What is the cause of the problem with the American education system?
89 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Sickle;35422493]There needs to be a focus on science from the FIRST year children are at school. They should be able to find the area of a sphere in forth grade. They should be doing algebra as soon as possible.[/QUOTE]
I agree that education should be based more on math and science, and really just logical thinking in general. If schools focused on math, I'm sure kids could be doing Algebra by sixth grade (some of them already are).
[editline]4th April 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=prooboo;35435597]No, there shouldnt be a required curriculum. Students should choose what they want to learn[/QUOTE]
if kids could choose what they learn, most kids would learn diddly-squat. Most kids don't realize the value of education until it's too late.
[QUOTE=The Kakistocrat;35435726]if kids could choose what they learn, most kids would learn diddly-squat.[/quote]
1. Most kids are already learning nothing
2. they would be learning exactly what they want to learn. I took an AP US history class not because I wanted it to appear on some college application, but because I'm interested in US history and don't want the No Child Left Behind reader's digest version. On the flip side, if I had the choice I wouldn't take chemistry, physics or earth science, but I would definitely retake biology if given the chance (though the "no homework" teacher that taught it doesn't work at my school anymore and the rest of the science department assigns homework)
[quote]Most kids don't realize the value of education until it's too late.[/QUOTE]
Most kids don't realize the value of a [I]diploma[/I] until it's too late. First of all, you can get a perfectly good education without going to school. Second of all, a lot of people go throughout life without ever using the information they were taught in chemistry, US History, or other academic classes, even though they received all A's to get their diploma. What you know and what you really learn will be born out of necessity or interest. Everything else you learn in school will either be file away to forget years from now or immediately forgotten to move on to the next subject. You can't honestly expect an artist to memorize their trig tables unless they somehow need it in art or are truly interested in studying trigonometry.
What about an aptitude test of some kind to determine what classes a student should get?
[QUOTE=Penguin-Man;35435915]What about an aptitude test of some kind to determine what classes a student should get?[/QUOTE]
Why should one's skill determine what they learn?
[QUOTE=prooboo;35436010]Why should one's skill determine what they learn?[/QUOTE]
An aptitude test would address the concern that if students were granted total freedom to choose what they learn, that some would opt to not learn anything and otherwise drop out. (However, I reason that the 'i-hate-school' mentality is the result of this shitty education system, and contend that no normal person would deny themselves the chance to be educated in something that they are interested in) The resulting classes would have some degree of suitability to the student, as well as preventing students from picking classes for trivial reasons (e.g. to be with their friends or peer-pressure)
In all honesty, I would appreciate a system where students were completely free to choose what they learn. Beyond the ability to reason and logical thinking skills, nothing should be mandatory of the student in the education system and I feel that students and human beings in general have an innate desire to do something productive (to put it vaguely) and if they are given the choice to learn what they want, that's exactly what they will become--productive, creative, and intelligent. Hell, save the Apt. test for students who can't decide on what classes they want to take.
But freedom is not much without choice. The education system needs some real fucking reforming; among a myriad of other things, I'd like to see a larger variety of more interesting and challenging subjects and of course, more freedom and choice for students in regards as to what they learn.
[QUOTE=Penguin-Man;35437109]An aptitude test would address the concern that if students were granted total freedom to choose what they learn, that some would opt to not learn anything and otherwise drop out.[/quote]
Well what's wrong with that? If they don't want to do something why make them do something?
I bet that kids would listen to the subject of trigonometry if it were more about how much a bullet curved in an action film than a plain ordinary triangle. I don't have an issue with this, but others see those subjects as pointless since they aren't intriguing to learn. I personally think that subjects need to be interesting if they want most people to learn them.
not enough black history week
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("Shitpost" - Starpluck))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=prooboo;35435597]No, there shouldnt be a required curriculum. Students should choose what they want to learn[/QUOTE]
No they shouldn't. I'm glad you don't head the education board, we'd be fucked.
They should be accepted into math at a young age, and required to do science and a second language as well as history, anything other than that should be a choice.
[QUOTE=Sickle;35451508]No they shouldn't. I'm glad you don't head the education board, we'd be fucked.
They should be accepted into math at a young age, and required to do science and a second language as well as history, anything other than that should be a choice.[/QUOTE]
Not everybody cares about science or history, and not everybody cares to learn another language. if a student doesnt care about a subject they wont find meaning in it, they wont truly understand it, and they wont really be learning anything other than the subliminal status-quo connotations that come with spending a large portion of your developmental years in a state-sponsored program.
I think the major problem is that kids can just mosey on through school, not caring about F's. Bad parenting also makes up a big chunk of it, "Oh Billy, you got an F on your history test, you better try harder next time."
