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.

 

The Failure of American High Schools and Your Solutions!

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Off_The_Street
Why not let me choose what school I want my kid to go to -- and you choose what school you want your kid to go to?


Hey! It's my old friend Off_The_Street. Good to see you again...
As for your idea on choice schools, I believe the primary problem with this can be summed up in two phrases: lack of standards, and uneven placement of resources.

In theory, it would be great if one could get the same reliable quality education from a Catholic School, Hebrew School, Atheist School, Buddhist School, Muslim School, etc... but the sad fact is that populations are usually quite out of balance in a particular community, and at least one sect will end up with most of the funding, and the rest will have little more than a one-room class in a strip-center somewhere, that most will have to drive an hour to get to.

Additionally, there are enough materials that -need- to be learned, in order for a child to merely grasp the basics of society, that they should not be burdened with the -requirement- of classes in their religions, unless they or their families wish to be.

There are already "schools" where religious points of view are taught (like Catholic School, Hebrew School, Sunday School, etc..). Their primary function is to edcuate the children in the complex histories and rituals of their particular faith. These schools are already existant, already at the choice of the parents and child, and do not need further reinforcement by the Basics school system, IMHO.


Originally posted by Off_The_Street
It’s pretty obvious that the government-monopoly schools have failed. The amount of taxpayer money thrown at the monopoly schools doesn’t seem to make much difference; DC has the highest per-student spending in the United States, but, compared to the other states, the second-worst schools in the nation.


I couldn't agree more, and this is exactly why I'd like to start a whole new way of handling basic schooling for the pre-college crowd.


Originally posted by Off_The_Street
Competition results in better quality for less money.


Now this is a very interesting idea indeed, though remember competition also results in the adsorbing or dissolving of the failing institutions. Which is fine for businesses: people can usually get another job or get unemployment, but can really cause problems when the education of children is on the line.

However, I'd like to explore this idea further.

Considering my previous proposal for the school systems, what if, as a way to diffuse costs, if private institutions were given schools in their area as a "tax dump", or some other incentive to fund a successful school, and the business part of trying for success of these schools was handled much in the same way of Universities, who do compete, and do, overall, offer high-quality education?


Originally posted by Off_The_Street
Besides, there’re two ways that every kid in the country can afford the school of his choice One way would be tax credits to people who pay taxes, and assignable tax credits to businesses to provide to the people who don’t qualify for tax credits. Another way would be tax credits to the taxpayers and cash grants to any other parent for the same amount as the tax credits.


It appears you are suggested an overhaul of the way in which school taxes are handled, and again, I couldn't agree more. However, there is one thing to consider with the rest: school isn't always about cost, but also location. It is important to be able to provide a quality school system wherever there are children of learning age. The funds to access a better quality school are only a part of the problem. The other problem is access. Most parents are not going to want their children to have to go through a 2 hour commute each day, to get to the better schools.

Now, one of the problems with the permanent structure schools is that if the area changes, and you have a significant positive or negative change in student population, then the school is inefficient. For instance, in a student population boom, the school's space may prove inadequate, become overcrowded, students may have to be bussed to other locales with more space, or yet another elementary school will have to be built. Then, during a student population drop, the schools will be even more inefficient, with unused space having to be heated/air conditioned, powered, watered, etc.

That's one of the great things about a modular school design: it gives a wholly satisfactory menu of options for dealing with booms, drops, and even shifts in the location of the student demographic (so that it can be more central to the student body, or moved to an area with less traffic problems). It can even be moved out of areas that have "gone bad" to provide a safer learning environment. A modular school can be moved, added to, or removed from, as needed, so that the school is always running at peak efficiency, spacewise.

Additionally, since the size of the school will be dynamic, the teacher-student ratio can be regularly adjusted. Normally, an entire city is not going to be devoid of students, they will be shifting from one side of the city to the other. Thus, teachers may get re-assigned to another school that needed to grow, when their previous school had to shrink. This should allow the staff of the school to also run at peak efficiency.


Originally posted by Off_The_Street
Yet the parents, who are the ones both legally and morally responsible for their children, should have the right to choose whether they want their kid to go to a school with uniforms, strict discipline (or not); a religious education (or not); heavy science and math instruction (or not); lots of art and sports (or not), and so on.


