, those two teachers earn the same if they ar equally expereienced. What class sizes do is increase the number of teachers required, and therefore increase the number of union dues payers.

In short, the education system is a socialist program: mandatory participation, top down administration, massive unionization, and
no opportunities for merit based advancement.

Forcing this sort of system on the public is downright wrong.

There are some other issues that need to be considered: AN educated populace is critical for economic growth, and it is easier to impose tyranny on a less educated populace. The era of blue collar amnfacturing in the US is ending - outsourcing is the name of the game. Thus education becomes paramount. A room full of PhD's knows exactly what teh Patriot Act is; whereas a room of high school dropouts could not even read the entire thing.

Right now, America is choosing a poorly administered system over no system. We are denying reality right now. We havew to admit that if schools were locally run, with zero government interference, we would see the same thing we see now: the best schools in the richest areas, poor schools inpoor areas.

So what exactly is the government doing, other than spending billions of our money at all levels.

it is in everyone's interest to educate as many people as possible as much as possible. The current method of doing it is suboptimal, to say the least.

While it is bad to use tax policy to effect legislative change, tax policy is at the heart of the education issue. More to come later....

 

[Lao Tzu]

How would you encourage that atmosphere?

i am not 100% sure. the major differences between college & regular school are

college is voluntary
in college there are rewards and punishments for academic success/failure
popularity and bullying are not really issues in college

The major difference is that in college the motivation for academic achievement motivation comes from within. In college the reward is the ability to make $20 an hour someday. In k-12 petty bribes like $5 for every A, a fake letter from the president or a membership in a club are the rewards.

If you can encourage that atmosphere in high school learning would be better. but i am unsure how. Maybe by only making education mandatory up until 8th grade or something along those lines. As long as motivation to learn is forced from outside as it is in k-12 then schools will be shit.

Overall k-12 is just a babysitting gig.

 

[danielson]

your forgetting the age of college graduates instills some maturity

bullying and popularity still goes on in colleges, its just less obvious

 

[atlantabiolab]

Something that is left out of these debates is the idea of parents. Because government has entered the equation, as in so many issues in life, the family unit passes on its function of parenting to the institution. Parents don't discipline their children, for whatever reason, and then wonder why the school cannot control the child or that he/she is failing. "It must be the schools fault, they are supposed to teach my child." Parents don't pass on values and duties to children and then wonder why the teachers don't favor their child, after little Johnnie called the teacher a "whore" or "bitch".

The way this argument is being presented is futile. Man is a social creature, and the primary social unit is the family, not the school. We have children and we have the responsibility to mold them into good children, not the school, its only function is to teach academics. We cannot fix the problem with kids in school by a social program. Government cannot substitute for family. Also, we must get out of the egalitarian idea that "all" children must succeed, that all people must be "equal" in the egalitarian sense. There are some who should not succeed, for they are not prepared to succeed and they have not earned it. To promote them for social standing is damaging to them, for they are not prepared. To lower the standards to their level is damaging to all who should be progressing faster than the slower ones.

Children have responsibilities in life, one is to go to school and learn. They don't have a say in this, because they are not at an age of rational thought. If I were left to do as I pleased during school years, I would be either dead or in prison. My parents gave me no choice, it was not my decision to make.

Dissolve the Department of Education. Allow the states the authority to control local public education if they so choose. Make people pay for their children's education. Obviously with the removal of the DOE, there should be a major reduction in taxation, allowing people to retain more of their earnings, which would allow them to direct this towards placing their children in the schools of their choice. Make people more accountable for their decisions.

 

[Tarheel]

I'm really surprised you're saying this Dutch. But you must remember the soceities we live in.

Billy says school sucks. He drops out and does drugs and wastes his life and makes a lot of kids. His kids have no values either and they all drop out. Now we've got an assload of people on welfare programs, which is going to drag you, me, and anyone else who pays taxes down.

