Importance Of Core Subjects (high school, interpreting, grades, history)

[Metaphysique]

English/Language Arts
Math
Science
Social Studies
Arts

As adult learners who encourage our young learners, our focus centers on STEAM, since we view artistic and creative abilities as useful and valuables tools of innovation in the age of technology.

On the topic of English/writing, my eldest's (middle school) recently had a school-wide writing assignment to assess their paragraph writing abilities. She said there have been concerns about text speak and shorthand writing being used in school assignments. She's known since, gosh, grade school that lazy writing and text speak is a no-no. She's developed excellent writing skills. Far better than most adults, including writers in some of my graduate (writing) courses.

So, yeah, I place a high premium on writing, because it's the basis of effective communication. English/LA, along with other humanities disciplines, can also facilitate critical thinking.

Originally Posted by phetaroi

I really like your idea about less literature (not no literature) and more emphasis on technical and business writing. When we would interview teachers or other educators for open positions, we always did a writing sample, half done on the computer and half by hand, and sometimes I would just shake my head at what was turned in. And that's not even really technical/business writing.

My curiosity is piqued. What were the issues you observed?

[phetaroi]

Originally Posted by Metaphysique

English/Language Arts
Math
Science
Social Studies
Arts

As adult learners who encourage our young learners, our focus centers on STEAM, since we view artistic and creative abilities as useful and valuables tools of innovation in the age of technology.

On the topic of English/writing, my eldest's (middle school) recently had a school-wide writing assignment to assess their paragraph writing abilities. She said there have been concerns about text speak and shorthand writing being used in school assignments. She's known since, gosh, grade school that lazy writing and text speak is a no-no. She's developed excellent writing skills. Far better than most adults, including writers in some of my graduate (writing) courses.

So, yeah, I place a high premium on writing, because it's the basis of effective communication. English/LA, along with other humanities disciplines, can also facilitate critical thinking.



My curiosity is piqued. What were the issues you observed?

very poor grammar skills
inability to write a coherent essay
couldn't stay on topic at all

things like that

[mitsguy2001]

Originally Posted by Katarina Witt

Taking these two together. First of all, 08grad, you're not going to be able to do Computer Science, Wood Shop, Home Economics if you can't read, write or do math. Secondly, shop and home ec can be taught at home as well. Nor can you learn health w/o knowing reading and math. The human body is very complex. As a health care provider, I know that every Tom, Dick and Harry thinks they know more than any HCP, but it's not true.

I think a point can be made that basic English and basic math are probably the 2 most important subjects, since they are the key to learning everything else. Do you also agree that every subject, especially math and English, has a law of diminishing returns, where they become less useful the more advanced they get? Again, balancing a checkbook is more important than multivariable calculus. Writing a coherent essay is more important than interpreting British literature.

And yes, mitsguy, as we've discussed on so many other threads, virtually every school requires home ec and shop in middle school, and offers them as electives in high school. It was that way when I was in HS back in the Pleistocene, even. Most high schools do require some type of "practical arts" course, so colleges don't look askance unless you haven't taken a lot of rigorous academics as well, IME.

My high school did not require any "practical arts" courses. And, our guidance counselors would strongly discourage college-bound students from taking such courses.

[quote]No, I don't agree with your conclusion. There are very few careers that one can have these days that only require an 8th grade education, and not even many that only require a HS diploma. The former has been the case for at least 50 years now, and the latter at least the past 20 years or so.[/quotes]

Most employers require the "piece of paper" (high school diploma, or college bachelor's degree), but do not actually use the academic skills that you learn in college or even high school.

College undergrad does not prepare one for an academic career. I don't think everyone "needs" college but I do think everyone needs some sort of post-HS education to have a meaningful career.

College undergrad does nothing to prepare people for the real world.

[mitsguy2001]

Originally Posted by phetaroi

Very good post (I pre-date you...I was alive in the Eocene...at least that's what I think...I like to horse around!).

What I disagree with the other poster's conclusion is that it sort of follows what I refer to as the "either/or" mode of thinking that is so common in this forum (I do it from time to time myself). Education is not something that can be compartmentalized into sections that only prepare you for one thing. I was using basic arithmetic twice today...and that dated back to early primary school. I was using some computer skills that dated back to my first degree in computer programming in my first year of college. And so on.

