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.
Being so called highly intelligent is overrated by far. I've know alleged geniuses who would read scientific journals and who live in half way houses.
The first thing that occurred to anyone who understood logic or statistics could be the following: although there may be such a person living in a halfway house and reading journals, for every such person there might be ten-thousand really dumb people living in halfway houses and not reading journals.
The first thing that occurred to anyone who understood logic or statistics could be the following: although there may be such a person living in a halfway house and reading journals, for every such person there might be ten-thousand really dumb people living in halfway houses and not reading journals.
You took my statement about geniuses entirely out of context.
Try again.
"School is much more than learning academic subjects. Its about learning how to work with others. Learning to how to deal with people outside one's immediate family and friends. Learning how to get to a place on time, complete projects on time, etc.
No employer wants to invest lots of money on a genius who hasn't proven he can complete school, get a professional license, etc."
You took my statement about geniuses entirely out of context.
Try again.
"School is much more than learning academic subjects. Its about learning how to work with others. Learning to how to deal with people outside one's immediate family and friends. Learning how to get to a place on time, complete projects on time, etc.
No employer wants to invest lots of money on a genius who hasn't proven he can complete school, get a professional license, etc."
(Reply deleted by the author, HF -- never mind, I just read some of your other posts)
Last edited by Hamish Forbes; 11-09-2013 at 10:23 AM..
NyWriterdude
I was simply postulating that most or in other words the majority of children in our society are remarkably more intelligent than many of us give credit.
We must disagree. I believe school is ONLY for academic pursuit. The extracurricular things are a nice diversion when one`s studies are going well, but getting an education in math, english, spelling, history, etc. are essential to being a good citizen who is functionally capable of taking care of him or her self.
The type of apprenticeship I was thinking about would be to just go to work for someone even if it is sweeping floors and work your way up with the understanding you would be given instruction in the employers trade. One doesn`t have to attend high school or university to learn the mathematics or business necessary to become a machinist say or a plumber. And this in no way casts aspersions on these trades. The guys I know who are machinists and plumbers make good money. Personally I think trades are the best thing going for many of us.
Of course many would not be selected as apprentices but then, well, they could go back to school couldn`t they. Or do neither and stay satisfied with a low paying job as long as he or she was willing to sell themselves so cheaply. Many many people are not at a stage to pursue their education at a certain age just because a school district or government says so and I believe our determination to force people to a minimum level only sets the bar low for those who might otherwise excel in their studies.
I do think we should make available publicly a program to say the 8th grade from which a youngster would learn history, english, math to trigonometry or precalculus, and learn how to balance his/her own checkbook and make a budget etc. Making this available would not mean one had to attend, just that one could attend for free if he or she so wished (either on their own or through parental "persuasion"). Compulsory education is the bedrock of quotas which are not meant to educate but to provide justification for more money.
travric
I agree with you wholeheartedly about the parents responsibility to motivate the youngster to learn. But even though my parent tried to motivate me through example, threats, and who knows what else, ultimately it was my decision to do so poorly in school. And I know that many youngsters today are just there to get by.
Emigrations
I absolutey agree this education thing is a team effort. I also know that no matter how hard the other members of the team are pulling for you that you (or in my case me) and you alone determine your success. I think the condition of some municipalities' school systems are very very sad. But the young people who attend schools will either take care of them or destroy them. Especially now day with no real way to enforce discipline on children without being taken to task.
I know many would miss out on school given the choice but I also think of those who could then attend school of their own desire and truly get an education that would make them much better prepared to enter the world as functioning citizens.
I realize we all don`t agree on much but we do share the commonality of concern for our younger citzens' educations and that is a starting place to help them succeed. Thanks for reading and pondering my contribution.
I live near starman71 and received what I would call a low quality education aside from a handful of exceptional teachers. Much of our student body was "redneck" and the parents never encouraged education with many even viewing it with contempt. Some of my graduating class did very well, many others are incarcerated or dead due to the high rates of drug abuse and violence here in Tennessee. Students were "socially promoted" and I knew several that were still functionally illiterate upon graduation. With probably less than a handful of exceptions, you could have predicted who would have gone where in their senior year of high school.
My parents always placed an emphasis on my education and had college educations themselves. They taught me to read well early, which gave me a leg up early in school. I was in the gifted programs throughout K-12, but there was nothing in the organized curriculum to challenge me. Schools in poor, violent areas often don't have the resources to properly challenge gifted students, but are compelled to "teach to the test", so the effort and funds go to raising the bottom to some marginal level of functionality, instead of challenging the top to reach its potential.