If our society were structured in a way with less safety nets, there would be more encouragement to get an education. As it is now, we waste resources trying to educate "problem children" who go on to drop out and then become a drain on soceity. Less education means they work for cheaper (lots of cheap labor isn't that bad) but sadly they'll also be draining more money as well. I'd like to see the economics of how the pay off would be. Is the cheap labor during thier lifetime enough to pay off the medicare and social welfare programs they'll use?

BTW, I also grew up on a (hobby) farm. So I have an upper middle class background, but my parents and grandparents made sure I did enough manual farm work to realize the value of an education, and that unless I wanted to pull tobacco and pick beans for a living I had better pay attention in school.

 

[Tarheel]

. In k-12 petty bribes like $5 for every A, a fake letter from the president or a membership in a club are the rewards.

Dude you got one of those letters too!?!?!?!?!!

I cant say high school was a waste though. I had a Yale educated PhD who was more enguaging and actually "instructed/taught" English better than anyone I've met at the university level (mindless teaching assistance/grad student drones). He only taught high school to "keep his mind occupied" and rarely socialized with the other teachers, who he found amusing for the most part.

A hot 25 year old bio teacher who did an excellent job (and I ended up with 7 college credit hours after her AP Bio class).

And my agriculture/metal shop teacher who probably taught me as much as anyone about how the world really works. Most of the normal HS teachers looked down on him as an uneducated hick, yet he was about the only one who Dr. Yale regularly talked to.

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

A bad teacher gets paid the same as a good one.


A bad teacher gets paid the same as a good one. A bad teacher gets paid the same as a good one. A bad teacher gets paid the same as a good one. A bad teacher gets paid the same as a good one. A bad teacher gets paid the same as a good one. A bad teacher gets paid the same as a good one. A bad teacher gets paid the same as a good one. A bad teacher gets paid the same as a good one. A bad teacher gets paid the same as a good one. A bad teacher gets paid the same as a good one. A bad teacher gets paid the same as a good one. A bad teacher gets paid the same as a good one. A bad teacher gets paid the same as a good one.

Does that seem like a problem?

 

[atlantabiolab]

A bad teacher gets paid the same as a good one.


A bad teacher gets paid the same as a good one. A bad teacher gets paid the same as a good one. A bad teacher gets paid the same as a good one. A bad teacher gets paid the same as a good one. A bad teacher gets paid the same as a good one. A bad teacher gets paid the same as a good one. A bad teacher gets paid the same as a good one. A bad teacher gets paid the same as a good one. A bad teacher gets paid the same as a good one. A bad teacher gets paid the same as a good one. A bad teacher gets paid the same as a good one. A bad teacher gets paid the same as a good one. A bad teacher gets paid the same as a good one.

Does that seem like a problem?

So what are you saying?

 

[bdog527]

Something that is left out of these debates is the idea of parents. Because government has entered the equation, as in so many issues in life, the family unit passes on its function of parenting to the institution. Parents don't discipline their children, for whatever reason, and then wonder why the school cannot control the child or that he/she is failing. "It must be the schools fault, they are supposed to teach my child." Parents don't pass on values and duties to children and then wonder why the teachers don't favor their child, after little Johnnie called the teacher a "whore" or "bitch".

The way this argument is being presented is futile. Man is a social creature, and the primary social unit is the family, not the school. We have children and we have the responsibility to mold them into good children, not the school, its only function is to teach academics. We cannot fix the problem with kids in school by a social program. Government cannot substitute for family. Also, we must get out of the egalitarian idea that "all" children must succeed, that all people must be "equal" in the egalitarian sense. There are some who should not succeed, for they are not prepared to succeed and they have not earned it. To promote them for social standing is damaging to them, for they are not prepared. To lower the standards to their level is damaging to all who should be progressing faster than the slower ones.

Children have responsibilities in life, one is to go to school and learn. They don't have a say in this, because they are not at an age of rational thought. If I were left to do as I pleased during school years, I would be either dead or in prison. My parents gave me no choice, it was not my decision to make.

Dissolve the Department of Education. Allow the states the authority to control local public education if they so choose. Make people pay for their children's education. Obviously with the removal of the DOE, there should be a major reduction in taxation, allowing people to retain more of their earnings, which would allow them to direct this towards placing their children in the schools of their choice. Make people more accountable for their decisions.