And I agree with you completely that without a strong foundation in reading, writing, and math skills, one is going to be stymied in many job and/or career choices. As a principal I had to read educational journals, interpret test and survey results, and write observation and evaluation reports. In fact, back in 1970, while earning that first degree in computer programming in Rochester, NY, the big news for us was that an executive in Xerox, which was then headquartered in Rochester, had just gotten canned because while he was a whiz at technology, part of his job was writing a monthly report for the Board Of Directors...which he failed miserably at.

I agree with all that. In fact, how does that disagree with anything that I said in my earlier posts?

I think what mits may not be fully thinking about is that the reason shop and home ec classes are more prominent at the middle school level is that that is where they are developmentally reasonable. Real physics is not. Real chemistry is not. Subjects like that take more background in mathematics and a more basic level of science.

That makes sense; you have a valid point there. But, do you agree that (even if there are other reasons, such as the ones you mentioned, that force home ec and shop to be taught in earlier grades) all other things being equal, that home ec and shop would be more useful in 12th grade than in 6th grade, since 12th grade is closer to when you will use those skills (even though you have a valid point as to why home ec and shop are taught in 6th grade, and why chemistry is taught in 12th grade)? And, do you agree that, for the majority of adults, the skills learned in home ec and in shop are more useful than the skills learned in chemistry, physics, calculus, British literature, European history, etc?

[mitsguy2001]

Originally Posted by otowi

1. English
2. Math
3. Science
4. Social Studies

As for grade level -

English - each grade should have a share of focus on literacy/reading appropriate to grade level, some literature appropriate to the grade, and some composition and related skills appropriate to grade. I think there is quite a bit of leeway here as long as students end up with a decent survey of literature, solid composition skills in a variety of genres but not to exclude the technical/business/practical arenas, and good reading/literacy skills including both in traditional and in more applied/technical contexts.

Math - depends on the ability of the students - the general goal is to get all generally college bound students through College Algebra by graduation, and those going into STEM fields through Trig and hopefully Calculus. Non-college bound students going into most vocational fields that pay well still need to do Algebra and basic trig and geometry pretty competently, but in a more applied format. Generally speaking, Geometry as its own course is the most disposable course in the traditional track, and one class that is rising in importance pretty quickly is statistics/data analysis. I would propose that it would be well to replace Geometry with a Statistics/reasoning/data analysis course and embed the needed geometry concepts into the Algebra courses. Financial literacy could be taught much more at the middle grades than they are - there is often little room for them for college track students in high school.

Science - the lack of basic science literacy in this country is pretty apparent in our politics and pretty alarming. I think students need more science than is typically currently required for graduation. In middle school, students should finish with solid understanding of scientific method, basic lab practices, scientific inquiry, and general knowledge of basic physics, basic chemistry, basic earth science, and basic biology. The goals should be to produce scientific literacy at a consumer level and to promote curiosity and solid investigative/critical thinking techniques. In high school, students should be required to take a year each of lab-based physical science, lab-based biology, lab-based chemistry and lab-based environmental/earth/astronomy science - perhaps a quarter of astronomy, a quarter of geology, a quarter of ecology, and a quarter of atmospheric/meteorological science imho. I think the lower level high school students are currently graduating with significant gaps in scientific literacy because they choose one area of focus and miss the others. Typically they take physical science, biology and one other - chemistry most often for higher students. Some AP-type students will take more. But depending on what that third choice is, they're missing out on every other science field and I think that should change. We should probably move away from subject-based courses and do more integrated science at least by quarter aside from the AP courses.

Social Studies - I am not sure what should be done in which particular grade, but students need to come out with an understanding of the U.S. government and political system, an understanding of the principles of economics, a basic understanding of U.S. history, a basic understanding of world history and culture, a solid understanding of current issues at local, state, national and international levels, and a good foundation in geography. In my district the world class is in 9th and I think we should push that to a higher level because I think the level at which we cover it is just too low today for a real political understanding of the world. I might like to see a quarter of current issues every year, a quarter of world/geography every year, a quarter of U.S. history every year, and a quarter of economics or government alternating every year. I know this doesn't work well with the current system but I am not convinced our system of year-long one-topic courses are serving us well - students do not hit the key topics and different levels of maturity - so they get U.S. History in a particular year and Government in some other particular year - they forget what they learned without revisiting it the next year and they also only get it at that particular grade level. So I would advocate for a more integrated approach, personally.