When I moved from TN to IA, it was very sobering to realize how much better educated the average high school graduate I worked with was compared to the average high school graduate here in Appalachia. Schools in Iowa are very good overall. Most of the populace there is literate, has graduated high school, and not addicted to drugs - something you can't say about where I'm from.
I was very curious and read a lot on my own, chatted with a lot of strangers on the internet, listened to unusual music, and kind of pushed the envelope socially when I was in middle and high school (1998-2004). This kept me immersed in fresh ideas and experiences that the average local resident didn't bother to seek out. I also had probably a half dozen excellent high school teachers who went outside the classroom guidelines to challenge the students. Most of these were older (late baby boomers - one was 76 in 2002) and have since retired - the younger ones have gone to private education. One of my best teachers remains a good personal friend today and was also a minister. His English assignments were very unstructured and allowed the best and brightest to write freely. The assignments were almost a partnership and collaborative, and a lot of what he taught sticks with me to this day.
You know what is real unequal and dangerous to our future? Spending a great of education dollars and resouces on the low end, and cheating the kids in the middle and high end. We need to do a 180 turn--we have to produce more Bill Gates and Woz's, not those who consume resources with little potentional payback to society or the economy. If a kid has a parent who supports and stresses education (even if they are only elementary school grads) that child has a hugh advantage over those who do not. We must reinforce success and resource it appropriately.
The educational system America has is the educational system that America, deep down, WANTS TO have - because it is driven by its very own culture (aka "who America actually is").
I have never read a better, more articulate, and more truth-based book on education.
Yes, inequalities in family background and resources certainly matter but it is far from being THE thing/ THE ONLY THING like this article argues. America doesn't have a monopoly on inequality! Besides, plenty of evidence exists that privileged children in America still do significantly less well academically than their privileged counterparts elsewhere. That should signal something.
Like this book argues ...as long as:
- curriculum itself remains largely mediocre and lacking in rigor across the nation...(a sort of giant "fill in the blanks/circle/underline the right answer on some flying sheet" affair)
- definitions of "difficult" fail to match what top performing nations understand by "difficult"
- people who teach children are themselves not very intellectually gifted and not very well educated, education degrees are relatively easy to get, and teachers, in general, do not count among the "best and brightest" in the nation.
- the perverse marriage between academics and sport persists both institutionally and culturally (ex: teachers who get into "teaching" because what they REALLY want to do is coaching, and a quick certification in teaching math...("because I kinda liked Math when I was in school") can get him to what he ACTUALLY wants to do.
- "parental involvement" continues to be defined as "PTA"-type of involvement or free labor for the school or some extra-curricular entreprise ("volunteering") as opposed to sitting down with your kid at home and actually doing challenging academics with him, in addition to what the school does.
- children fail to get the message from their families, schools, media, the entire society - that RIGOROUS, TOUGH academics is what matters MOST for their life chances (yes, A WHOLE LOT MORE than sports or any any other extra-curriculars),
- most families fail to talk about world affairs or "what not" at the dinner table - in a critical, analytical, curiosity-driven manner, and stick instead to the good ol' "sports" topic, be it as American as "apple pie",
- a good chunk of the population can continue to live in relative material comfort, be it all debt, without having to exert itself with the kind of education that is ALL THAT rigorous (which is the story of this nation in a nut shell) ...
...then the educational system will remain largely what it is.
Unfortunately it would be very hard for this country to "policy" its way to such radical changes because most of it is just culture and we all know Americans can't turn over night, (hey, not even over years!), into Koreans, Finnish or even Poles. Moreover, they don't want to!
Only brutal economic realities/competition might bring a willingness to change the national "self".
Many of us will not even live to see...
Anyway, the book is beyond awesome. You can only gain by reading it.
I also know that no matter how hard the other members of the team are pulling for you that you (or in my case me) and you alone determine your success.
I disagree with this "only you!!" philosophy because it is more ideological than real and it can be highly misleading.
While it is true that at the end of the day NOBODY can score high on the SAT for you and nobody can actually pour education in your head unless YOU are fully invested in the goal of becoming educated - you still need to articulate "why, oh why, would I choose to become SO invested in the goal in the first place?"
There's got to be some real incentive to it. Sheer, personal, good intentions - for the sake of showing what a "strong will" I have - is never enough! Besides, most people are not so cerebral and intellectually inclined to love learning so hard - like they love a beloved hobby.
The social conditions and environment matter MOST because this is what leads to a child BECOMING PERSONALLY INVESTED - or FAILING to become personally invested - in the goal of acquiring that awesome education.
Read more about Koreans and how they've come to study like complete, utter, out-of-control nuts - pushed by their parents and ultimately, the conditions in their larger society.
