The Education System

Words cannot express the loathing I have for the educational system. I could not wait to check out, and have never once regretted leaving the education system.

My biggest beef was the caliber of people teaching public schools. For the most part they are people who went from elementary to Jr. high, to High School, to College, to return to school and teach. All they know is school, and they presume to teach about the world. Occasionally I had a teacher I could respect, and more often than not, they had come from difficult paths, or something else that brought them into contact with the outer world. But the majority of teachers I’ve encountered during and since the time I was in school, are pathetic, insulated, mediocre cattle.

For the most part school trains humans to feel comfortable crowded into groups and corraled like livestock, to arrive on schedule, and spend their days sitting at a desk shuffling papers, concerned about things that have no real significance outside the scholastic beaurocratic circle-jerk.

Primary schools should focus on practical matters, teaching kids how to think, read, communicate, work with their hands [industrially and creatively], and nuts & bolts reality survival skills - segregated according to aptitudes and allowed to pursue pragmatic development along the lines most suited to them.

At a college/university level, the education system is basically a money scam to sell textbooks and milk bank accounts while the individual is collared with red tape. If they are lucky they will come through without too much crippling debt and maybe, maybe knowledge and skills that will put bread on the table.

For the most part it is a fucking scam.

Decent vocabulary, proper spelling and punctuation, able to formualte a thought and communicate it…I’d say you got something from your education.

I’m not sure you can put all the blame on the teachers. Most I have known have been dedicated professionals saddled with unreasonable handicaps to getting their jobs done. Parents abdicate theri responsibilities to the school system and cry bloody murder if anyone so much as suggests little Johnny is anything but an angelic Einstein rather the a dumbshit little punk. This is common. Talk to any teacher and ask them what it takes to actually flunk a student. Now ask that teacher how they can manage to engage Julie the Genius when she has Johnny the Dumbshit in her class as well. Now tell the teacher that she has state mandated tests that she must see XX% of her class pass and consider where her focus is going.

There are lots of problems with the education system but I’d wager the real problems can be found in the local school boards, parents and the teacher’s unions.

As for unioversities there are not mandatory and you have lots to pick and choose from. If you choose to pay for a ripoff then what does that say about you?

Apparently I can’t spell either so maybe your indictment is correct…or maybe I’m just stupid. (No need to comment on that)

**

My education yes.

But not my formal education; aka education system.

My word choice is only to appease those who have come from this idea that grammar is king.

I could have communicated my post via eubonics in an equally correct or sound fashion. I’m new here - Gotta do as the romans.

**

I’m not really blaming teachers for anything.

**

lol… This is a very good point.

**

Hence; a problem with the system.

However, a small one.

**

Agreed.

It says you’ve been forced into an scam.

Unless you are telling me you are a prodigy who picked up writing English with no formal education I have a problem thinking your formal education had nothing to do with your communication skills.

Exactly how do you communicate effectively without grammar and why is using it appeasing anyone? Without grammar you will have a jumble of words and it would be fairly difficult to get anyone to understand what you are trying to say.

Eubonics has grammar. You also could have posted in Farsi but so what? When in Rome it is helpful to speak Italian. When on the SDMB English works best if you expect an answer.

“But the majority of teachers I’ve encountered during and since the time I was in school, are pathetic, insulated, mediocre cattle.”

That sounds like blame to me as you are suggesting teachers are, on the whole, not adept at their jobs. Maybe we’re having a semantics problem.

To my knowledge no one has ever been taken to college at gunpoint and forced to sit there while the school emptied their bank account. If you don’t want to go to college nobody is making you. If you go it is because you chose to do so and accept the ‘scam’ they are supposedly perpetrating on you. (I will say I always thought it was crap that I HAD to buy a textbook at $100 a pop written by the professor of the class I was taking…money grab if ever there was one.)

**

Writing english and having gramatical skill are two different things.

My remedial writing skills came from low level schooling.

I wasn’t really referring to remedial skills.

**

Your use of the word “grammar” is lazy.