Street, I agree, but choice is also a luxury of those with either money or the popular vote. If parents want their child to go to a school that enforces uniforms, then the PTA can get together and vote on their local school requiring it, or they can save their pennies, and send the child to a private school. The same holds true for discipline and, to a degree, the way the budget is spent.

However, I disagree about the course curriculum. There needs to be a standard, which is updated based upon current information, and verified. After reading "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!" and reading his account of what it was like to be on the state board for approving school textbooks, I'd even go so far as to say the curriculum textbooks need to be slimmed down to the point where they are unified, across the state, with translations for ESL students, and updated every single year. This would not only lower production costs of textbooks (the real cost is in the typesetting and initial setup for each book), but would allow the reviewers to focus a lot of attention on a much smaller selection of books. One of the biggest problems currently in the school curriculum is that the reviewers rarely, if ever, read any of the materials. While Feynman was on the board, he watched in horror as some books were passed completely blank on the inside. This doesn't even remotely touch upon the problem of incorrect information.

If the agrarian system ended up remaining for schools, then part of a teacher's job would then become reviewing and evaluating textbooks for the next year.

As for religious teaching, I stand by my statement: If they want their kids to get a religious education, they can take them to the Church, or Temple, or Mosque, or Shrine, or wherever they hold dear for religious practices. I believe firmly in the separation of church and state, and tax money should not go to fund someone else's religion.


Originally posted by Off_The_Street
It’s that freedom that the monopolists want to steal from you, and the future they want to steal from your children.



The only thing I want to steal from anyone is ignorance. I want to steal it and throw it into the furnace of knowledge, where it will be burnt away. I feel that there is a fair way to still have a government school program that is not only much much more efficient, money-wise, but also provides a much higher quality education, while being dynamic enough to account for changing student population, and open enough to benefit from parent, student, and teacher ideas.


Originally posted by namehere
(edit by Libra to account for context: Equipment for the physically handicapped is...)
...not possible unless every special programs and devices are made cheap, even the most basic ones are so expensive the schools cant supply it to all who need it

I firmly disagree. A modular school can be reconfigured on the fly to account for new needs. It costs very little, compared to other programs, to allow for ramp access, automatic doors, and handicapped toilets. As far as extra space in the classroom, it only costs the effort involved to move a desk. This is, of course, assuming that the student is wheelchair bound.


Originally posted by namehere
plus not everyone disabled can use touch screens, many need things that work by eye movement, voice activation, etc which cost thousands, plus thousands for computers to operate them, print work, etc.


Remember that touch screens can be operated by a pencil in the mouth. Additionally, there are numerous voice-activation packages out there, and for the rare student that is able to do no more than move their eyes, a modified Nomad-type set of goggles can be issued to them. I have no doubts that if the school system as a whole approached the Microvision corporation, and asked that a GUI-specific Nomad be created for disabled children to be able to attend school, and that they would have the exclusive contract for this equipment, provided they gave a significant discount, then this option should be quite affordable enough to provide for the very few students totally incapable of any action short of moving their eyes.

Now, most of the time, the insurance companies are going to cover the costs of all of these, if they are determined neccesary. And certainly the majority of the student population is not going to be this severely disabled. For the few whose policies cannot cover it, the school can provide it, for as long as the child remains a student of that school.

Finally, as to the cost of the laptops themselves, not only can a charitable deal be made with a provider of laptops, but additionally, there are numerous foundations who would contribute, and the lack of "extras" in the laptop would keep the cost significantly down.


Originally posted by namehere
not to mention the high speed connections needed to broadcast to schools, the servers, etc...


Again, I'm sure that a deal for schools being able to provide an education to handicapped children could be reached.


Originally posted by namehere
you dont understand how expensive things are for disabled, even a manual wheel chair or hospital bed can cost 600 to 1000 dollars, heck combined my 2 wheel chairs was 25000 dollars, supply and demand are what makes things for us so expensive, you should understand special ed cznt be discarded, many cant be treated as everyone else especially ones who cant communicate as fast due to ms, cp, md, als, etc.


I understand and sympathize, but also please understand the school is not the answer to all of life's problems. Those things would be needed for any phsyically challenged individual, regardless of whether or not they are in school. The school can be designed with handicapped access in mind, as well as providing the ability for the rare case were children need to learn remotely if their disability is great enough, but the school is not there to provide wheelchairs, hospital beds, treatment programs, physical therapy, etc. That's what hospitals, insurance companies, clinics, and foundations are for.


