What is going on in our schools?

Okay, then, let’s throw out the planets in the solar system, since we can reasonably assume that no one will travel there. We’ll just limit ourselves to the planet Earth.

So now, you are going to plan your syllabus around where the 180 students you teach might possibly visit. How do you know this? How do you have any idea where the future will take these people? Or do you simply assume, “Well, hardly anyone visits Africa, so we can discard Africa. I seriously doubt these people will visit China or Tibet, so we can eliminate those. Pakistan and India? Not quite vacation spots, they’re gone. The Middle East? Pah! They’re out.”

So we’ve successfully eliminated several places that are very important in world events at the moment because we think those kids might never visit them. We can keep playing this game, and soon we’re back where we started, where American kids only learn about America and maybe a little bit of Europe.

Yes, education by lowest common denominator is fantastic!

And let’s not stop at Geography. We can pretty much assume that no one needs to know any math beyond addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division. For English classes, no one really needs to read anything longer than a magazine or write anything longer than an E-mail. It’s doubtful if anything that will affect these kids personally happened before 1950 (if that long ago). How many of them will become athletes? Bah, Phys Ed could be taken down to simply “brush your teeth” and 30 minutes on the exercise bike once a week or so.

Under this plan, you could get a high school diploma in about six months or so, easy! Yeah, there’s some people who may want to learn more, but they can do that on their own without wasting our valuable time on things that will never actually intersect our lives. Education, after all, isn’t about broadening our horizons or increasing our opportunities, it’s about building a tiny little shell around us that we can then inhabit for the rest of our lives.

Good call.

Surprisingly, it appears that young people in the US are almost TWICE as likely to commit suicide than in Japan.

At least, according to this link: <http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~tanaka/m/youth_suicide.txt>


According to the Statistical Abstracts of the United States: 1994, Table No. 1360, which notes its source as WHO (1989-1991).

The numbers given in the table:

suicide rates (per 1000,000) for 15 to 24 years old.
	USA   (1989)	male: 22.2   female: 4.2
	Japan (1991)	male:  9.1   female: 4.7

I know that people who commit suicide in Japan are more likely to be middle-aged men, not young kids. But I didn’t expect this. Now that I think about it, I recall stories of a kid committing suicide - and it would be on the news for literally weeks on end. Maybe akin to how stupid jury decisions make big news in the US precisely because they aren’t really all that common?

I am going to have to do some more digging to see if this data is correct.

Legomancer, you are twisting my words and extrapolating to ridiculous conclusions I did not draw and would not agree with. My point is that there is a lot more information than can possibly be taught. Someone has to decide which things are taught in the limited time available. I say that the usefulness of the information is one good criterion. Are you suggesting that usefulness should not be considered when deciding what to teach?

Nowhere do I say that education should be shortened to include only very useful information.

So, don’t just criticize - what criteria would you use to determine what makes the syllabus and what doesn’t?

I was talking with an old college friend this afternoon and he hit me with a most disturbing comment. I told him that after I retire in 7 years, I want to get my teaching credentials and teach either math or physics in high school. He said I should teach Honors level classes ONLY at a small private school. Otherwise I’d be wasting my time.

How cynical and shortsighted! As if my decision to teach included the requirement that it be as easy as possible on me. As if mere average kids in public schools were not worthy of me. At least that was his tone.

I most certainly don’t consider myself to be the be all and end all of education - heck, I haven’t stood in front of a classroom in 17 years - but I like to think that I’ll be a good teacher and I think I should go to a school that needs good teachers. We’ll see what happens when the time comes. But it bothered me that he would have such an attitude - how are school going to get any better if we ignore the ones that need the most help?

So, let me get this straight. You expect me (and millions like me) to pay high property taxes (which is how schools are funded here) and when I want to send my kids to private school I have to pay that tutition (with no tax breaks or writes offs) yet somebody who isn’t able to afford to send their kids to private school should get to anyway? FUCK THAT!! :mad:

My wife and I went without so our kids could go to these schools! We drove cheaper cars and worked longer hours. We sacrificed!
Why should someone elses kids get to go free? Life isn’t fair! If a parent can’t afford the best for their kid my tax dollars shouldn’t be used to even things up. Lot’s and lots of people went to public school and ended up fine. Including me. But the decision to send ones children to private schools includes the ability to be able to pay for it.
Apparently you disagree. What poor kids would you let go, and who would you discriminate against and say they couldn’t go?

