It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Japanese Universities to Cut Humanities and Social Sciences

page: 3
3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 04:13 PM
link   
a reply to: ladyinwaiting



A voice of reason!




posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 04:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: crazyewok

He made a valid point though.

When we put our schools in the charge of the Federal Dept. of Ed. our literacy rates and our other education indicators walked off a cliff. We actually got worse.

Obviously, something about that move didn't work well at all.



Well obviously there needs to be some sort of state level public education.

But tailored to the needs of the areas and financed by the state not federal government


Personally id make some sort of amendment thats says

All states have to provide adequate education 5-18. But it would be down to the the states to decide how to both fund and provide such education provided it meets a minimum level. Faliure to meet miminmum requirement would result in state government impeachment

By minimum we are talking measures we all agree are vital like literacy and numerousy skills.nothing more nothing less.

If California want to teach gay sexclasses to 7 years olds but cant teach the basic RRR then they get impeached.





edit on 25-9-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-9-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 04:43 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok


All states have to provide adequate education 5-18


My town has a large university, and also a great community college, which is much less expensive. The have a 'deal' with the University, so many of their core courses transfer. Kids have jumped on that, and it's a great thing. It typically gives them only two years at the University, which is much more expensive, so in a way, college courses are somewhat being given, or at least, assisted.

You can also get terminal studies done there, such as LPN, barber/cosmetologist, mechanic, photographer, and other careers. It's really a great thing.



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 05:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: greencmp

One can indulge in any education one chooses. Just don't assume we should have to be burden with that cost.

Go to a private institution and pay for it yourself. Thus freedom of choice is maintained....



I am only addressing the dictatorial subject/syllabus issue.

I don't believe there should be any subsidy for any service or product. I don't believe there should be "education ministers". In fact, I don't believe that there ought to be public education at all in the first place.



I dont agree with subsiding liberal arts or even arts degree BS in general.

But there needs to be some sort of scholarships available for the truly bright or you will only have those form already rich background going into the best professions like law, medicine ect.

You will have zero social mobility.

The poor will be born poor and die poor without the means to better themselves.


As for the no state schools in genreal?

Can you say Derp Derp land? The USA is already the biggest joke in the world for education! Get rid of compulsorily education and the USA really will be the dumbest nation in the world. Hell some areas in your southern states already have literacy rates of less than 60%!
Talk about sell your children's futures out!

Don't get me wrong here I think education should be decentralized across something as broad as the USA. But to abandon all education from 5-18 excepted for ONLY those with money? I cant see any bigger disasters !



People were getting scholarships long before there was public funding but, those were scholars and benefitted the university somehow in deed or association.

The problem appears to be that people have confused scholars with the poor en masse, that is a grave mistake.



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 05:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: crazyewok

He made a valid point though.

When we put our schools in the charge of the Federal Dept. of Ed. our literacy rates and our other education indicators walked off a cliff. We actually got worse.

Obviously, something about that move didn't work well at all.



Well obviously there needs to be some sort of state level public education.

But tailored to the needs of the areas and financed by the state not federal government


Personally id make some sort of amendment thats says

All states have to provide adequate education 5-18. But it would be down to the the states to decide how to both fund and provide such education provided it meets a minimum level. Faliure to meet miminmum requirement would result in state government impeachment

By minimum we are talking measures we all agree are vital like literacy and numerousy skills.nothing more nothing less.

If California want to teach gay sexclasses to 7 years olds but cant teach the basic RRR then they get impeached.


Of course for me, my opinion was established early on but, it was when I discovered how much physical and psychological abuse was occurring under the euphemism of "education" that I had come to grips with the simple undesirability of public education not just for intelligent people but, for fools as well.

Stop Teachers from Beating Kids in US Public Schools!

Let's be done with this failed experiment so we can move on.
edit on 25-9-2015 by greencmp because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 06:23 PM
link   
Things like this program in DC might be why:

DC Schools to Teach Bike Riding to 2nd Graders Despite Low Reading Proefficiency Rates

On its face, it's not a horrible idea. Kids like to learn how to ride bikes and it does provide for independence, but should they be spending a month's worth on instruction time teaching this to children when the district had a less than 50% proficiency rate in reading with only slightly above 50% proficiency rate in math for these kids?


“We decided second grade is the foundational year,” Walker-Hones Elementary School physical education teacher David Gesualdi told the Post. “A kid needs this experience before second grade, and if they don’t receive it by this age, we are going to provide it.”

