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 think I will stay away from the empathy discussion.
Why do you think that taking the courses that the parents can't teach through other resources couldn't be better?
Is your definition of a 'quality public school' one whose standard of teaching is higher than the standard at a community college?
Does your opinion change if the courses taken are in the 'adult ed' program of a 4-year college? What if the courses are taken at Harvard's evening program? Or if the homeschool cooperative has teachers who are subject area experts with lots of teaching experience?
Hmmm... maybe I am missing the point, and the key phrase is "most parents, in which case, I'll have to pause to collect my thoughts. I know that most homeschool advocates insist that any parent that cares enough can homeschool successfully - but I guess I am unsure on that point.
I think a good high schools often can offer a better quality course than a community college can. A quality public school course is on par with what you'd find at the college level, and - and yes, I'm sure people will jump on me for this, many (not all) community college course are not necessarily rigorous. Or, even if the teacher is excellent, the fellow students as a whole have a good chance of not being as academically inclined as the high school class (not an across-the-board absolute, and some states have better community colleges than others, but in many places the most motivated academic kids skip community college and go straight for the four year colleges or universities). No, it doesn't change my mind if it's through Harvard's extension program. What's the rush to take college classes early? A good public school course can provide college-quality education. I think a dedicated homeschooling family can fill in the gaps, but I guess the key word is that I dont' think it will necessarily be superior to what a good public school would offer. (of course not all public schools are "good," which is another issue. But then again, not all homeschooling experiences are "good," either.)
As for the cooperative, it depends on the availability of experts; I doubt that many areas are lucky enough to have a wide enough net of subject matter experts on hand. I realize that's not the case everywhere, and I'm sure it's easier in some places (and access will improve as more and more people do homeschool), but in some areas you'd have to cast a wide net to find everyone you need.
I don't think that "most parents" can necessarily homeschool successfully. I think many can, at least at the elementary levels. I do think they need to at least have a high school degree or GED. I don't think formal knowledge of learning styles is necessary. I think it's more useful for classroom teachers because they do have less one-on-one time with the kids, and because by the very nature of having lots of children through the classroom over the years they are going to work with students with all educational learning styles, often at the same time and in the same classroom.
I admit that overall I am uncomfortable with homeschooling, not because it can't be effective (obviously it can work very well for some children and families) but because overall I think society as a whole does benefit from a public school system. I don't like charter schools, private schools, or religious schools either, for that matter. I do respect the right of parents to choose any of these routes, as long as the public doesn't have to pay for it.
I think a good high schools often can offer a better quality course than a community college can. A quality public school course is on par with what you'd find at the college level, and - and yes, I'm sure people will jump on me for this, many (not all) community college course are not necessarily rigorous. Or, even if the teacher is excellent, the fellow students as a whole have a good chance of not being as academically inclined as the high school class (not an across-the-board absolute, and some states have better community colleges than others, but in many places the most motivated academic kids skip community college and go straight for the four year colleges or universities). No, it doesn't change my mind if it's through Harvard's extension program. What's the rush to take college classes early? A good public school course can provide college-quality education. I think a dedicated homeschooling family can fill in the gaps, but I guess the key word is that I dont' think it will necessarily be superior to what a good public school would offer. (of course not all public schools are "good," which is another issue. But then again, not all homeschooling experiences are "good," either.)
As for the cooperative, it depends on the availability of experts; I doubt that many areas are lucky enough to have a wide enough net of subject matter experts on hand. I realize that's not the case everywhere, and I'm sure it's easier in some places (and access will improve as more and more people do homeschool), but in some areas you'd have to cast a wide net to find everyone you need.
I don't think that "most parents" can necessarily homeschool successfully. I think many can, at least at the elementary levels. I do think they need to at least have a high school degree or GED. I don't think formal knowledge of learning styles is necessary. I think it's more useful for classroom teachers because they do have less one-on-one time with the kids, and because by the very nature of having lots of children through the classroom over the years they are going to work with students with all educational learning styles, often at the same time and in the same classroom.
I admit that overall I am uncomfortable with homeschooling, not because it can't be effective (obviously it can work very well for some children and families) but because overall I think society as a whole does benefit from a public school system. I don't like charter schools, private schools, or religious schools either, for that matter. I do respect the right of parents to choose any of these routes, as long as the public doesn't have to pay for it.
I agree on a quality public school being able to offer courses on par with a community college. Where the community college is the advantage is when the high school doen't offer courses on that level. One issue here is that the emphasis is on passing state tests. Schools oftern don't put effort into their best performing students because they already pass the test. A cheap alternative is dual enrollment. The school collects the state money for that student and pays their community college tuition.
My dd is slated for dual enrollment. Why? Because the school will run out of courses to offer her before she graduates. They only have a handfull of students who need the higher courses so they don't offer them. If they did, she'd stay at the high school. A lot depends on what the high school offers. In more affluent areas, they offer more and there is less need to dual enroll. Here, the problem is addressed through dual enrollment.
Out of curiosity, why do you dislike charter schools? They are public schools that anyone can attend. Are you also against school of choice?