My kids want to go to Ivy League colleges. We can’t afford that, so they went/go to smaller colleges. Or would you rather spend your tax dollars so they can go to Yale? I didn’t think so.:stuck_out_tongue:

Here’s a better idea. Since you are the one who has decided that usefulness is the criteria, why not define your terms? What do you mean by useful? Give me an example of what you think is useful and what you think isn’t. I’m not the one throwing away information because it’s not useful, so I don’t believe I need to decide what is. We already know that the order of the planets isn’t useful - what else would you eliminate and what would you be eliminating it in favor of?

I am not saying anything to that effect. What I was asking is, what business is it of yours who goes to what school? Yeah, bitch about property taxes; but maybe you should be more concerned about the fact that the tax money isn’t being spent in a way that would make the public schools in your community viable for your children.

**

Many public schools are woefully underfunded and overcrowded. I don’t know if the “voucher” students at your children’s school would otherwise be going to such schools, but if they are…can’t you give them, and their parents, the benefit of the doubt that the parents want the best for the children, just as you do for yours? There are plenty of non-shameful reasons why a family wouldn’t be able to afford private school on their own. Illness. Death of a wage-earning parents. Parents themselves lack a degree because they couldn’t get help when they needed it. But they could still be honest, sincere people who don’t want their children stuck in the same poverty loop all their lives. Please don’t assume all “voucher” students are freeloaders, or the offspring thereof.

**

Any kid who could score high enough on an evaluation, and convince admissions counselors that they both wanted and needed the advantage.

Hold your fire a moment, pkbites, because there’s something I need to know, and be able to factor in to your response. When you say you don’t want your kids to go to school with “bad kids”, are you referring to specific students who have caused (a) problem(s)? Or is it just a general principle?

I would also like you to factor into this post the fact that I don’t like the voucher system either. The problem is with the public schools; they should be good enough that people don’t feel they have to send their kids elsewhere. Free-lunching students into public schools doesn’t help enough people.

But you know what? I ate the free lunch (literally, not figuratively) for a while, and I got just as much nutrients out of it as the people who paid. So I don’t think anyone’s money went down a drain there.

**

Well, there are scholarships :stuck_out_tongue: right back at you. But that’s part of what I’m getting at. By the time a student is applying to college, the die has already been cast. It’s difficult/impossible to get into college/Ivy League college if you’ve had a poor high school education. It’s also difficult to do well in high school if you’ve had a poor education in elementary and middle school. Again I say, I don’t like vouchers, but if they’re for elementary students, I’d tell them and their parents to take the chance that’s being offered. Set a good foundation at any cost, whether it’s money or pride.

As far as resources:

National Geographic. My parents have had a subscription to it since before I was born, and I am so glad that I had that lying around. I also had a subscription to the kids magazine for a while. Even now, every month there is at least one thing that I want to read. And the fold-out maps are awsome – I learned at least the vague locations of a lot of stuff just from messing around with those maps.

And your answer to this is to take tax money away from the public schools and use it to fund private schools?:eek:
yeah, that will help fix public schools.:rolleyes:

And what about private schools that are religious? You believe that my tax dollars should be used to pay tutition to a religious organization?:eek:

Do you think tax dollars should be used in corporate welfare? Corporations provide jobs, so why not?

How about tax dollars to build stadiums? stadiums provide jobs to the under privilaged.

Why do you want to use tax dollars to fund private and/or religious institutions? This amounts to socialism.

Sure it sucks that some riff-raff have kids and can’t afford to raise them in style. Sure it sucks that some people are hard working but still can’t afford some luxary things for their kids. Sure it sucks that some people are good people but get tough breaks. But that’s life. And life’s a bitch. It is not appropriate to use tax money to send kids to private school. especially if that school is religious based! You want poor kids to go to private school? Set up a foundation or scholarship program. (they already exist. So? set up another one). But leave our tax dollars to pay for public schools! Vouchers are bad, and I look to the day they’re outlawed!

lost all faith in the american school system when i took the SAT at 14.

i got 1390.
800 verbal.
590 maths.

and i KNOW that i, at 14, having only moderate mathematical skills should not be doing better than 75% of college-bound americans.
i thought the verbal quiz was a joke, so i guess the 800 was probably ok.

something just doesn’t figure.