I was referring to “articulation”.

Vastly superior to grammar.

This looks like a board of educated fools.

I know the type.

And will do my best to abide to the unwritten prerequisites.

**

Correct.

See above for clarification.

**

Yes, but not the kind that would be “taken seriously” here.

**

See above.

If still confused; I’ll elborate more.

**

Blame requires that I feel violated.

I do not.

If teachers are inept, for what do I blame them?

**

Correct.

I’ll clarify.

I assumed you would make the logical jump yourself.

One is “forced” to go to college to aquire a certification that employers will look to as a signal of qualification for a job. If one hopes to be “qualified” for most posistions, they are forced to go to college to achieve this.

This applies to not “biologists” being certified by a “biology degree”.

But in a more general, and frequent scenerio.

i.e. Getting a liberal arts degree qualifies you as a better help desk manager than without.

It makes no sense.

They are not “forced” into it by gun point.

It is a scam that is sold to both sides of the equation.

Hopefully my elaboration has closed the gap in that sentence.

**

Writing english and having gramatical skill are two different things.

My remedial writing skills came from low level schooling.

I wasn’t really referring to remedial skills.

**

Your use of the word “grammar” is lazy.

I was referring to “articulation”.

Vastly superior to grammar.

This looks like a board of educated fools.

I know the type.

And will do my best to abide to the unwritten prerequisites.

**

Correct.

See above for clarification.

**

Yes, but not the kind that would be “taken seriously” here.

**

See above.

If still confused; I’ll elborate more.

**

Blame requires that I feel violated.

I do not.

If teachers are inept, for what do I blame them?

**

Correct.

I’ll clarify.

I assumed you would make the logical jump yourself.

One is “forced” to go to college to aquire a certification that employers will look to as a signal of qualification for a job. If one hopes to be “qualified” for most positions, they are forced to go to college to achieve this.

This applies to not “biologists” being certified by a “biology degree”.

But in a more general, and frequent scenerio.

i.e. Getting a liberal arts degree qualifies you as a better help desk manager than without.

It makes no sense.

They are not “forced” into it by gun point.

It is a scam that is sold to both sides of the equation.

Hopefully my elaboration has closed the gap in that sentence.

It seems to me you just may have checked out a tad too soon. Perhaps you would care to post something akin to proof this outrageous assertion of yours?

Well, I really don’t recall a particular course entitled “the world.” But I did take a number of courses in Math, Geography, and English, just to name a few. Amazingly, the Math courses were taught by Mathematicians, the Geography courses were taught by Geographers, etc. Even more amazing, going by your assertion, is that the Linguistics courses I’m taking are taught by gasp Linguists!

The rest of your posting actually was nothing but incoherent ranting, IMHO.

**

Ah, the wit board.

Too soon eh?

…back to the substance…

What kind of proof are you looking for?

“My biggest beef was the caliber of people teaching public schools. For the most part they are people who went from elementary to Jr. high, to High School, to College, to return to school and teach.”

Do you not… believe this?

How is this claim “outrageous”?

=/

**

Yes… remedial skills.

Perhaps I have a grander vision of what “school” should mean in regards to education.

If find “job training” to not = ‘education’ as a whole.

I suppose that is the difference.

Incoherent?

Is there a sentence I can help you with?

Actually ‘grammar’ is vastly superior to ‘articulation’. Grammar applies to the relations and functions of words in a sentence. Articulation is giving utterance of sounds…somewhat meaningless in a non-vocal medium of communication.

Debate 101 – Ad Hominem: An attack on an opponents character rather than answering contentions made.

That comment says more about the lack of substance in your argument than your accusation that this board is filled with fools.

"Words cannot express the loathing I have for the educational system. I could not wait to check out, and have never once regretted leaving the education system.

If not ‘violated’ it certainly seems you have some strong emotions regarding this subject. Besides, blame does not require that you personally be violated. You can apply blame to any number of things that you are not necessarily connected to or have a stake in.