I think that the current school system is old-school, while everyone is new-school. We need technology embedded within out schools. I also think that we need to change [I]what[/I] people learn.
[QUOTE=areolop;35472331]I think that the current school system is old-school, while everyone is new-school. We need technology embedded within out schools. I also think that we need to change [I]what[/I] people learn.[/QUOTE]
We got interactive smart boards in my school, shit ton of laptops, and the economics class is taught entirely electronically.
Same shit, different medium. Technology has nothing to do with what we learn
I heard somewhere that the Rockerfellas had something to do with it. I think it was originally invented to raise lower class worker's skills with our tax money, with no intention of having the kids live their real dreams (during the start of the public schooling industry).
[QUOTE=Secrios;35474503]I heard somewhere that the Rockerfellas had something to do with it. I think it was originally invented to raise lower class worker's skills with our tax money, with no intention of having the kids live their real dreams (during the start of the public schooling industry).[/QUOTE]
I'm pretty sure it's older than that, plus that doesn't explain why actual worker skills are barely taught.
[QUOTE=CoolKingKaso;35444823]I bet that kids would listen to the subject of trigonometry if it were more about how much a bullet curved in an action film than a plain ordinary triangle. I don't have an issue with this, but others see those subjects as pointless since they aren't intriguing to learn. I personally think that subjects need to be interesting if they want most people to learn them.[/QUOTE]
Trying to explain the curving motion of a simple point mass, let alone a bullet without any grounding in basic trigonometry would be a disaster.
Not to bump an old thread, but when we are talking about students not being interested in a particular subject, and that they should be allowed to choose what they take, then the problem is revealed. Schools need to make money and you have to understand that you can't have one teacher teaching a class of 5 students because that is extremely inefficient in terms of turning a profit, so the schools must require students to take a bunch of selected courses. That is my theory though without a lot of explanation.
[QUOTE=tesher07;36060756]Not to bump an old thread, but when we are talking about students not being interested in a particular subject, and that they should be allowed to choose what they take, then the problem is revealed. Schools need to make money and you have to understand that you can't have one teacher teaching a class of 5 students because that is extremely inefficient in terms of turning a profit, so the schools must require students to take a bunch of selected courses. That is my theory though without a lot of explanation.[/QUOTE]
Not to mention students may not choose courses that they'll need, despite not being interested in it.
Personal Finance classes, for example. It's a very important course, but I doubt 100% of students will be interested in taking it.
Parenting and Texas.
Parenting in that parents don't let their kids explore. Parents actively stop their kids from breaking things, scold their kids for making messes and generally instill this idea that asking questions and experimenting with their surroundings is a bad thing. I'm not saying let them stick forks in the electrical outlets, but if they spill some milk or break a vase it's no big deal. Let them figure it out and answer whatever questions you can when they ask. If you don't have the answer, find the answer with them. Authoritative parenting makes kids complacent. They don't get excited by learning new things. Their urge to explore is beaten out of them from a young age. They'll scrape a few knees now and again, but you can't keep them on the couch trying to teach them with a television for their most formative years. They need to have that urge to learn before they can appreciate anything, and it's very difficult to instill that in later years.
Then, when they get to school, this standardized bullshit turns their entire learning experience into a formulaic series of tests. They might memorize the Pythagorean Theorem, but they won't be given the tools to conceptualize how it works. They'll have a formula to memorize with no understanding of [I]why[/I] the formula works, all for the sake of cramming enough trivia into their heads to get a higher arbitrary number on increasingly more complex, arbitrary tests.
Shit, even the English language works on this sort of level. You can memorize all the words you want, but when you start getting into the way in which the words are formed, which prefixes and suffixes mean what and so-forth, you don't [I]need[/I] to memorize words anymore. You can make them intuitively from the words you know. Kids would naturally want to learn this shit if we would allow them to go down that path, rather than trying to cram whatever arbitrary essentials we come up with into their little heads.
Texas because their backward bullshit dominates our teaching materials.
It seems that as the "lazy technology" has progressed, the lazy attitudes have grown. Children today are far too distracted to give a shit about history and general education. You could say that kids have always been like this, but it's become more noticeable in today's system.
A bad education is a mixture of many causes. I'll list what I can and my reasons for listing them:
1. Bad parenting
- This is an obvious first choice. A bad upbringing leads to problems that extend beyond just how well one does in school.
