Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I agree with much of what is posted.
Most Americans just aren't educated in Finance or Economics.
Heck, even personal finance basics (home mortgages, credit cards) elude a large portion of the population.
America's ignorance can be blamed on the internet and education system.
America's ignorance can be blamed on the internet and education system.
And yet our current system of public-funded education was intended to bring 'up' our nation's literacy.
One of the fraternities that I am a member of was very instrumental in the 1920's, in pushing for the idea of a nation wide system of government funded [and controlled] education. And in the 1930's taking that idea and pushing it into reality. To this day, they are very proud of that push and how 'wonderful' it is to live in a land where our taxes pay for a Federally regulated 'education'.
This is not a issue of federally funded education. Europe, Asia and every where else has federally funded education, yet their systems are better than ours. We need to ask ourselves, why is that. Before the smart/dumb crowd chimes in, I am not talking about higher education. I am speaking of k-12
So to recap its not a issue of federal funded or not, there is a inherent flaw in our system.
I believe it's in the curriculum and placement in the classroom. When I went to school we took placement tests and were put in classes according to the results. AP type curriculum took place in one class, normal curriculum in the second and remedial with extra help in the third.
We all managed to progress with an occasional kid here and there left back or had to attend summer school.
These days, placement is a stigma. All kids are equal and everyone should go to college. Well with a mixed class of aptitude, you can only teach to the lowest common denominator. This leaves many kids bored, antsy and unchallenged.
bingo, curriculum! I was a teacher for a sort while and saw a study on math classes in a certain asian country as opposed to how we teach math. It was like night and day. The entire system needs a colon cleanser.
bingo, curriculum! I was a teacher for a sort while and saw a study on math classes in a certain asian country as opposed to how we teach math. It was like night and day. The entire system needs a colon cleanser.
Same with English/Reading curriculum, lower grades are taught with boring, unchallenging textbooks. At least when I was in grade school that's how it was. "See Spot run" doesn't inspire much enthusiasm.
I've read that children whose parents read to them do better at reading. So there's something to be said for parents taking an active role in educating their kids.
Somehow though...I think its expectations and emphasis...and personal responsibility. If your parents demand good grades, you are more likely to learn more while in school and learn self-discipline. The value that's put on education at home is a big influence.
I don't have kids, so I don't really know the current problems. Though I've heard my (ex) coworkers complain about their children's teachers/schools enough to realize that just throwing tax dollars at schools doesn't solve anything. Also looking at demographic numbers...how much is spent per child in a district and what the results are...higher $ don't = better grades.
Same with English/Reading curriculum, lower grades are taught with boring, unchallenging textbooks. At least when I was in grade school that's how it was. "See Spot run" doesn't inspire much enthusiasm.
I've read that children whose parents read to them do better at reading. So there's something to be said for parents taking an active role in educating their kids.
Somehow though...I think its expectations and emphasis...and personal responsibility. If your parents demand good grades, you are more likely to learn more while in school and learn self-discipline. The value that's put on education at home is a big influence.
Which is largely why home schooled children are in such high demand in colleges.
The more that you remove big government from the education equation, the better our children can do.
If one child can only sit and work for 45 minutes, until he needs to run and play for 10 minutes; an unstructured environment allows that. While another child may need to read out loud, before he can understand what is being presented to him. Each child may need some slightly different learning methods.
Locking step in a classroom with 28 other children does not allow that.
The last foster children that we had were being public schooled, and at their elementary school there were no outside play-times. The requirements handed down to that school district were such that every minute had to be documented under some form of curriculum. The children formed lines and walked single file into the multi-purpose room twice each day, for group physical activities designed to teach various things. That is today's replacement for what I had as 'recess' periods.
Same with English/Reading curriculum, lower grades are taught with boring, unchallenging textbooks. At least when I was in grade school that's how it was. "See Spot run" doesn't inspire much enthusiasm.
I've read that children whose parents read to them do better at reading. So there's something to be said for parents taking an active role in educating their kids.
Somehow though...I think its expectations and emphasis...and personal responsibility. If your parents demand good grades, you are more likely to learn more while in school and learn self-discipline. The value that's put on education at home is a big influence.
I don't have kids, so I don't really know the current problems. Though I've heard my (ex) coworkers complain about their children's teachers/schools enough to realize that just throwing tax dollars at schools doesn't solve anything. Also looking at demographic numbers...how much is spent per child in a district and what the results are...higher $ don't = better grades.
you are definitely right, parents are just as much to blame as poor curriculum. I have seen kids do the most ridiculous things in school and parents don't bat a eye lash or even seem to car. Seems they send their kids to school for more of a baby sitting service while they go to work rather than for them to learn.
I believe it's in the curriculum and placement in the classroom. When I went to school we took placement tests and were put in classes according to the results. AP type curriculum took place in one class, normal curriculum in the second and remedial with extra help in the third.
We all managed to progress with an occasional kid here and there left back or had to attend summer school.
These days, placement is a stigma. All kids are equal and everyone should go to college. Well with a mixed class of aptitude, you can only teach to the lowest common denominator. This leaves many kids bored, antsy and unchallenged.
You are SO right!!!! Ability groupings are necessary but lambasted as a "stigma" these days. AP courses used to have criteria for admission until even the College Board decided that ALL students should have the opportunity to try them, sigh.
I taught AP English III and IV courses, along with regular English. When the College Board did this, it made the situation untenable. The school decided that if the parents wanted their kids in AP classes, then they had to be placed in AP classes. I wound up with several students in each class who didn't have the ability or the work ethic and their parents insisted they had to be in AP classes for the "status." The kids were in over their heads and would disrupt out of frustration and then the parents would be after ME because their kids were failing the courses. It was awful!
Conversely, I entirely sympathized with the students whose post-high school plans were vocational in nature. They were made to feel second-class by the system. They LOVED carpentry, welding, automotive technology and had bright futures in these fields! What on Earth is wrong with that?! I listened to and agreed with their frustrations but told them that to do what they wanted later, they simply had to play the game and go along now. Good training for life, that, LOL! Happily, they appreciated my honesty and cooperated.
I like the British method. Students are tested at age 11 (well, maybe that needs to be raised to 13 or 14) to determine what academic pathway they would follow. Those who are college bound are placed in the schools and curriculae that will prepare them for university. Those whose interests are vocational are similarly prepared and, when they are 16, they begin working in the fields they choose. The students are not warehoused and given generally the same education until they are 18.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
