If my own experience is anything to go by, that’s already done to some extent (at the high school level).
These were the requirements for the college-oriented High School that I went to (10 credits per subject, per year). This is just for graduation, not to get into college, so language classes are considered a general elective.
Social studies 40 (history, US gov, econ, psychology, US history)
English 40 (too many to list)
Science 20 (bio, chem, physics)
Mathematics 20 (algebra, geometry, trig, calc)
Physical Education 20 (badminton, track, self defense, volleyball, etc)
Fine Arts 10 (art, photography, drama)
Career Voc. Ed. 10 (cooking, woodshop, auto, etc)
Living Skills 5 (class where you carry around a bag of flour for a week)
General Elective Credits 50 (I don’t know what counts)
In my opinion, it may be worthwhile to require:
computer applications (excel, word, photoshop)
financial basics (loans, interest, stock, 401k, basic employment law)
I don’t know what I would remove from the current list, except maybe what they call ‘vocational’, which is completely out of date. MandaJo was right in that the purpose of high school is not well defined. Overall, we live in a relatively well educated society, and I don’t think I wold want to give it up to shift the focus to job skills for kids who have no idea what they want to be. The best we can hope for is that their educations allows for flexibility in the future rather than a career path.
On one hand, tracking sounds good. On the other hand, it can shoehorn people into roles that may not suit them later in life. Not every smart person is temperamentally suited to higher education (like the naturally-smart kids who never learn study skills, then flail about wildly their freshman year). And some others are late-bloomers. Someone with moderate intelligence may have little motivation at 11 or 12, but may have a lot more motivation at 16 or 17. And someone of moderate intelligence who studies hard is *quite *capable of going farther in life than an unmotivated prodigy.
I could maybe get behind a tracking system that allowed students to jump back and forth over time. Someone who gets put on the blue-collar (vocational) track at age 12 may become motivated by that to try harder in school over the next year or two. I’ve known my share of kids who weren’t “living up to their potential” in middle school, yet now are college graduates.
IME it should start much earlier.
My wife’s nephew is a case in point. In 9th grade, this kid was a real discipline problem-he hated school (and told everyone so). He was diagnosed as "learning disabled), and put into special classes-the problem got worse and worse, till he was allowed to go to a vocational school (he’s now an electrician). If people had jst LISTENED to him at the outset, things would have been better-instead, the school spend many thousands of dollars finding out…that the kid didn’t like school.
How does that adjust once you account for special needs students?
ralph124c doesn’t want to fix it. He doesn’t want to spend anything on education. Privatize it, throw parents a token coupon.
That about cover it, ralph?
Where were the kids parents in all of this? You seem to think that it’s either the responsibility of the State to make sure these kids get the best education possible or the kid’s to voice an opinion and the State to listen. Most kids don’t have a clue what they want to do. Hell even a lot of college freshmen don’t have a clue about what they want to do. They’re in college because they think that’s what’s expected of them.
Parents need to take a more active role in their kid’s education. That’s part of their responsibility.
But there’s a difference between trivia, e.g. “What years did WW2 occur and please name the commanding generals of the following armies during the following war: US, UK, Japan, Germany, Italy, and indicate if the general died during the conflict.” from “Explain how the modern European Union community was influenced by the events of WW2. How might Europe be different today had the war not occurred? How might it be different if Hitler had won?” For another example, consider the difference between, “Locate the following countries on a map, and name their capitals and year of founding.” and “Describe generally how countries come into existence and how they gain a national identity. Select a country and describe it’s history, with respect to language, culture, religion, borders, and relationships with adjoining countries and with the world community at large.”
I think education in the US has moved toward the “big picture” scenario and away from memorization of random trivia. It seems more important nowadays to understand the dynamics of national identity than to have memorized the names of African capitals.
I agree.
IMO, the most important thing to learn is not knowledge in a particular subject area such as geography, history, or science. The most important skill for a student to acquire is the ability to teach him or herself.
I teach college math in the evenings. I went over scientific notation during the last class. Went *very *slowly. Probably spent two hours on it. Just last night I received an email from a student that said she didn’t understand my explanation of scientific notation:
A google inquiry will probably bring up no less than 500 tutorials on scientific notation. This student obviously didn’t do that. She is incapable of teaching herself anything; she needs her hand to be held at every step.
Unfortunately she is not the exception. She is the rule.
So how do you teach someone to teach themselves? I don’t know.
When I see young people needing a calculator to find out what 10% of some quantity is or what is 8 time 7, I just have to shake my head.
When I see people fooled by confirmation bias, I just have to shake my head.
FIrst, what does ralph124c mean by the “**American **high school system”? AFAIK there is no American system. Schools are administered locally and different jurisdictions have different approaches.