I think a good high schools often can offer a better quality course than a community college can. A quality public school course is on par with what you'd find at the college level, and - and yes, I'm sure people will jump on me for this, many (not all) community college course are not necessarily rigorous. Or, even if the teacher is excellent, the fellow students as a whole have a good chance of not being as academically inclined as the high school class (not an across-the-board absolute, and some states have better community colleges than others, but in many places the most motivated academic kids skip community college and go straight for the four year colleges or universities). No, it doesn't change my mind if it's through Harvard's extension program. What's the rush to take college classes early? A good public school course can provide college-quality education. I think a dedicated homeschooling family can fill in the gaps, but I guess the key word is that I dont' think it will necessarily be superior to what a good public school would offer. (of course not all public schools are "good," which is another issue. But then again, not all homeschooling experiences are "good," either.
There is an obvious advantage of community college vs same level classes taught in the high school. Many, an increasing number every year, do not give college credits for college level courses taught at their high school, because of the poor quality at which they are taught. However, if they have taken these clases at the community college, that is all the better.
With the homeschooling perspective, now you have a college looking at an 18 year old kid and asking the questions, as they do to all students applying to their school, "Does this kid have the modivation to continue to make our school look great?" Well lets see, we have a kid who effectively finished high school at age 14 and has been taking college classes for four years and, while their same age public school peers are graduating, are able to put down that they are ready to head to their college with their AA already under their belt...not to mention all the real life experiences that these kids have had in the public for some many years, all the volunteering they have countless referances for, really out of the ordinary educational opportunities, such as taking time to apprentice with various people or spending time doing research in a lab, traveling, ect.
The typical homeschooler has been going to k-12 for about 4 hours a day for four to five days a week. Then they get there AA a few classes at a time, again only learning for three to four hours a day, for four years. They get that half a day kids are imprisoned helplessly in school to be a kid and do whatever makes them happy...which results in learning hands on in a wide variety of sujects unintentionally or by choosing to..for fun. When it's time to buckle down, they STILL don't have to work as hard as their peers because they have a large chunk of it out of the way.
It's an obvious pleasure for colleges to welcome homeschoolers with open arms. If it were not for colleges, homeschoolers would be sitting in a much more negative light, a spot light developed by our government run schools.
I received college credit for many of my high school courses, yet chose not to rush college and graduate early just for the sake of graduating early. Then again, apparently my public school education must have been worth something, as I received an almost entirely free ride to school (did get some loans to cover some of the living expenses) and a complete free ride (including books and a living stipend) to grad school. And as far as "real life experience," well, let's just say that kids who attend public schools have plenty of opportunities for quality volunteer experiences and other unique experiences, too. That's great that homeschoolers have that chance as well, but we're collectively kidding ourselves if we think that ONLY homeschoolers have that chance or take advantage of it (and don't forget that school is not exactly 7 days a week/52 weeks a year). I managed to fit quite a bit in during my younger years, volunteering, competing nationally in figure skating, working, tons of travel, and what could effectively be considered apprenticing. I also enjoyed my classes at school, had plenty of fun, and had plenty of motivation to thrive when I went on to study at the university level. This is not an either/or issue; kids can gain valuable experiences and have an excellent (and well-rounded) education and life in more than one setting.
And yes, I know this potentially marks me as an educational snob, but does an AA really matter? I suppose it matters for applying to certain jobs, and can help reduce college costs, but just because a kid completed one as a homeschooler (which does not in itself show personal motivation any more than does attending and thriving at a public school) doesn't seem particularly noteworthy. I value education of all sorts, and I can certainly see why it can make economic sense to take courses at a community college and then transfer, but from a pure educational standpoint it's not an ideal scenario. Then again, for students who mostly want to get a college degree fast and as cheaply as possible, that may not matter as much.
I think homeschooling can be a good option, and am pleased that colleges are making it easier for homeschooled students to apply. I do, however, think that some of these homeschooling advocates haven't had a chance to spend time around kids who attend some of the country's excellent public schools. Believe me, they are definitely out there (and yes, kids who graduate from those schools are also welcomed with open arms by colleges). I think the homeschooling advocates who continue to push the idea of public schools as across-the-board bad or always inferior are doing themselves and their cause a disservice.
I think homeschooling can be a good option, and am pleased that colleges are making it easier for homeschooled students to apply. I do, however, think that some of these homeschooling advocates haven't had a chance to spend time around kids who attend some of the country's excellent public schools. Believe me, they are definitely out there (and yes, kids who graduate from those schools are also welcomed with open arms by colleges). I think the homeschooling advocates who continue to push the idea of public schools as across-the-board bad or always inferior are doing themselves and their cause a disservice.
There are superb public schools (aside - the Newsweek formula is a stupid way to find them). They are relatively few and far between, though I would quickly grant there are more today than there were 25 years ago.
I deal regularly with alumni/alumnae from many of them, as well as with their current students. I also deal with a substantial number of homeschool families.
For some students, homeschooling is better than the best of the public or private schools. For some students, public schools are better than the best of homeschooling or private schools.
I have said this before. I will say it again.
Your mileage may vary.
Community college courses generally require more self-discipline than most public school courses, which is one of the reasons many colleges value those grades more than an AP course or even AP test result.