Originally posted by krissyinokc
I believe the main problem of the failing public school system in America has to do directly with the parents and their involvement (or lack of). Myself, I homeschool my 11 year-old son. I believe I can do a better job than strangers that control my son's education, and thus, future.


Would that every parent took so keen an interest in their child. I applaud you! Unfortunately, most don't, thus the need for a public school that can provide a much higher quality education, with much more efficient use of the taxpayer's dollars.


Everyone, please keep these ideas and thoughts coming in and keep playing Devil's Advocate with "The Libra System" idea of schooling.

I need as many counterpoints to address as possible. There are things already raised as very good points I didn't even consider needing to address, but will obviously be concerns in the minds of parents, teachers, students, and others. Who knows, one day this system might be perfected enough to become the standard, and the face of education improved hereafter.




posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 11:59 AM
link   
Drfunk says:

"I believe in public education, I believe in education for all, I believe that parents should have choice and I will fight against those who wish to destroy the public system and replace it with a privatized education system.

If you believe in "public" education, which means government schools, how does that give a "choice" to parents?

If the government runs the schools, the parents are forced to pay for them with their taxes. Are you suggesting that the parents, if they want to choose anything other than the government schools, should be exempt from that portion of their taxes that go to pay for the government schools, since their kids won't be using them?

Because, if you don't believe that, and you think the parents shold be forced to pay the government for the government schools -- even if their kids don't use them -- then that's not really a choice at all.



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 12:07 PM
link   
thelibra says:

"I believe the primary problem with this can be summed up in two phrases: lack of standards, and uneven placement of resources."

I'd agree with you one hundred percent, libra, if the government-monopoly schools had those same standards and resource placement that we both yearn for.

But they don't.

Schools vary from district to district, and will continue to do so, as long as the demographic of a particluar location differs from another. And we both know they always will.

"In theory, it would be great if one could get the same reliable quality education from a Catholic School, Hebrew School, Atheist School, Buddhist School, Muslim School, etc... but the sad fact is that populations are usually quite out of balance in a particular community, and at least one sect will end up with most of the funding, and the rest will have little more than a one-room class in a strip-center somewhere, that most will have to drive an hour to get to."

That's assuming that only Catholic kids will got to a Catholic school, etc. but I don't think that's the case. Here in Arizona, where we have charters and will probably be the first state to provide either a tax-credit or voucher program, we already have a lot of parents who live next to a government-monopoly school who pay to send their kids a half-mile to Our Lady of the Quadratic Equation.

Catholic schools do not discriminate at all on their students; in the final analysis, if they don't offer their education to all, they'll lose the ability to provide both the quality of education and the quantity of programs what people want -- and will pay for.



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Off_The_Street
I'd agree with you one hundred percent, libra, if the government-monopoly schools had those same standards and resource placement that we both yearn for.

But they don't.


Therein lies the exact reason for what I want to do. Perhaps my idea is best taken as an inexpensive Private School option, and let the G-man's schools wither and die...


Originally posted by Off_The_Street
Schools vary from district to district, and will continue to do so, as long as the demographic of a particluar location differs from another. And we both know they always will.


But the quality of education shouldn't have to, especially with my newer, more efficient model.


Originally posted by Off_The_Street
That's assuming that only Catholic kids will got to a Catholic school, etc. but I don't think that's the case. Here in Arizona, where we have charters and will probably be the first state to provide either a tax-credit or voucher program, we already have a lot of parents who live next to a government-monopoly school who pay to send their kids a half-mile to Our Lady of the Quadratic Equation.


Yeah, there's that, but I want a non-affiliated, high-quality, affordable option to be available as the norm, not the exception.



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 02:11 PM
link   
Disclaimer.....many of my thoughts will take into account the variables that are not oft described; the social interactions and consequences inherent in the social dynamics of a non static social environment. First and foremost, the school experience is a time of compare and contrast for the individual and attitudes are formulated in response to the sometimes imposed roles attained in a new environment. Knowledge gained from the intellectual goals of the institution are a consequence of the social experience, and as such, a consideration of these issues would be relevant in the improvement of the school system as it currently exists.



Originally posted by thelibra
Screening teachers is indeed going to be neccesary. What I hope to accomplish is a highschool that operates a lot more like a college, where one's curriculum stacks over time, and students can focus on a few general paths or, if approved, a custom path.