“Bike skills presented one of the biggest disparities throughout the school system, says Miriam Kenyon, director of health and physical education with DC Public Schools, with up to 60 percent of children unable to ride a bike in some parts of the city,” Bicycling.com reports.

“And though cycling was already a critical part of the district’s physical education program, many of the fifth grade kids who attended bike safety programs led by the Washington Area Bicycle Association had no actual cycling experience.”


And they admit cycling was already part of their program ... so why more instruction and more intensive instruction when they need to intensify instruction in more useful skills like literacy?

And then they explain that the reason some of the kids don't know how to cycle is because their parents come from countries where cycling so that is where some of the biggest disparities exist. Who cares if it's a disparity? It's a cultural thing, and not a life skill that will hold them back nearly as badly as ... not being able to read or do math will, but lets equalize this one first by all means. Wouldn't want them to not be able to ride a bike.

Oh, and after they learn, they can ride with their families ... families that don't also know how to ride a bike!


“This a lifelong skill,” Miriam Kenyon, physical education director for DCPS told the Post. “It’s a way students can get to school and it’s also a way they can exercise with their family. It promotes independence, and it’s a good way to get around.”


But, this is a "cornerstone" lesson to make sure everyone gets the same education. And, the best part is that once we have poor kids who can ride bikes ... we naturally need to make someone else pay for them to have their own bikes.


Officials told the Post they hope to eventually add a week or two to the bicycling program, one of several “cornerstone” lessons designed to “bring more uniform and rigorous instruction to students in every part of the city.”

Kenyon said the next logical step, of course, is to help secure bicycles for poor students who just learned to ride but do not have money to purchase a bike.


This sort of thing is maybe why we have poor education. Kids need to learn everything but the important things.



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 06:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: greencmp

One can indulge in any education one chooses. Just don't assume we should have to be burden with that cost.

Go to a private institution and pay for it yourself. Thus freedom of choice is maintained....



I am only addressing the dictatorial subject/syllabus issue.

I don't believe there should be any subsidy for any service or product. I don't believe there should be "education ministers". In fact, I don't believe that there ought to be public education at all in the first place.



I dont agree with subsiding liberal arts or even arts degree BS in general.

But there needs to be some sort of scholarships available for the truly bright or you will only have those form already rich background going into the best professions like law, medicine ect.

You will have zero social mobility.

The poor will be born poor and die poor without the means to better themselves.


As for the no state schools in genreal?

Can you say Derp Derp land? The USA is already the biggest joke in the world for education! Get rid of compulsorily education and the USA really will be the dumbest nation in the world. Hell some areas in your southern states already have literacy rates of less than 60%!
Talk about sell your children's futures out!

Don't get me wrong here I think education should be decentralized across something as broad as the USA. But to abandon all education from 5-18 excepted for ONLY those with money? I cant see any bigger disasters !



People were getting scholarships long before there was public funding but, those were scholars and benefitted the university somehow in deed or association.

The problem appears to be that people have confused scholars with the poor en masse, that is a grave mistake.


There needs to be some way though to grant the poor WITH ABILITY some means of social mobility.

Notice im not saying every poor kids needs a scholarship. Only those with ability.



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 07:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: greencmp

One can indulge in any education one chooses. Just don't assume we should have to be burden with that cost.

Go to a private institution and pay for it yourself. Thus freedom of choice is maintained....



I am only addressing the dictatorial subject/syllabus issue.

I don't believe there should be any subsidy for any service or product. I don't believe there should be "education ministers". In fact, I don't believe that there ought to be public education at all in the first place.



I dont agree with subsiding liberal arts or even arts degree BS in general.

But there needs to be some sort of scholarships available for the truly bright or you will only have those form already rich background going into the best professions like law, medicine ect.

You will have zero social mobility.

The poor will be born poor and die poor without the means to better themselves.


As for the no state schools in genreal?

Can you say Derp Derp land? The USA is already the biggest joke in the world for education! Get rid of compulsorily education and the USA really will be the dumbest nation in the world. Hell some areas in your southern states already have literacy rates of less than 60%!
Talk about sell your children's futures out!

Don't get me wrong here I think education should be decentralized across something as broad as the USA. But to abandon all education from 5-18 excepted for ONLY those with money? I cant see any bigger disasters !



People were getting scholarships long before there was public funding but, those were scholars and benefitted the university somehow in deed or association.

The problem appears to be that people have confused scholars with the poor en masse, that is a grave mistake.


There needs to be some way though to grant the poor WITH ABILITY some means of social mobility.

Notice im not saying every poor kids needs a scholarship. Only those with ability.