I scored 560 on the math portion of the SAT, irishgirl… after having failed math three years in a row. That always bothered me, too. I knew dick about math, and should have scored much lower.

I remember we were having some sort of oral quiz game in 11th grade American history, and I was doing extremely well. One girl in my class said, “Oh, that’s just because she reads!” And my teacher said, “Exactly.”

I clearly stated in my earlier post that I don’t like the voucher system either. It’s not “my” answer, and I know (and don’t like) that it won’t fix public schools.

**

The separation of church and state prevents that.

**

Can’t comment: don’t know enough about corporations.

**

That’s happening anyway, and it’s not germane to this discussion.

**

What I objected to was your elistist attitude. Vouchers are a band-aid, and not the most appropriate use of tax money. I’m not defending vouchers. I am defending these students whom you write off as “bad kids”.

I understand that you resent the way the system is run. I don’t, however, understand why you’re directing your ire at the students who benefit from it. Your use of the term “riff-raff” reflects badly on you. IMHO, of course.

You still haven’t given your definition of a “bad kid”. Do you base a child’s worth solely on their parents’ earning power? If those parents hit the number tomorrow for 100 mil, and were then able to pay for the children’s education outright, would you reclassify them as “good kids”?

I’m 47 and attended grade school in St. Louis Mo. In the 5th grade, my teacher (a very liberal-arts type who I loved) handed me the keys to the chemical supply room and told me to make some interesting experiments for the class.
I made several over the next few weeks, how to get iodine out of clothes, simple things that she enjoyed as much as the students. Like most boys, my REAL interest in chemistry was limited to things that went BOOM. I vividly remember marching in on the "science day"as she called it and telling her that todays experiment would be manufacturing nitrocellulose. She smiled and nodded wisely while an 11 year old boy brought bottles of concentrated Nitric and sulphuric acid into the class, mixed them, and added cotton.
The resulting reaction filled the classroom with a hellish yellow gas that drove everyone into the hallway and permanently stained the walls yellow.
She never even asked what nitrocellulose might be, just assumed it was some harmless substance from the mysterious world of chemistry. In reality I could have blinded/burned the students, (including me) damaged the property, God knows what else.
At the time I thought it was funny but in retrospect it gives me cold chills. That woman was expected to teach a subject with ZERO prior training or even general information. She really had no idea what I was doing or even what chemicals she had given me access to.

Regards.

Testy

I was a product of the American education system, and one from California, which apparently is a pretty low rung on the ladder last time I checked.

I turned out fine. I don’t know what ratio you would be able to make as a comprimise between the school’s capacity to teach and the student’s willingness to learn.

I was one of those ‘smart but lazy’ types who could have probably gotten straight A’s if I really worked hard at it, but unfortunately I was never able to motivate myself. I was either pressured too hard, or mired too deeply in low self-esteem. I was looked upon with revulsion by the slackers who thought I was wasting my time ‘learning’ and snubbed by the smarties who thought me lazy/incompetent to be enjoying a summer afternoon riding a bicycle instead of cramming for a pre-pre-pre-PSAT (I never got around to taking the SAT’s by the way). So I didn’t really fit in school, but I did well more or less.

One reason school helped me be/stay knowlegeable is a love of reading. This is one thing I see sorely lacking in today’s youth. With more and more mass media, books are outdated, old, passe it seems. You know what I used to do before I went to bed? I’d read the encyclopedia. Thats right, volume A to volume Z in two weeks. People who love to learn, will succeed- I did.

But how many kids never learn that it’s possible to love to learn? I think the real world is usually very different than Matilda. The learning process and love of learning are things that need to be jump-started in kids, IMO.

Someone on the first page put it best when they said it’s a parent’s responsibility to send a student to school, not just a kid.

Hallelujah! BTW, it is almost impossible to retain a student at their current grade level. It basically has to be the idea of the parents, and guess how many parents are going to admit that maybe their kid needs a little extra time to learn the basics?

If you or your spouse/SO don’t spend at least one day a month in your children’s classrooms as a volunteer or just observing, then you have no right to complain. And yes, children do lie about having “no homework tonight.” Check with the teacher, if you have to. Do your job. Be a parent and a role model. Ragging about teachers and the education system in front of your kids will accomplish all sorts of negative feedback. Schools may be sub-par on a number of issues, but education is not solely the responsibility of the teacher.