I think that teachers should undergo psychological testing for stress management.....or stress management should become part of the curriculum. This would address concerns expressed earlier in the thread that a teacher's ability to reach his/her audience is affected by the various personal/social issues of the ever changing student body. This may sound a bit trivial, but it really isn't. The level of affectation a difficult student experience will have on a given teacher can be the difference between an apathetic, more sullen approach to a lesson(indeed, personal events of a teacher can lead to this as well) and an emphatic authoritative demeanor(or whatever appellation(sic) works for the teacher). If we are talking about effieciency in creating prepared and learned individuals, attention should be given to the quality of the teacher. The resolve and psychological health of a teacher is important.
Another potential thought is the repetition a teacher is forced to encounter after multiple years teaching the same subject. This may apply more to high school than elementary teachers(for reasons that lie in the personality being developed and default reactions to authority and interests having been established......if that doesn't make sense, I can clarify), but having taught the same thing over and over, unless an individual has a passion for the subject, can also result in an apathetic demeanor. Whether or not these psychological responses are pronounced enough or not does make a difference. We as a society know nothing(if my assessment of popular culture and exposure to it is any indication) of the nuances of the behaviours and attitudes and their ability to affect the brain state(and thus learning capacity/inclination). Maybe a provision made in a teacher's contract to allow for the possibility of changing subjects, or involvement in other aspects of the extra curricular activity......


Originally posted by soficrow
The current kafuffle is more about about 'appropriate indoctrination' of the lower classes.


I think this is more true than not. The current system is designed to teach memorization. Many tests, in my experience, are multiple choice or some other "one answer is right" form, rather than tests that encourage the personal expression of students. Granted, some subjects require black and white details and the time it takes to grade essay tests as opposed to scantron is relevant, however the answer could be as simple as a teacher's aid. Critical thought is not encouraged as it would result in a more critical society not so apt to fall for the usual tricks employed by society..............but alas, this aspect of the discussion is way more involved than is probably necassary for this thread...........


Originally posted by thelibra
Levels of mastery could be achieved as soon as the student displays sufficient skill in that area in front of a panel of instructors of that field....


I find this concept interesting and potentially benifitial as the resulting achievements and determinations could impact the pride and subsequent desire of the student towards school.........


Originally posted by krissyinokc
I believe the main problem of the failing public school system in America has to do directly with the parents and their involvement (or lack of).


The involvement of the parents, or lack thereof, is relevant, indeed thelibra, as you stated in the other thread, the determining factor in the social outlook of the student. Children learn many of their social reactions from their parents, either directly or indirectly(an inverted personality can be in response to a stressful homelife), and this in turn can affect the learning capacity/motivation of the child. But the parents are in turn a product of government schooling and likely encountered the same type of atmospheres that resulted in thier attitudes towards child-rearing. Self-fulfilling prophecy, in a sense. But the dynamics of the social relationship do not necassarily translate into a particular personality......my experience is example of that.......
.........I was a straight A student in elementary school and the class clown......my relationship with my family was such that we never really communicated. My father was a workaholic and his free time was spent in leisure, which rarely included acknowledging my existence unless discilpine was called for, which in thier exaggerated reactions was often and for reasons as simple as arbitrary lashing out, as admitted by them in my later encounters. My junior high school life was also highly academic and also saw very little encouragement from the parents, or even involvement beyond the physical requirements of keeping me alive.......the experience can be summed up with my seeking of help on homework one night and was told that I knew what I was doing and therefore didn't need their help; a casual dismissal. High School was the duzy.......my grades fell, my home life was such that I avoided it as much as possible because of the increasing conflict between everyone and I eventually turned to drugs as escape. I barely graduated high school, with a 2.02 GPA, not because I was in any way looking forward to the future and excited for the next step, but because my Econ teacher caught me one day and sent me to the councilor to arrange for a different schedule as my constant ditching of his class had resulted in there being no possibility of me gaining a passing grade at that point. I convinced him to let me stay and ended up passing the class and earning my diploma because I was afraid of my parents reaction had I failed.........so my outlook on life was defeated. Point being, the parental relationship is important, but when it is found lacking, a substitute is required and found wherever it can......popular culture by way of a detached persona, neighborhood, church functions, or even the school system.

Seeing as how the school system is as much of a constant for the majority of children/adolescents, the social structure is an important factor where parenting is found to be inadequate.......since this is becoming more of a dissertation on adolescent psychology than topic specific, I'll re-route into my suggestions for the addressing of this.....keep in mind, I am better at noting the problem than offering solutions, so please feel free to jump in and help me out with that aspect.........