Perhaps "we" (that is, us folks as opposed to the mythical societal actor [aka da gubmint]), do need to address the specific unsatisfied needs of children within our individual spheres of influence.

It isn't the responsibility of the state to grant social mobility to anyone as if it was some quantifiable bestowment that, if withheld, constitutes a slight upon dignity of mankind.

Social mobility is just the term for a feature of liberal society which allows individuals to traverse economic class through the fruits of their own labor. Something that is absent from socialism and caste systems alike.



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 07:48 AM
link   
a reply to: greencmp

Of course notice I never said federal government.

They should be the least involved as they have NO idea of the skills and ability's in the area. Hell even in a country as small as the UK we had the "wonderful" Blair government offer loads of places in IT only for there to be a glut and high unemployment in that area yet we had a desperate shortage of Chemists and Biologists!

Local government, councils and Charity in my opinion should handle it. They will know the needs of the area.

Hell I got my scholarship through a pharma company (through partnerships of the local council that had a big bio tec industry and needed skills) Go figure!


In my opinion a society is most happy when mid to high paying jobs are in plenty throughout all sectors, social mobility is high and taxes are low.




edit on 26-9-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-9-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-9-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 08:03 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

I agree with that even though I would have the same reservations of a local authority as I would of a superarching one.

When it comes to careers, I think it has been the uniformness of goals which is the cause of the uniformness of expectations that has produced the winnowing of variance and professional specialization that is necessary for a productive division of labor within our liberal society.

In other words, as you say, these subsidies and the social pressure exerted by the state to prefer one field or industry over others that has skewed the normal process of individual professional selection.



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 08:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyosaurus
The truth is our education needs programs like this. Teach people to form their own ideas. Teach people to behave ethically. Have people check what behaving ethically means. Teach people how to think logically, with reason, and analyze in everyday life.


The truth is that this needs to be taught in junior and senior high, not wait for the college years. That's why I'm sending my kid to a private school that promotes classical education. He'll be learning logic, philosophy and debate by 7th grade.



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 08:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: Indigent

Sounds like a fine idea to me. We should adopt similar policies.

Let the 'humanities' survive like trade schools....supply and demand.



They already do, because there are so few jobs in humanities or similar fields the number of degrees being handed out per capita has fallen for several years. The most popular degree in the US, and oddly enough one of the most useless is the Business major, unless you take it up to an MBA which few do.

When it comes to humanities there's all the jokes about what can you do with a philosophy degree, or a history degree, or even a women's studies degree but I would counter that as a society don't we want people who are knowledgeable about these fields and can put forward new ideas or challenge the existing ones? That's the primary value to society of liberal arts educations actually, they equip students to ask interesting questions... they don't learn how to solve them, but without asking the question no one will think to solve it in the first place.



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 08:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: greencmp

Hmm, interesting thought.

I would suppose basic education...the three "Rs" costs less in the long run than the chaos that would ensue as a result of zero public education.

The problem being, as is always the case, is where that line is drawn...and by whom. Certainly not the Federal gov't.



Can we trust the states to do it? With the semi hands off approach the federal government currently has to education standards we have Florida which ranks among the bottom third schools in the world, down there with nations like Kazakhastan and places where their "schools" don't even have buildings. We have Kansas that is so anti education they started ending the school year early to save money. We have Louisiana with a 66% literacy rate. We have Texas where creationism is taught as valid science.

Can the states be trusted without any oversight to produce reliable schooling?



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 09:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

If we can't trust the states, we can then trust the Feds?? The mechanism is identical....Oh, I forgot, you see the Feds as a solution... We don't need a 'we know what's best for you' in D.C., certainly not in education...

As far as hands off, you need to take a closer look at common core. If that's 'hands off', i'm your daddy....


Sorry, but each state is responsible. The FIRST Federal Agency I'd dump is education...



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 09:36 PM
link   
Any time there are cuts to education people in the states are conditioned to flinch because it means there are budget problems and soon the potential for strikes and school closings and the like. In Japan, I would think the school system prior to higher education prepares students well enough in most liberal sciences to compete with US college level education. The US really is lacking in pretty much every respect except profit where education is concerned.



posted on Sep, 28 2015 @ 09:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: Aazadan

If we can't trust the states, we can then trust the Feds?? The mechanism is identical....Oh, I forgot, you see the Feds as a solution... We don't need a 'we know what's best for you' in D.C., certainly not in education...

As far as hands off, you need to take a closer look at common core. If that's 'hands off', i'm your daddy....


Sorry, but each state is responsible. The FIRST Federal Agency I'd dump is education...



