Might I suggest you come up with a better system to educate large masses poor children with limited resources for buildings, books and various other essential sundies while still doling out low incomes for the teachers?
That was a nice rant you made at the OP but it indicates a lack of worldly experience of yourself which you loathe in the teachers you have had. This is the best system that we have based on what we can do with limited money and personnel willing to be dedicated enuf for aspiring young philosphers like he without a name ** (O_o)** … love the logo tho.
suggestions on how to improve the system would be nice.
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.
Instead of pulling silly stuff out of nowhere, what you can do is realize that the IMHO forum isn’t this one. This is Great Debates. You made an assertion in your OP which I challenged. To wit:
So, what statistics should be forthcoming?
[ul][li]The total number of those who teach. Since you’re complaining about the entire educational system, this should not be limited to the schools you’ve actually attended but should include the total number of those who teach at every school in the country.[/li][li]Of that number, the total number of those who have not done other “real world” (by your nebulous definition) jobs prior to returning to school to teach.[/li][li]Of that number, the total number who “presume to teach about the ‘real world.’”[/ul][/li]You seem to have mistaken your ill-informed and uneducated opinion for fact. As I said above, the Great Debates forum is not the In My Humble Opinion forum.
I get it… this is a Turing Test. This (O o) thing is really a computer, cleverly programmed to take any answers we give and turn them around, then spit them back out. Well, you’ve failed. I can tell you are actually just a program running in senseless loops. Not a bad try though.
Thats a nice mission statement. hardly a pragmatic or implimentable solution to the problems you cited.
Primary schools do teach practical matters such as reading, riting and Rithmetic. I believe hormones seem to block the brains willingness to communicate with any person they cant form a relationship with.
Teach How to think?? Gooood luck on that one. Any formalized education on “how to think” would instantly be rejected by one parental faction or another. Hell, we were at odds over 2 little words not too long ago. remember the ruckus over the phrase “under God”? How do you suggest we teach youngsters how to think?
and how is teaching young minds to work with their hands going to aid them when they become laywers, chemists, scientists, philosophers and business majors?
who would decide (and how) a student is more apt to do one thing or another. At what age do we test these little ones to see if they are better suited to become burger jockeys or politician? Is an aptitude in math and science really a sign that he becomes a good scientist or will he burn out 2 years past high school? What if he really is good in math but he hates it?
Heres a survival skill: Deal with what you have. If you dont like it, do something to change it. If it dont work, try something else. Keep trying until you succeed. Its what you get out of the system thats important not the system itself.
I need statistics to back up the theory that teachers generally go through the process I have described?
Obviously, they did not “live” in these schools all their lives. I know they at least left to sleep and buy groceries. :rolleyes: You are taking what I’ve said way too far.
Shall I now need to produce a statistic on what percentage of “shelteredness” say, overly protected children have - If I were to discuss such a topic?
Then this site has won one battle in its ongoing war against Ignorance.
And, yes, you really do need statistics to back up assertions such as “most XXX have XXX.” That’s what’s known as proof of your assertion.
As to your veiled attempt at calling me a sheltered child: Not even a nice try. I, for one, have already retired from one career and am pursuing a degree in what strikes me as a very rewarding field.
p.s. to the OP: The site management, tends to frown on changing a peson’s words, or leaving them out without indicating so, when you quote them here. I’ll be magnanimous and give you a pass on it this time because, well, because I really don’t think you understand the concept. Do it to one more posting of mine, though, and you’ll be invited to the Pit.
You left them out without the traditional indication. As I said, I’m giving you a pass on it this time because I didn’t think you understand the concept. Now I’m sure you don’t.
I’m a liberal now? Bwahahhahahahahahahahahahahahah {pause for breath} Bwahahhahahahahahahahahahahahah!
Uppity? You actually called me uppity? Bwahahhahahahahahahahahahahahah {pause for breath} Bwahahhahahahahahahahahahahahah!
Feel free to do a site search here and you might find out something.
If you could just kindly show what you are referring to, we can move on.
Please.
**
i c
Naw, I dunno if you’re liberal or not. I usually use the word “lib” in a kind of slang sense. I have no idea what your political offiliations are. I associate the term “lib” with pretty much anyone who displays certain qualities that you have above. It’s kind of silly. Linguistics is quite a cunundrum sometimes.