My daughter is a high school sophomore and there are a very rich variety of options available to her in our county. Her school offers an IB diploma, vocational training, and the option to attend another school with an AP program. There is also a magnet for science & math. My son in middle school is taking a class that we used to call Home Ec (can’t remember the newfangled name) and he is learning to sew and cook, as well as other things that aren’t as traditional homey ecky. This is an affluent county and probably doesn’t represent the average school system, but the OP should know the facts before painting with a broad brush.
Although grades will probably continue to be with us for a while, a grade is not at all a pigeonhole for what a student will learn. In my county, math is a particularly good example of this. There are several paths a student can follow (note: 1-page PDF, less than 100K) for math courses.
This is stunning to me. My daughter learned scientific notation in 9th grade or earlier and needed some help from me, but she did get it. She is good at math, though not gifted, and she was 14 fer cryin’ out loud. I cannot imagine spending *two hours *teaching this subject in a college class. I wonder if the college where you teach represents a cross-section of college students.
ETA: Although when I was teaching professional software developers, I had to give a talk on significant digits, and also why not all numbers can be represented exactly in a computer.
Being able to do basic addition and subtraction in your head is an entirely useful skill. Making change doesn’t require complicated calculations. Plus, how are you going to know if you’re being shortchanged if you can’t do the math?
I’m reminded of the comment someone said about marketing: we know that 50% of it is effective; we just don’t know which 50%. Education is the same way: we know that some of it is vitally important to produce well-rounded graduates who can compete in the global marketplace and the rest of it is obsolete garbage they’ll never use. We just don’t know what falls into which category.
I’m not sure that Googling things qualifies as “teaching oneself”. I do think that schools should teach students to access information themselves, which is perhaps the same thing in effect.
Would you please point out where I have advocated such a position?
I graduated from high school in 2009, and the grad requirements that an earlier poster mentioned were quite similar to the ones that I had to contend with.
Yes, I have a problem with the way that current high schools operate (or at least the ones that I’ve been exposed to); namely, there isn’t nearly enough focus placed on practical knowledge and far too much importance is given to theoretical concepts and such. Case in point: my HS was absolutely AP crazy in that the administrators tried to push just about EVERYBODY into the AP program. The thing is, a lot of those students had no business being there and their falling grades were evidence of that. And believe me, even though I took my fair share of AP classes, the ONLY classes that have proven to be actually helpful in the real world were my ninth grade health class (which was later removed from being a grad requirement) and the three years of Spanish that I took.
Yeah, if it were up to me, I’d at the very least require that all HS students take a “life skills” class or something, covering things like how to move out of your parents’ house, how to set up a retirement plan, how to invest in stocks, etc.
My biggest problem with American education in general, though, is that we don’t start teaching foreign languages UNTIL the high school level. Seriously, in the modern world that we live wherein nearly every other child begins learning a second language as soon as they friggin’ START school, it is absolutely RIDICULOUS that kids here aren’t exposed to foreign languages until they’ve reached the high school level. We need to start teaching our youngsters another language as soon as they enter school, not thirteen years later.
I was completely stunned at the vast amount of ignorance I witnessed when I started teaching college math three years ago. Now it no longer fazes me.
(Oh, and this is at a small private college in a small Ohio town. The situation is probably worse at public community colleges.)
I am teaching MAT 105 this semester, Fundamentals of Mathematics. During the first class I reviewed the basics of multiplication and division. When I would write (8)(6) on the board, for example, I was met with complete silence. For two reasons:
-
They didn’t know what it meant. I had to explain that we do not use the “X” symbol for multiplication. I am not joking.
-
Once I explained #1 to them, they had no idea what the answer was. Yes, that’s correct… no one knew (8)(6) = 48. They did not know their multiplication tables.
If you think I am exaggerating, I am not.
There were looks of horror when I introduced exponents.
Yesterday I showed them how to add fractions. There was ***major ***difficulty there. One girl is ready to drop the class.
Anyone who says we do not have a major problem with our high school system is delusional.
Correct me if I am wrong.
I actually kind of agree with ralph124c on this particular point (though I disagree on many of his other points); I think the US needs a much better system of vocational training as well as the expectation that not everyone needs to go through an academic high school training. I do agree with points others have made that it needs to be flexible and one needs to be able to change one’s mind and be able to switch tracks easily, but right now I feel like it’s either academic or nothing.
Here’s the thing. I can see why an academically-tracked kid ought to go through a couple of shop classes, but it would be crazy to make him sit through the majority of his classes being vocational, right? Well, say the kid wants to be an auto mechanic. Why should she have to sit through the majority of her classes being academic subjects she’s not interested in?
Oh, Crafter Man, it starts way earlier than high school. Fractions are supposed to be taught in grade school… I spent a summer ten years ago TA’ing algebra for academically gifted kids. To get into this program, you had to be at least in the top 10% of kids in the US.
These kids were quite bright, and obviously with parents who cared a great deal about their education (this program was not cheap!), and I think ONLY ONE OR TWO of them could add fractions.