Great post, exactly how I feel. I just spoke yesterday to a good friend of mine in his first year of teaching and his number one complaint was the trememdous lack of respect. He is teaching freshman and sophomores at a public high school in my hometown and he was telling me that the majority of the class could not write an essay and some couldn't even put together a basic sentence. Sad.

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

Great post, exactly how I feel. I just spoke yesterday to a good friend of mine in his first year of teaching and his number one complaint was the trememdous lack of respect. He is teaching freshman and sophomores at a public high school in my hometown and he was telling me that the majority of the class could not write an essay and some couldn't even put together a basic sentence. Sad.

Then their teachers have failed them.

 

[Imnotdutch]

Then their teachers have failed them.

You mean that the school system has failed them? I meet the same problem as bdog527's mate on a regular basis. In an average lesson you can devote only a couple fo minutes to each individual student. This is not enough to develop complicated communication skills. More people are needed in the classroom that specialise in developing these skills.

Oh and it doesnt help that many teachers try to work around the issue rather than addressing it directly when they teach. However, in order to do this they would not be able to devote time to teaching their own subject. Kinda catch-22 situation.

 

[bdog527]

Then their teachers have failed them.

agreed, i'm no expert but i would think it would be a two way street.

 

[Tarheel]

My aunt teaches 7th grade (that would be like, 13 years old I guess?). Science classes.

She says she usually has a few students per year who cant read the tests well enough to take them! Obviously, they should have been retained in previous grades before they got to her (I'd say if you cant read by the 4th).

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

You mean that the school system has failed them? I meet the same problem as bdog527's mate on a regular basis. In an average lesson you can devote only a couple fo minutes to each individual student. This is not enough to develop complicated communication skills. More people are needed in the classroom that specialise in developing these skills.

Oh and it doesnt help that many teachers try to work around the issue rather than addressing it directly when they teach. However, in order to do this they would not be able to devote time to teaching their own subject. Kinda catch-22 situation.

I have a friend who brings some of her students' work home. She has 9th graders (14 year olds). It is all poorly written - she teachers in a poorer area.

The system is failing, but the teachers are the delivery point.

 

[Imnotdutch]

I have a friend who brings some of her students' work home. She has 9th graders (14 year olds). It is all poorly written - she teachers in a poorer area.

The system is failing, but the teachers are the delivery point.

Yes we are the delivery point. Unfortunately, we are meant to be experts in many things and deal with many pupils. There comes a point when you can do no more........your best just has to do........despite the fact that you owuld like to do much more.

Bottom line is we need more adults in classrooms in order to address the problems properly. This is where the failure is........

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

Yes we are the delivery point. Unfortunately, we are meant to be experts in many things and deal with many pupils. There comes a point when you can do no more........your best just has to do........despite the fact that you owuld like to do much more.

Bottom line is we need more adults in classrooms in order to address the problems properly. This is where the failure is........

In the US, teacher pay is not based on merit. It is based on seniority. Good teachers and bad are paid the same.

Isn't that inherently bad?

 

[atlantabiolab]

Then their teachers have failed them.

Not always. The family is the most important structure in this equation, for the teacher has less vested interest in the child than the parent does. If a child is not encouraged at home to care about certain things, such as education, why would they care out in the real world? A teacher can only work with what they are given and children from shitty families are not the best starting points, they are not worthless, simply difficult.

The public school system has numerous problems, but they are not responsible for the quality of children that they are given. This is the responsibility of the parents.

 

[danielson]

unfortunately it is hard to exert pressure on parents to raise good children, especially if the parents are the shit of humanity that clogged up the school system previous

i LOVE it when these punk ass fucks get to exam time and it slowly dawns on them that all their years of fucking about are aout to screw them. its then they FINALLY go cry to the teacher

 

[Imnotdutch]

In the US, teacher pay is not based on merit. It is based on seniority. Good teachers and bad are paid the same.

Isn't that inherently bad?