Collaborative Approach.......Now there are many situations/subjects where this is not applicable. And there are schools nowadays that do incorporate a team effort in situations that call for it......english for example, as well as the art electives, I'm sure, but my experience has shown me that it is aimless in that team efforts are usually a time for teachers(again, mostly applicable to high school) to have a college requirement that would enable them to be more proactive and more inclined to encourage collaboration.

An aspect of this would be an ability to assuage mild concerns amongst the students who are not so inclined to expression towards their peers.......also, an ability to recognize social inclinations in a student that would be detrimental to the learning process.......

to head into a different direction for a short time....(please excuse the diluted expression; I can elaborate if necassary)...the brain is segmented into different areas and these areas have been shown to be responsible for different aspects of the human experience. The region of the brain responsible for learning and assimilating data for cognitional function is not the same area of the brain responsible for social interaction. I spent alot of my time rating classes by the attractions I had to the female aspect of the student body rather than by their usefullness to my future incarnation. As a result, my academics were lacking as I didn't care as much.

So the requirement could be for a teacher to be capable of attenuating to these aspects of the student, and to have adequate services available. This is unrealistic for the immediate future, and in some areas, is already practiced available. My high school took a step and created peer councilors to help in this area and I believe it is a great idea that should be instituted all over the place, because there is only so much a student will want to express to an adult councilor.


Originally posted by Off_The_Street
However, although you're fortunate to have the time and the will to teach your kid, many other people simplay aren't able to do so. For example, the single parent needs to feed and house her kids. Another parent might simply not have the patience or the communication skills to teach their kid(s) at all.


An important quote that I feel needs to be re-visited......the inclination of the parent is important. Let us also remember, that today's society is so effective in its propagations and subtle implorations(another thread, I assure you this is a valid assertion, though) because of the focus on ego-gratification. The child has to compete with society in its many incarnations for attention. Conversly, the educatioonal system has to comete with society in its many incarnations for the attention of the student. Have you ever encountered a child who can rattle off all 500 charachters in a cartoon fantasy realm, but have difficulty in school? The cognitive function is not the problem, the interest level is impacted. I think this is where parental influence can have a great deal of impact and that is in the amount of unsupervised interaction with the pop culture medias........but as stated, the parent may be blind to this paradigm.

Again, I'm better at recognizing problems than offering solutions; my main point is that the interaction of the individual with his/hers environment is such that you have competing interests and the educational system is fraught with problems because of a purveyed ignorance in our society regarding our own children. The current administration has created The New Feedom Commission For Mental Health which would implement the screening of all individuals for mental illness in all government institutions, including all government schools, K-12.www.abovetopsecret.com.... This helps to illustrate how parents are being undermined by the government into accepting that their own children are victims of abnormalities, even when physical development and full genetic expression has yet to fully be expressed. If this help show what an uphill battle educational reform is, I don't know what will........


Originally posted by thelibra
I'd even go so far as to say the curriculum textbooks need to be slimmed down to the point where they are unified, across the state,


You'll be interested to read this link........www.abovetopsecret.com...


Originally posted by thelibra
As for religious teaching, I stand by my statement: If they want their kids to get a religious education, they can take them to the Church, or Temple, or Mosque, or Shrine, or wherever they hold dear for religious practices. I believe firmly in the separation of church and state, and tax money should not go to fund someone else's religion.


I fully agree with this and feel that religious inclinations can help to blind the student to various aspects of the learning experience and make social applications difficult due to predispositions in some cases. Personally, I would see a benefit for a Catholic student to encounter a Buddhist curriculum, lol, but the idea is far from reasonable.......

In summation of this very disorganized but hopefully coherent post is that the inherent problem in a social society, and the microcosm of high school being the segmentation into cliques and the effect this has on personal motivations and subsequent attenutations where these are influenced by our chaotic and ego- centric culture.......any educational reform must take into consideration these aspects........




[edit on 10-6-2005 by MemoryShock]



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 02:29 PM
link   
Personally, it doesn't matter how bad the school is, if the student WANTS to learn, they will, so to me, that seems to be the key....getting the students to WANT to learn. Make them realize the advantages, reap rewards, etc.