Common core is a state level initiative. It wasn't thought up by the feds and it isn't even designed to be maintained by the feds.
www.corestandards.org...

The federal government will not govern the Common Core State Standards. The Common Core was and will remain a state-led effort. The NGA Center and CCSSO are committed to developing a long-term governance structure with leadership from governors, chief state school officers, and other state policymakers to ensure the quality of the Common Core and that teachers and principals have a strong voice in the future of the standards. States and local school districts will drive implementation of the Common Core.


I do actually think we need the feds to step in and regulate education however. I think it's a very bad thing as a nation if an education from Mississippi is inadequate compared to an education from Oregon. To do otherwise is to create a situation where a GED, HS Diploma, or eventually a college degree from some states is worth less than from other states. When it gets bad enough, what happens when California's universities start requiring additional remedial classes to people from Kentucky?

Without federally imposed standards a breakdown between the states is inevitable, and it's already starting to happen. That said, I'm all for letting states and communities decide how they want to teach, so long as the mandated material gets covered.

Furthermore, on the concept of states having control rather than the feds, some states are more responsible than others. I often see people on the right claim they want small government by making things an issue of states rights, but that's just trading one government for another. Without a federal Department of Education (which again, doesn't even oversee Common Core) there's still going to be a state level DoE in it's place and government size remains the same. Most states aren't homogeneous either, using Ohio for an example we have a few big cities, but where I live is a very rural area, Columbus might as well be another country for as similar as it is to the needs of the area in which I live.

So the question becomes, should we then take a proposed state level DoE away and make every single county or municipality determine their own standards? What happens when a town cuts their school budget to save money? There's no one to answer to in that situation, and as long as the town has jobs people will continue to live there in order to put food on the table, so there will be no exodus from the area.
edit on 28-9-2015 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2015 @ 04:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: DantesPeak
The point of electives is to broaden your mind. Universities like to produce graduates with an expanded understanding of the world. Many people end up discovering that they have an interest in a subject they never would have ended up taking if not for being required to take a course outside their field of study.


Male cow feces. If they didn't make these classes mandatory, there wouldn't be enough interest for them to stand on their own.



posted on Sep, 28 2015 @ 07:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: JIMC5499
Male cow feces. If they didn't make these classes mandatory, there wouldn't be enough interest for them to stand on their own.


You can say that about any class though, even core classes to a major. If math wasn't mandatory in many degrees would anyone take it, or would they just learn to solve the handful of formulas their job requires?



posted on Sep, 28 2015 @ 07:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

Yes not designed by the Feds. Reagan Administration program initially. His bad. Obama has added it to 'Race to the Top', which is a federal program.

it's going down as we speak. federally mandated programs, in education, tend to backfire, much like No child left behind. A Bush foul-up.

"Trusting" states is hubris. It's none of the Federal gov'ts business. That's the commonality of these programs. If local states aren't getting it done, then it's up to the constituents to address it.

That's the arrogance of big gov't, invent new federal programs all the while ignoring extant laws where they do belong, such as immigration laws...and your a proponent of more of the same??

A definite vested interest here, I feel....



posted on Sep, 28 2015 @ 09:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker
"Trusting" states is hubris. It's none of the Federal gov'ts business. That's the commonality of these programs. If local states aren't getting it done, then it's up to the constituents to address it.


You can't place responsibility on voters, it doesn't work. The average voter has an average level understanding of any given topic. Which is to say the population at large has at best only a rudimentary understanding of an issue. A group of people who barely understand education cannot be the ones who decide how we educate because they're incapable of identifying the best practices. That's the whole purpose behind representation, where a handful of people can effectively get the counsel of experts in order to make decisions.

Aside from the benefits of education standards meaning each state has an adequate education system, the federal government simply has more resources to tackle the issue than the states do. The best system in my opinion is to let the feds decide what needs to be taught, and then leave it up to the states to determine how to teach. Standardized tests provide enough of a metric to determine if the states are meeting the goals (side note, we have way too many of these tests currently).

The real question comes in how to handle the states that aren't meeting those goals. If you punish them by cutting funding you only make the problem worse and in the worst case scenario you incentivize school districts to pass everyone so they look better. The same is also true of financially rewarding states that do meet the goals and that's something I have no solution to in a system where education is provided. If schools were optional and private it would be much easier to handle, but for reasons already pointed out in this thread private schools have their own problems, largely that it inhibits social mobility and provides a reason for a populace to not educate themselves which leads to fewer good jobs, and ultimately much lower tax revenues.
edit on 28-9-2015 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)







 
3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join