No…your elaboration hasn’t helped. Companies for hundreds of years have sought college educated people to work for them in certain classes of jobs. Would a company willingly pay a higher wage to a college graduate if they could get away with someone with only a high school diploma that could do the job just as well? Certainly not…they are in business to make money, not throw it away. Perhaps the liberal arts degree didn’t give any specific skills but it gave problem solving skills, interpersonal skills…whatever. Doesn’t really matter as the bottom line is that most companies feel there is value in a college graduate that they won’t get from someone without a college diploma.

**

Articulation requires grammar… therefore encompassing it.

Therefore, making it “greater”.

A root cannot be greater than the whole.

Debate 101 – Ad Hominem: An attack on an opponents character rather than answering contentions made.

That comment says more about the lack of substance in your argument than your accusation that this board is filled with fools.
[/quote]
**

My “attack” was based on data aquired here.

Ad Hominem only applies when an “insult” occurs to cover up a logical gap.

Where’s the gap here?

**

Right… but who has been violated here?

I suggested nothing of the sort.

**

Yes they would. They do it everyday.

**

Correct…

Hence…

The scam part.

**

No, it did not.

**

My point.

Correct.

See above.

Why cannot I edit posts here?

So your backtracking doesn’t crack the space-time continuum. Carry on, I’m enjoying myself immensely.

P.S. I suggest you attempt to articulate English using Mandarin grammar structures and see how far you get.

Ok…this is getting way off topic but for the record ‘grammar’ and ‘articulation’ are two entirely unrelated things. There is no ‘root’ or ‘whole’ of anything regarding this. Maybe you can articulate “Phblllbpt” better than I can. Articulation is making sounds. Thos sounds need not have any relation to language. Grammar is stringing words together in a particular way. Don’t take my word for it…go look it up in a dictionary if you must.

Ad hominem means just what I said it does. It has nothing to do with covering a logical gap. It has everything to do with attacking the person in lieu of making any argument about the topic at hand. You don’t have a logical gap because you haven’t said anything to apply logic to. You have made assertions but seem content to let what amounts to a rant stand on its own with no supporting arguments other than your good word that it is just so.

Whack I believe our new poster means to use articulate, as in to expressively convey meaning through speech. The problem is that to be articulate you need to a) possess a vocabulary b) solid grasp of the language’s grammatical structure and c) an expressive manner in presenting the idea.

A lack of grammar renders the other 2 pointless and negates the whole idea of being articulate.

My teachers had been farmers, professional chemists, barkeeps, played in garage bands that didn’t make it big, and pretty much lived in general. Some of them were “pure” academics, but many weren’t.

**

I know… You’re correct; I, however, was trying to alchemize (I know… that usually involves chemicals) the word “articulate” into what it would mean regarding message board communication.

Nice catch though.

Hope it was fullfilling.

**

Right.

No one debated your provided definition.

What I am looking for is the gap in logic that my ad hominem is compensating for.

**

Your definition: Debate 101 – Ad Hominem: An attack on an opponents character rather than answering contentions made.

What does the word “rather” mean to you in this sentence?

**

in lieu.

Correct.

How have I done this?

**

See above.

Instead of saying what i have done. Tell me how I have done it.

What requires further support here?

Isn’t that all you should be addressing here?

Yet…

Have not at all…

Does no one read my stuff? :wink:

Which, sad to say, is an actually definition and not the dross to gold O_o thinks it is.

You’re right. This silly dance of semantics with you is wearing thin. It is my mistake for indulging you.

I did indeed respond to your original post. Your response to that post was brief, nitpicky and devoid of substance. Your original post was more of a rant likewise devoid of anything worthy of serious debate.

The premise that our education system in the US is in need of help is mostly without question either here on the SDMB or anywhere else such discussions come up. The devil is in the details. The debate is over what can or should be done to correct the problem. You have provided none of that.

Feel free to continue your internet imitation of the crazy guy standing on a corner ranting at everyone and no one at the same time.

Maybe (O_0) is trying to talk about “eloquence” rather than “articulation.”

Just a thought.