Also, I still fail to see why ALL school (other than college level) isn't 9am to 5pm, and has MONTHS off. That would solve/help a TON of issues, from Latchkey kids, to youth crime, high cost daycare, economy, etc. Not to mention the way summer deactivates the learning, so they then have to refresh each year. More two-week vacations I'd think, would be preferable to one long summer break. I know I would have loved it.



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 02:50 PM
link   
I have an idea

How bout we take a few billion dollars off of military spending and gie it to the schools? In my opinion, I would much rather see a nation of bright peoples rather than a military nation.

Another thing

Take away those ABSOUTLY FRIGGEN STUPID tests! I think it's wrong to teach off of tests. It takes away the fun and observation of learning. Exploring into things gives a student much more information than taking vocab words out of a science book and having a quiz on them the next day.



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 04:07 PM
link   
You couldn't pay me enough to teach in a school system. (A College perhaps - after they learn to read and write)

There are a few things that need to be changed (I'm sure there are a lot more than I'll mention here) I am not going to say it will be easy to do, as laws will have to be changed, but if it doesn't get done things will get worse.

First of all - Fail the kids who don't deserve to pass. It is what they deserve, and it will prepare them for the real world when just showing up doesn't cut it (even at Burger World).

Stop retarding the curriculum - time to start raising the bar.

Reinstate corporal punishment. Kids need Disipline!

In the Wayback machine;
I remember when the Teahers hit the kids (as well as Nuns with rulers over knuckels) They didn't have to do it very often - because the threat was there. (and if the teacher beat the kid too much, then his dad would go down and stomp the teacher). I remember kids bringing weapons to school ... Show one in class or have a teacher spot one and Padula (Gym Teacher - out of Nam at the time) would be there in a heart beat and Beat you like a redheaded step child - go ahead and shoot him cuz it's only gonna get him mad.

The whole thing about spare the rod and spoil the child was a warning, not an edict.

Fire pansie judges, get some rednecks in there - the boys who would throw out 90% of the BS cases that backlog the court system.

Need Teachers?
Ok, GM is about to lay off 25,000 people and it doesn't take rocket science to parrot out of a book (Those who can do, those who can't teach).
How about recruiting Ex- Drill seargents - They can certainly maintain order (no, I don't like the idea - but it is a solution).

The problem begins before kids are old enough for school.
If you get into the wayback machine - there was once a time when a single income was sufficient to run a household. If both parents worked one income could go for luxuries and savings.

Now days, it takes two incomes to almost stay even. With both parents working the children become latch key kids. They have little superision within the house so they run wild. The Parents rely on the teachers to teach the jids, and the teachers rely on the parents to help the kids learn. Unfortunately after working perhaps two jobs tere simply isn't enough time for the kids. So the whole thing snowballs and feeds upon itself.

Another aspect is that kids have little or no self-respect. If you don't respect yourself you cannot respect others.

If two kids are fighting in the school yard - (Old rules - no weapons) it is healthy and a great outlet for anger. Sorry if your kid is getting beat up - teach him to fight so it don't happen again. Teachers should ref. the fight so it doesn't get out of hand. It is a normal thing for kids to do.

If you think that you have seen violence, just wait cuz it's gonna get a LOT worse. In the way back machine; when I was mad at someone and swore at them, they knew and understood that I was upset, the obsenities I used have over time become so intragrated into the language that they have no meaning anymore - and kids are unable to express anger so
they do what they must do which is to escalate things.

Telling the Class bully that he is making you uncomfortable, or that you are sensitive to his anger - Ain't gonna work - or do much more than get your tail beat.

The pansies preach "Anger Management" and that it is unacceptable to be angry. that whole thing is BS Anger is healthy and necessary it is supresed anger that later explodes as rage (and the pansies don't deal with it - they let the court system do it and you have kids in prison).



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 04:18 PM
link   
Forgot to mention:

Kids and Criminals don't fear the law, they don't recognise it.
They fear physical retribution.



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 04:33 PM
link   
Well.. I go to a private school so I can't really say anything. But I do hear a lot about public school education on the news. Most of the things I hear are about stupid things. Like a teacher can't use a red pen to grade bc it might damage a child. Which I think is crap. Bc no matter what color you mark in the kid is still going to have the same number of answers wrong. People today really bother me with how they make the little problems, enormous ones. I really don't think a kid is going to care if what color its graded in. The parents just want to stir something up. I think another problem is teachers paid. In oklahoma teachers don't get paid a lot of money, so no one is wanting to teach so were short teachers. Their are a lot of things wrong with our education. We need to fix it. I hate to say it kids today are getting stupider and stupider. I mean the average ACT score is an 20 out of 36. And the SAT score is 1026 out 1600 . We really need to get those scores up.