2. Lack of motivation/applicability (if that's a word)
- The media doesn't report on advances in science and technology as much as it should. Our culture has grown to accept the products of science yet never really encourages children to explore and be curious. Our government only invests in science when there is a specific problem to be solved, rather than what there is to be discovered. Reactive funding rather than proactive. Read Neil Tyson's Space Chronicles, this is a point that he discusses.
3. Curriculum / Tests
- "Learn A, B, and C to pass the test". This does not fan the flames of curiosity, and it is a lazy approach to teaching. Learning a subject should not be about memorization of facts, but rather inspiring those to look into the subject outside of the classroom / on their own time. Teach kids to teach themselves by keeping the subject interesting and stress-free.
4. Bad Teachers
- Mostly the same reasons as #3. A bad teacher can ruin a subject for a person.
That "No Child Left Behind" politically correct bullshit is to blame. Also, soccer moms.
My problem with school is there's a lot of pointless busy-work that accomplishes nothing and wastes my time, but as I grow older that seems to be a problem with the entire world in general, not just public school.
I think it comes down to this...
Student A: Thinks/knows the material is important and strives to do their best at it
Student B: Knows the material isn't very important, but realizes its significance in the grand scheme and makes an effort
Student C: Thinks/knows the material is not important, and therefore does not make an effort
Student D: Genuinely struggles with the material
I feel like America has a whole lot of student C. It's a cultural thing. I wouldn't blame the schools for it. Just a lot of ignorant kids who think they know whats best.
[QUOTE=Banhfunbags;35299985]Most students don't want to go to school because they're forced to learn things that they don't care about. I think that's the reason why.
What I mean is like, some people just don't want to go to school, while others want to go to school but want to learn something they care about. For example, one of my friends wants to learn architecture stuff, but my school doesn't offer any classes on that, and we're forced to take a bunch of unnecessary classes like History in order to graduate.
(I hope I didn't completely miss the debate topic)[/QUOTE]
I agree in some sense but, at least for me, it is also the difficulty of the classes or how effectively the materials teach it. We have a good teacher but we have pretty lame materials and budget so it gets really hard for a teacher to be very effective and interesting.
There's more than one cause in my mind, but a lot of it has to do with seeing students as a product + numbers (grades) rather than a participant. They seem to be more focused on the outcome than the process. Isn't education about learning, and isn't that a process?
It's due to a lack of public funding, as well as a lack of efficient spending of this funding.
I don't live in the U.S and I'm not entirely sure how it works, but in Sweden we don't get to pick our classes from 1-9th grade, and we only get to pick a few in the later years.
And what made me dislike parts of school was the fact that I was forced to take art classes, home economics and had to take "crafts" basically, make stuff out of wood and textiles.
Extremely boring, no motivation at all, surprisingly enough, I failed all 3 of them while doing well in all other areas of school.
I think education needs to be made fun, and students need to be able to "choose" more, plan their shit by themselves and actually stick to it.
Rather than writing essays and papers I'd much rather have tests, since I always do extremely well on tests, but not as well on papers.
I think it's a bunch of things. Funding is a big one. My schools were underfunded, and what they did get almost always went to the jocks. The teachers had to make do with crashy Pentium 2 Dells(Mind this was as late as 2008) while the football team got shiny new equipment every other week. Another part is how they try to do EVERYTHING. They forget they're a school, they get it in their head that they need to teach the kids how to dress, how to eat, how to walk in a straight line, etc etc. These are not things the school exists to teach, these are things the parents are supposed to be teaching. They also tend to force kids to take shit they don't need, which makes them uninterested and unwilling to cooperate. Looking back at my transcripts I can see a clear trend: Forced classes such as math and english I got the bare minimum to get a C in. Classes I opted into I almost always got a 95+ in.
Lastly there's a fair bit of governmental meddling going on. Governments are setting curriculums, governments are holding them ransom(Fuck No Child Left Behind), and they're forcing schools to teach-to-test by making it mandatory to pass a bunch of standardized tests in order to graduate.
[QUOTE=Banhfunbags;35299985]Most students don't want to go to school because they're forced to learn things that they don't care about. I think that's the reason why.
What I mean is like, some people just don't want to go to school, while others want to go to school but want to learn something they care about. For example, one of my friends wants to learn architecture stuff, but my school doesn't offer any classes on that, and we're forced to take a bunch of unnecessary classes like History in order to graduate.
(I hope I didn't completely miss the debate topic)[/QUOTE]
This is why I didn't really give a shit when I was in school. I just didn't see a need for knowledge on when Shakespeare lived and why he stole the plays he stole since that knowledge doesn't help me fix cars or get a job. It's only something someone who's either A: interested in Shakespeare or B: someone who wants to make a living studying that sort of thing would need to know.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.