posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 11:07 PM
Before i say this, let me clarify that I am considered by many to be libertarian. As such, I really don't think that the government should fund
education, or create curriculum. Curriculum should be decided at the local level, preferrably including best practices gathered from wherever the
local arms can reach.
However, if the government is to be involved, they should do it thusly:
- Early in your childhood you are tested. Not like the modern tests showing your ability to memorize. But rather logic tests, taking into account
the theory of multiple intelligences. Early on it should be determined what your strengths are, and they should be enhanced. Your weaknesses should
be mitigated. The "Jump" method of teaching should be employed from day 1, with true process analysis put on teaching methods AND learning methods
(we currently completely ignore the side of teaching our students how to learn, although untold millions are spent teaching teachers how to teach.
- As the career progresses, each child has a customized lesson plan approach applied to continue to nurture and challenge strengths, while mitigating
weakness. Students will be placed in groups/classes that more closely fit expected skill sets. Since the government is known to make planned
releases of technology, they know best what skills will be needed 15 years down the road...perhaps some success could be seen by having some input, at
the very least, from groups like DARPA (if our tyrannical masters must continue to hoard their technology from us).
- As the child enters adolescence (maybe 7th-8th grade), they will have some specialization continued by enhancing skills that are strengths. Never
abandoning a perceived weakness, the curriculum will remain balanced. But in this way you can find mathemeticians and push them into ever increasing
capability, with the same said for other fields.
- before graduation, testing can be conducted to identify possible future careers based on the education recieved throughout their career. If they
choose a college major that is in line with recommended career paths in the graduation testing, they will recieve funding to attend. If they would
rather chase their dreams, despite the advice of the testing, then they can still seek loans, etc. Maintaining freedom of choice is critical to a
free society. However, from the governmental perspective, this is an investment in America's future. It is "putting our aces in their places", so
Bear in mind, not all people will have aptitudes that allow for college. And many would still drop out (at which point all funding is pulled, and you
have to seek your own funding via loans or private pay). Some kids may be deemed excellent at art, and thus choose auto body repair at a vocational
school. While others may choose to just party and work as a waitress.
The point is, if the government is to be in the business of funding education, they should be doing it with the purpose of not only making a
fulfilling life for Americans, but also ensuring that America is always competitive, and able to maximize the available technologies as they become
What we instead have is a nation of in the box thinkers. Where is the inspiration in that?