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 07:57 PM
link   
My broke high school got some cash somehow a few years ago (I'm not sure how, I didn't attend at the time) and spent it (it being 20,000 dollars, I hear.. or 2,000.. either way, too much) on a statue that spins in the wind... Thought I'd mention how well the school's money gets used.



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 09:31 PM
link   
OMG........But hey, statues increase school pride.......Maybe that money should have gone to fund a clash on whether or not creationism has a place in high school.........



posted on Jun, 12 2005 @ 10:57 PM
link   
I think I have the solution:

Get the Best teachers in the country to video tape their classes.
(Lecture format) These tapes are converted to Digital - DVD and placed on servers.

Students log in (Possibly - fingerprint ID eg. Microsoft's mouse)
They watch lecture and answer questions. Any questions the student has would be contained in a FAQ, or possibly moderated chat room.

The answers indicate what areas the student requires inprovement in, and thus reviews the approperate area of the lecture, or supplies additional resources for the student.

The student moves at their own pace, thus they don't hold the class back, and the class doesn't hold them back.

The terminals can be located anywhere from the student's home to a school building (Placed into small alcoves) in the case of a school setting, a student could request a move to a different area (if another student is causing a distraction)

Benifits:
Everyone receives the same education - no group could claim discrimination.

Student learns at own speed.

No need to curve the grading system - or to "Push" students through.

No upper limit on the education, the classes could reach the PHD level - or beyond.

It would be easy to add/replace classes as demands change.

Students could be encouraged to persue fields of special interest, and then directed to career choices the student would be best suited for.

System would be free for all to participate and thus encourage the further education of all.

All but eliminates the necessity of teachers.

Short commings:
Awful 1984 ish
Could elliminate socal interaction with others of same age group.



posted on Jun, 12 2005 @ 11:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow
Good post. ditto what RANT said.

...IMO - Public education is the cornerstone of democracy. And like everything else democratic, it's under attack and in danger of being destroyed.

...We're dealing with a backdoor quota system - certain kinds of kids from certain kinds of families are chosen to be educated as managers and professionals. The rest are left to sink or swim, and make their own way. ...The current kafuffle is more about about 'appropriate indoctrination' of the lower classes.


A broad and general education is essential IMO. Change the presentation, don't censor the knowledge.

...My pet peeve: 'Special education' encompasses disabled kids needs and advanced kids needs in many states. ...Disabled kids needs are very costly - and the plug has been pulled on the whole program. Dumb. ...The $$$ for disabled special needs should come from a different pot entirely - and advanced kids need the programs.



.


Well my mom is an aide for a POHI classroom here in Michigan. Actually a lot of the money (almost all the money) designated to go to special ed classes ends being spent on other needs (salaries and i'm not reffering to the special ed staff or teachers
) as well as the company they began oputsourcing the aides through, in the school district. Most of the funding our special ed classes end up getting come from fundraisers we run.



posted on Jun, 13 2005 @ 06:22 AM
link   
Sports! Your education must revolve around sports. Football is god you know, the the lesser god basketball. These two gods must be served regardless of the students grades and grades must be altered to serve the sports god.
YMMV



posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 06:44 AM
link   
Pritvatise the public school system and give people a geniune tax cut. Sadly thou governments have a habit of rasing taxs and expecting people to pay for more services.

Students talents dont always come to the surface for example I hadnt touched a PC till high school turns out I was pretty good with computers now Im studying to be a computer tec.

There needs to be a method to id the talents of students.
Why shouldnt the gifted mathmatician go to a high school that focuses on maths?
Here in NZ more emphisis is needed on trades rather then programming students to go to universty. The problem with government funded education is simila to the one of government health care it tries to cater for everyone.


[edit on 18-6-2005 by xpert11]

[edit on 18-6-2005 by xpert11]



posted on Jun, 21 2005 @ 10:02 AM
link   
THE PROBLEM: Educated citizens interfere with established economic and political rule.

THE SOLUTION: Terminate or radically restrict public education.

THE STRATEGY: "Assess" young children by function, label by utility, "educate" accordingly, and restrict other educational opportunities. Protect the status quo by setting a quota on people allowed to be educated out of their class.