Do you think they've become "iron children" in only 50 years (from being completely illiterate less than a century ago) just because they wanted to show the world what "super strong will" they have and how "determined" they can be - out of the blue?
No. It's called battle over scarce resources. Impossibility to get a decent life unless you get into a highly competitive, highly selective, yes - elitist higher-ed institution.
What do you call an American who DOESN'T get into Harvard (or equivalent)?
An American who can STILL lead a perfectly nice, materially comfortable life - and who subconsciously says "why bother?".
Heck, compared to many parts of the world, that's what you call an American who doesn't get into any college period!
Why do you think people all over the world have been dreaming to come to America for centuries? Because you could live darn well here without having to torture yourself with elite academics for years in a row.
I am the product of a society where young people could go so far as to consider suicide if they didn't get into that elite university (btw, the only kind there was!) that handed the degree making the difference between a "harsh life" and "a nice life".
I went through tons of years of education - the torturous, hard, picture-less kind - and I had to bring "elite degrees" to the table to be allowed into American grad school; eventually, after this long torture, I got to live the western, middle class lifestyle in America.
Guess who else lives the same lifestyle in my neighborhood?
Tons of native-born Americans who...let's just say had a dramatically different relationship with academics than what I had growing up and whom you could call ANYTHING but 'cerebral' or "brainiacs".
Let's just say they had a much, much more "laid-back" approach to academics, growing up .
While I agree with much the common core that is being pushed into our schools, we must also demand from parents that they reinforce learning at home. Although many teachers work their butts off and have to invest so much classroom time in developing a pro social and respectful environment, so many children arrive at our public schools at least two grade levels behind where they should be, therefore making progress very difficult academicall, but also trying to instill proper behavior in those kids whose parents have not prepared them to operate in a classroom, harms all the kids. If a kid gets left back and repeats a grade, the parent needs to pay the school district one half of the cost. It's a kind of 'lousy parent tax'. Of course, if a child is learning disabled, he or she would not be held to the same normal standard. If kids need three meals at day at school because their is none at home, so be it. But parents can read and reinforce proper behavior even when poor. Its attitude. We cannot keep going down this road which leads to societial stupidity. We must hold parents accountable -- just as we hold teacher accountable.
Well, many believe that equal distribution of misery is better than unequal distribution of wealth.
You call the total of America's wealth "misery"?
I think you'd have quite a bit to distribute around a bit more evenly (don't need to make it flat line) without anyone being in danger of "misery", don't you?
I live near starman71 and received what I would call a low quality education aside from a handful of exceptional teachers. Much of our student body was "redneck" and the parents never encouraged education with many even viewing it with contempt. Some of my graduating class did very well, many others are incarcerated or dead due to the high rates of drug abuse and violence here in Tennessee. Students were "socially promoted" and I knew several that were still functionally illiterate upon graduation. With probably less than a handful of exceptions, you could have predicted who would have gone where in their senior year of high school.
My parents always placed an emphasis on my education and had college educations themselves. They taught me to read well early, which gave me a leg up early in school. I was in the gifted programs throughout K-12, but there was nothing in the organized curriculum to challenge me. Schools in poor, violent areas often don't have the resources to properly challenge gifted students, but are compelled to "teach to the test", so the effort and funds go to raising the bottom to some marginal level of functionality, instead of challenging the top to reach its potential.
When I moved from TN to IA, it was very sobering to realize how much better educated the average high school graduate I worked with was compared to the average high school graduate here in Appalachia. Schools in Iowa are very good overall. Most of the populace there is literate, has graduated high school, and not addicted to drugs - something you can't say about where I'm from.
I was very curious and read a lot on my own, chatted with a lot of strangers on the internet, listened to unusual music, and kind of pushed the envelope socially when I was in middle and high school (1998-2004). This kept me immersed in fresh ideas and experiences that the average local resident didn't bother to seek out. I also had probably a half dozen excellent high school teachers who went outside the classroom guidelines to challenge the students. Most of these were older (late baby boomers - one was 76 in 2002) and have since retired - the younger ones have gone to private education. One of my best teachers remains a good personal friend today and was also a minister. His English assignments were very unstructured and allowed the best and brightest to write freely. The assignments were almost a partnership and collaborative, and a lot of what he taught sticks with me to this day.
So what's the moral of the story?
Delegate educational mandates to the family - just because some parents think it might be a good idea to give their kid a "leg up" in the education rate race?
With all the teaching, supplementing and material-buying I do at home with my kids, I wouldn't mind receiving some kind of educator-type compensation.
After all, I AM preparing labor force for tomorrow's economy.
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.
.