This is a similar system to that in the UK. I agree that it is bad, but how could you fairly determine who is good and who is not so good?

 

[Imnotdutch]

i LOVE it when these punk ass fucks get to exam time and it slowly dawns on them that all their years of fucking about are aout to screw them. its then they FINALLY go cry to the teacher

I recently met one of those kids who took exams last year in school. He was wondering around the school and trying to get a reference.........musta sucked to get turned down so much.

 

[danielson]

I recently met one of those kids who took exams last year in school. He was wondering around the school and trying to get a reference.........musta sucked to get turned down so much.

yup. and if it was because he just wasnt strong achademically but didnt interfere with others learning then i feel sorry for him. but if it was (more likely) he pissed an education away then i hope as an adult he looks back and realises what a priveledge he has being a child in this country and does something about it (night school etc)

of course his sort never will. he'll hang around on the streets, be invloved in petty crime, maybe mug a few grannies or knock up the local slut or even better one of the 'conservative girls' and end up being shipped off to an uncle abroad to work

 

[Tiervexx]

Teachers are blamed for way to much. Atlantabiolab made a good point, the student’s family must discipline the child or else the school can’t do anything. I never get in trouble because my parents straitened me out at a very early age.

Also, it helps to have good teachers but nobody can teach kids who don’t want to learn and good students will teach themselves to some extent.

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

This is a similar system to that in the UK. I agree that it is bad, but how could you fairly determine who is good and who is not so good?

If students can be graded, teachers can be graded.

Standardize.

Test.

Score.

Evaluate.

A society that can put a man on the moon can develop a reasonable standardized testing platform. Consider economic differences by evaluating student scores within a district, rather than comparing rich kids to poor.

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

Not always. The family is the most important structure in this equation, for the teacher has less vested interest in the child than the parent does. If a child is not encouraged at home to care about certain things, such as education, why would they care out in the real world? A teacher can only work with what they are given and children from shitty families are not the best starting points, they are not worthless, simply difficult.

Parents are parents; they are not a taxpayer funded entity charged with educating children.

Good parents? bad parents? It's not society's business except in cases of true and severe abuse. Who is to second guess a parent? Teachers? Schools? Government? Of course not.

Schools, on the other hand are taxpayer funded and as such must be reposinble to society. Teachers should not even consider the thought of having expectations of parents.

 

[Island Son]

Good parents can compensate for bad teachers.
It rarely happens the other way around.

 

[Lao Tzu]

I am still 95% sure that most of what you learn isn't important vocationally. even in college alot of what you learn isn't important to your vocation but in high school its even worse. you guys are fighting over something thats not really important. You learn the shit in high school and even if you do learn it inside & out you still forget it in a year and it doesn't matter after that.

 

[atlantabiolab]

I am still 95% sure that most of what you learn isn't important vocationally. even in college alot of what you learn isn't important to your vocation but in high school its even worse. you guys are fighting over something thats not really important. You learn the shit in high school and even if you do learn it inside & out you still forget it in a year and it doesn't matter after that.

So you can't count? Who is typing this post for you?

 

[Imnotdutch]

The problem with this is that you then get teachers whose only goal is to fulfil the criteria for being a 'good teacher'. For example, you might use pupils exam grades compared to predicted grades as a measure of the teacher. In this situation, teachers predict low scores for kids and teach to the exam........rather than trying to promote and understanding and love of the subject. This leads to bored and disillusioned kids who leave school being able to repeat facts that were in the exam but cant think for themselves.

To an extent, many teachers already act like this due to league tables being established.

If students can be graded, teachers can be graded.

Standardize.

Test.

Score.

Evaluate.

A society that can put a man on the moon can develop a reasonable standardized testing platform. Consider economic differences by evaluating student scores within a district, rather than comparing rich kids to poor.

 

[Imnotdutch]

You need to come and work for the Brit government. You sound just like them. Unfortunately, their views are leading to a decline in kids ability rather than the improvements they like to report (nothing like changing mark schemes to make your results look good).

Parents are parents; they are not a taxpayer funded entity charged with educating children.