[edit on 21-6-2005 by soficrow]



posted on Jun, 21 2005 @ 01:33 PM
link   
Since there's not really a simple solution for bad parenting, which is at the root of most of this, I think the next best thing would be to allow teachers to hit the students. They'll pay much more attention when they run the risk of having the ruler smacked across their hands. That's why private schools, like Catholic ones, get better results out of their students.

Parents need to get more involved. You can only blame the school system so much. Its what the kids do at home (ie homework, studying, reading, practicing) that really counts. We've been dumping more and more money into education and it doesnt seem to be working. Obviously underfunding isn't the big problem.



posted on Jun, 21 2005 @ 04:24 PM
link   
I'm pretty much done with people suggesting that corporeal punishment is the answer........

To educate through fear is to essentially raise for subservience.

To educate through respect and collaboration is to raise for critical thought and socially minded interaction.......the problem with the second, more idealistic approach is the social dynamic inherent in any social 'cosm'......individuals are going to slip under the radar and others will be favored due to their case specific adherences..........

For all y'all who think resorting to physical violence is an answer........

I'll be back with supporting links if you really want to argue.......



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 12:24 PM
link   
Ah, MemoryShock, how good to see you again!


Originally posted by MemoryShock
I'm pretty much done with people suggesting that corporeal punishment is the answer........

To educate through fear is to essentially raise for subservience.


Hmmm... I'm torn on this, actually. I don't think teachers should be allowed to beat the kids (much).

However,in Elementary school, it was a fact that if you were bad enough, you got paddled. It was accepted as the consequence of our actions, not as an act of submission. Positive reinforcement only works to a certain degree. It must be balanced with negative reinforcement as well. Whenever a kid was to be paddled, the teacher sent us to the priciple, and then the secretary or teacher would observe (probably to ensure nothing else happened other than the paddling). It was a very effective method of controlling unruly children.

Additionally, at that age, it is my opinion that children are supposed to be subserviant. It is their duty to respect their elders, behave, and learn. When they start paying the bills, then they are entitled to an opinion. But until that point, any requests for their opinion is charity on the part of the decision-maker.

Anyway, thus goes my opinion one way on this matter.
My other opinion on it, though, goes back to parenting, something the school cannot be held responsible for other than to report abuse.


Originally posted by MemoryShock
To educate through respect and collaboration is to raise for critical thought and socially minded interaction.


That's all well and good, but how? Children do not inherently know to respect their elders, that has to be instilled. They also do not contain the same sort of basis that adults do on which to base their opinions.

They don't look at their father and say "Wow, he managed to put a roof over our heads, food on the table, balance a career, a marriage, housework, yardwork, friends, and, children. He must really have it together.

What they think in terms of is more along the lines of: "I'd better not piss him off, and do what I'm told."

It's not that children don't have the ability to think the former way, it's that they don't have the experience to be able to draw that kind of conclusion in any sort of realistic fashion. Most teenagers still don't even have this kind of comprehension of the way the real world works.

So at that level, the only other way to instill respect is either through fear, or through sinking to their level, and making better armpit noises, or doing things that would get one arrested. This method had been working, for many many thousands of years. It hasn't been until the last 50 years or so that this idea of "no negative reinforcement" came about as a standard. It happened in the past, to be sure, usually in royal families (such as the "whipping boy" who took beatings in lieu of the prince or princess), but not as a standard.

As a result now, we have an extremely low level of respect for authority and adults, resulting in a society that is bordering on anarchy, which in turn causes the government to become more and more strict in the laws and enforcing of those laws, because the parents didn't do it at an early enough age.


Originally posted by MemoryShock
the problem with the second, more idealistic approach is the social dynamic inherent in any social 'cosm'......individuals are going to slip under the radar and others will be favored due to their case specific adherences.


Nice use buzz words, but what do they really mean? It's sort of like saying "We need to be proactive in adhering to a more synergetic environment."

It sounds like what you're suggesting is to eliminate individuality among the students. I can think of no more effective method at eliminating a student's interest at excelling.


Originally posted by MemoryShock
For all y'all who think resorting to physical violence is an answer........

I'll be back with supporting links if you really want to argue.......


It's not that I think physical violence is the answer, it's that I don't think allowing bad students at a younger age to be paddled is wrong. I don't know if that counts or not.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join