I like your approach to education.

[mitsguy2001]

While I agree about the importance of home ec and shop for real life, many, perhaps most, places don't offer it in either middle school or high school. Wish they did, but they don't.

I'm fairly certain that my state requires home ec and shop in middle school.

Originally Posted by tnff

As for the conclusion, nope. Middle school maybe prepares you for high school, but not everyone is prepared. And with the growing 9th grade academy type school, it seems it we're now adding a intermediate grade to do what middle school should.

What is a "9th grade academy type school"? Sorry, never heard that term.

High school somewhat prepares people for college, but leaves out important study skills and basic "how to college" information. Even with everything colleges do to ease the transition, freshman year is still tough where students have to deal with being responsible for their learning and need to "learn how to learn."

College somewhat prepares you for post college work. That is it gives you the basic knowledge to learn after college. Very few who go to college are heading down an academic track.

Unfortunately, middle school and elementary school (and, to a lesser extent, high school) do more to prepare you for the real world than college does. In K-12 school, you are on a regimented, morning person oriented schedule. In college, I was able to sleep late and follow my own schedule (even if I had a morning class, it would be 2 or 3 days a week), and have a lot of free time, which are not options in the real world, where your schedule is dictated by your boss. Also, college is far more intellectually stimulating than anything in the real world. Most real-world work is repetitive, below your intellectual ability, and dictated by your boss and especially by your clients. College really prepares you for an idealized, academic world that, unfortunately, does not exist for most people.

[phetaroi]

Originally Posted by mitsguy2001

I think a point can be made that basic English and basic math are probably the 2 most important subjects, since they are the key to learning everything else. Do you also agree that every subject, especially math and English, has a law of diminishing returns, where they become less useful the more advanced they get? Again, balancing a checkbook is more important than multivariable calculus. Writing a coherent essay is more important than interpreting British literature.

...

I'll tell you why I disagree with you. Learning how to balance a checkbook does not teach you to think. It's practically important, but mundane. I haven't really used algebra or geometry since high school...well, a little algebra in structural geology...but those subjects help students learn to think.

And there are similarities in other subjects. Diagramming sentences helped me from a practical standpoint, but it didn't help me learn to think. Discussing Shakespeare or Greek tragedies did help me to learn to think.

[phetaroi]

Originally Posted by mitsguy2001

...

That makes sense; you have a valid point there. But, do you agree that (even if there are other reasons, such as the ones you mentioned, that force home ec and shop to be taught in earlier grades) all other things being equal, that home ec and shop would be more useful in 12th grade than in 6th grade, since 12th grade is closer to when you will use those skills (even though you have a valid point as to why home ec and shop are taught in 6th grade, and why chemistry is taught in 12th grade)? And, do you agree that, for the majority of adults, the skills learned in home ec and in shop are more useful than the skills learned in chemistry, physics, calculus, British literature, European history, etc?

See my post 27.

But also, stop and think. Almost everything we learn in school is going to be most helpful to us in the adult world after graduation. Should we just teach nothing until the senior year? Obviously, that's impractical. So things are stretched out in little doses over 13 years.

[mitsguy2001]

Originally Posted by phetaroi

I'll tell you why I disagree with you. Learning how to balance a checkbook does not teach you to think. It's practically important, but mundane. I haven't really used algebra or geometry since high school...well, a little algebra in structural geology...but those subjects help students learn to think.

And there are similarities in other subjects. Diagramming sentences helped me from a practical standpoint, but it didn't help me learn to think. Discussing Shakespeare or Greek tragedies did help me to learn to think.

All good points.

Would you maybe agree with the following hierarchy:

1. Basic math and English, which are the keys to understanding everything else.
2. Subjects that are useful for all adults in the real world
3. Subjects that require you to "think"
4. Subjects that are based on rote memorization, rather than thinking
5. Subjects that are important only for certain (mostly academic) jobs

In any case, I think that this proves that you cannot rank the 4 core subjects, but rather can rank what you learn within those 4 core subjects. (also, should gym and foreign language be added to the list of core subjects, since they are required subjects for all or most years of high school?)

[mitsguy2001]

Originally Posted by phetaroi

See my post 27.

Fair enough. Did you see my Post 29, which basically puts home ec and shop 1 step ahead of chemistry, physics, British lit, etc?