Oh, I love this anecdote. :slight_smile:

I attribute my relative academic success to being an early reader (my parents and older sisters read to me a lot, and I could read well at age 4). Which is also why I can’t comprehend the mindset of those who scorn those who read. God forbid you should enjoy something that doesn’t involve explosions and flashing lights. :rolleyes:

In grade 6, we had to take a standardize test. I remember it mostly because of the funny shape of the graph that came back. It tested our skills in a bunch of different areas, and charted them by percentile. Mine was 98, 99, 97, 99, 98, 52, 99, 99, like that.

The 52 was math. After that I had two truly horrible math teachers in a row in Gr. 7 & 8, failed it first semester in Gr. 9 and had an amazing teacher the second semester, followed by a dud, but by the time I hit Grade 12 I was still in algebra and by an odd coincidence my final grade was a 62, which was exactly the lowest number I needed to put my algebra mark into the “we don’t care” category in the university’s admissions structure. It didn’t screw up the average I had in any of my other classes. I remember the guy who gave it to me fondly to this day, because I’m pretty sure I didn’t get the 85% I would have needed on the final to get that grade. I’m also pretty sure he knew I’d never voluntarily try to do anything involving numbers ever again.

I also remember high school English. God I hated that. They’d hand out a book, and I’d read it that night, and I’d have to sit there and wait for months until they handed out the test. I read Chaucer’s prologue to “The Canterbury Tales”. It was nice to listen to the tape of it being read in Middle English, the dude had a good voice and the accent was interesting. Once. The second time not so much, and I could really have done without the recording of him reading it in modern English, or the teacher reading it to us, or us reading it aloud in turn. Now, my Grade 11 English teacher’s presentation of “The Miller’s Tale”, complete with transparencies for the overhead projector, that’s a different story.

In Grade 8, I had a teacher who understood. She handed out John Wyndam’s “The Chrysalids”, and I read it that night, and we talked about it (just her and me) the next day, and while she was doing whatever she was doing with the class I read the book I’d brought. When she asked me a question, I answered it, and when the test came I took it.

Then came Grade 9. Lord of the Flies.

I’d read it. A few times. The teacher handed it out, and I read it again. The next day I cracked my other book open under the desk and she called me on it, told me to pay attention. I explained that I’d read “Lord of the Flies” a few times and would be ready for the test whenever she handed it out.

Apparently, she didn’t believe me. We argued a bit, had different interpretations of the subtext, and basically entertained the whole class until she pulled rank. I went and saw the principal. Corporal punishment can be fun, but only among consenting adults.

I returned to class, and boy, let me tell you, I paid attention. I listened to every word she said, and asked a lot of questions. I asked for clarification whenever she managed a malapropism or a spelling error. I suggested alternate interpretations, and could back them up with text. I was the most attentive and interested student she could ever have wished for, in the “Monkey’s Paw” sense.

I did everything within my power to drive her completely insane without ever giving her anything she could use as a reasonable excuse to discipline me.

Then came the semester break, and parent-teacher conferences.

My parents are well aware of what an asshole I can be when I want to, but they would definitely call someone on a complaint that was based on my knowing the material better than the teacher. My high 90’s mark on the test probably helped.

Day one, second semester, she handed out the book (Julius Caesar), and when she got to the front of the classroom and started to talk I slipped my current novel out of my backpack and opened it under the desk. She didn’t say anything. For the rest of the semester, I read what I wanted to and she taught what she wanted to and I wrote the exams when she handed them out.

I could have used a little help in the math department, and I managed just fine with the English when they’d leave me the hell alone. There were kids in my math classes who could do work well above the level of the teacher without breaking a sweat but would summarize “The Diary of Anne Frank” as “A girl gets caught hiding in an attic”, and I bet they felt the same way. There were some who could do both, and some who couldn’t spell their names right if you gave them 4 out of 2 chances.

Teachers have a lousy job, they have to work within the system. Administrators can’t design a system that’s going to account for individual differences because they have to make it mostly work for most of the people most of the time. You lose the ends of the bell curve that way.

You wind up with the joke about the guy in the ten items or less line with 15 items, he’s either a Harvard student who can’t count or an MIT student who can’t read.

Or a high school graduate who can’t do either.