Good parents? bad parents? It's not society's business except in cases of true and severe abuse. Who is to second guess a parent? Teachers? Schools? Government? Of course not.

Schools, on the other hand are taxpayer funded and as such must be reposinble to society. Teachers should not even consider the thought of having expectations of parents.

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

The problem with this is that you then get teachers whose only goal is to fulfil the criteria for being a 'good teacher'. For example, you might use pupils exam grades compared to predicted grades as a measure of the teacher. In this situation, teachers predict low scores for kids and teach to the exam........rather than trying to promote and understanding and love of the subject. This leads to bored and disillusioned kids who leave school being able to repeat facts that were in the exam but cant think for themselves.

To an extent, many teachers already act like this due to league tables being established.

American teachers call it "teaching to the test".

You speak of bored and disillusioned kids etc. Can't speak for the UK, but in America, that's what we've got already all over the place.

My personal education experience was unusual, so maybe I am a good example. I went to excellent public schools on the north shore of Long Island, NY. (If you've ever read the Great Gatsby, this is the "Gold Coast" he was talking about). Unsurprisingly, these schools were located in what one might call an "exclusive" area.

About 25% of the teachers on Long Island earn in excess of $100,000 per year; they are the highest paid in the country.

For high school I attended one of Long Island's premier private schools (it was literally one of the best private schools in the richest county in the US at the time. Numerous American luminaries have attended, Senators, CEOs, even some media personalities).

I finished high school at a boarding school in New Hampsire that has its roots all the way back in England. It is comparable to the schools where the Kennedy's and Bush's attended. Today it costs $30,000 per yeat to attend; it was 18K when I went.

So I've seen the very best that public and private schools have to offer. And I can count - on one hand - the number of teachers I had that really fostered a "love of learning" or of the subjects taught.

Today my sister is a teacher in NY city. She teaches the opposite of what we had growing up. She is in a public middle school in a part of the city called "East New York". That's a euphemism for "war zone".

Naturally there are wide disparities in the background of the students educated in the US, UK or anywhere.

Nevertheless, there is value in standardizing.
Any business person can tell you that some form of standardization gives us something we don't have now: a place to start . Any standard test will show that the "Gold Coast" kids are in the upper 90 percentiles and the East New York kids are in the bottom 10%.

But it will give authorities insight: what programs and policies actually work? What are a waste of time? And the funny thing about a place to start is that you can build on it.

I was lucky enough to recently make the acquaintance of a former Cabinet members of ex-President Clinton; she was part of the Housing and Urban Development Department, and had developed some new models for real estate valuation that will finally provide relevant data on neighborhood pricing trends and development that really works.

Similar models can be developed in education too, but there is no progress until we have something quanitifable. Anything!!

As for the greater goal of teaching "how to think" and a "love of subject" - it is impossible if the rudimentary skills are not in place. Buld the foundation before you build the castle, so to speak. You're not going to like to learn if you can't read well, and reading comprehensionis relativelyeasy to measure. So measure. Test. And hold teachers accoutnable.

This is the beginning of merit pay for teachers, an absolute must.

I'll take teaching to a test over nothing, which is what the US has now.

By the way, the US has lowered standards as well to show "success". Disgusting.

 

[Imnotdutch]

"As for the greater goal of teaching "how to think" and a "love of subject" - it is impossible if the rudimentary skills are not in place. Buld the foundation before you build the castle, so to speak. You're not going to like to learn if you can't read well, and reading comprehensionis relativelyeasy to measure. So measure. Test. And hold teachers accoutnable. "

Interesting post........unfortunately I am short on time so I'll only address this part right now.

I have to totally disagree. I can show you kids in my classes that can think for england and at least claim to love science (my subject) but they cant write for shit. They didnt need reading and writing skills to decide this. Of course, I am not claiming that these skills are not important, only that kids can appreciate a subject and develop alternative skills without them.

I understand what you are saying about developing a baseline. However, it must be a relevant baseline.

I'l spend more time reading your post later........but now I need sleep!!