Quote:
Originally Posted by uptown_urbanist
I can certainly see why it can make economic sense to take courses at a community college and then transfer, but from a pure educational standpoint it's not an ideal scenario.
Nobody claimed it was ideal.
And what is an ideal scenario from a "pure educational standpoint?"
By "pure educational standpoint" (perhaps not the most descriptive choice of words, I admit) I meant that if a student attends one four-year university from start to finish (including any time spent on study abroad, etc.) they often have the chance to learn their way around, explore their options, and have more time to develop relationships with professors than they would if they attend a community college and then transfer. (that's not to say that community college faculty are inferior; I know many excellent community college professors. It's just that students are losing out on the chance to work with one professor throughout the course of their college years.) Community colleges by their very nature don't have advanced coursework; I appreciated being able to take graduate-level classes early on in college, and not have the pressure to bundle all of my intro-level courses at the beginning and all of the higher-level classes at the end. Some states have very good community colleges that integrate well with public universities, but in many cases the transfer doesn't always work as smoothly. Given that study abroad programs are often (not always, but often) done junior year, a student coming into a university as a junior may either not have the freedom to fully embrace those opportunities due to transfer issues, timing, etc. If a student wants to live in a dorm (not purely educational, of course, but part of many college experiences) he or she may not be able to do so as a transfer student if the dorm spots are already filled. So... I guess my main thought was that while a transfer student may be able to fully take advantage of both resources and opportunities (research grants, study abroad, a broad range of courses at all levels, and the chance to develop relationships with fellow students as well as faculty) they'll be at a disadvantage compared to someone who already knows the system, knows the people, and potentially has more flexibility with scheduling of coursework over the years.
There's also a potential loss of scholarships to students who do community college and then transfer, as some merit scholarships are granted at the beginning of freshman year and renewed annually.
There are exceptions to all of these scenarios, of course. But overall I think a student is better off attending one school for four years than going two in one place, two in another. At the same time, it's also not worth taking out potentially vast loans to do so. There's a balancing act there.
I still don't buy the college classes requiring more discipline from a homeschooled student theory. The homeschool student is still at home, and still has his or her parents to make sure they do the work. The same is true of a public school student. Not to say that students in either situation aren't themselves completely self-motivated (I certainly was), but when a student is living at home, still technically under the educational supervision of parents, then completing college coursework isn't by itself indicative of self-discipline.
I completely agree that for some students homeschooling is best, for others private or public schools are best. There are some, though, who seem to be arguing that public schools can never offer the same quality of education that a homeschooling environment can, and I don't agree with that. There are good and bad homeschooling situations, public schools, and private schools, not to mention that what works for one family or student may not work for another. On some of these threads I do see frequent references (by a minority of posters, admittedly) to how public school is designed to indoctrinate kids, etc., etc., so perhaps I'm a little over-sensitive on that point. There are wonderful public schools out there. I know. I went to one. I know there are also kids who are receiving excellent educations at home. It's frustrating when people can't acknowledge that there is no one-size-fits-all ideal educational setting.
And, as an aside, I don't particularly like AP courses, although if done well I think they can be just as good as a college class.
By "pure educational standpoint" (perhaps not the most descriptive choice of words, I admit) I meant that if a student attends one four-year university from start to finish (including any time spent on study abroad, etc.) they often have the chance to learn their way around, explore their options, and have more time to develop relationships with professors than they would if they attend a community college and then transfer. (that's not to say that community college faculty are inferior; I know many excellent community college professors. It's just that students are losing out on the chance to work with one professor throughout the course of their college years.) Community colleges by their very nature don't have advanced coursework; I appreciated being able to take graduate-level classes early on in college, and not have the pressure to bundle all of my intro-level courses at the beginning and all of the higher-level classes at the end. Some states have very good community colleges that integrate well with public universities, but in many cases the transfer doesn't always work as smoothly. Given that study abroad programs are often (not always, but often) done junior year, a student coming into a university as a junior may either not have the freedom to fully embrace those opportunities due to transfer issues, timing, etc. If a student wants to live in a dorm (not purely educational, of course, but part of many college experiences) he or she may not be able to do so as a transfer student if the dorm spots are already filled. So... I guess my main thought was that while a transfer student may be able to fully take advantage of both resources and opportunities (research grants, study abroad, a broad range of courses at all levels, and the chance to develop relationships with fellow students as well as faculty) they'll be at a disadvantage compared to someone who already knows the system, knows the people, and potentially has more flexibility with scheduling of coursework over the years.
There's also a potential loss of scholarships to students who do community college and then transfer, as some merit scholarships are granted at the beginning of freshman year and renewed annually.
There are exceptions to all of these scenarios, of course. But overall I think a student is better off attending one school for four years than going two in one place, two in another. At the same time, it's also not worth taking out potentially vast loans to do so. There's a balancing act there.
I still don't buy the college classes requiring more discipline from a homeschooled student theory. The homeschool student is still at home, and still has his or her parents to make sure they do the work. The same is true of a public school student. Not to say that students in either situation aren't themselves completely self-motivated (I certainly was), but when a student is living at home, still technically under the educational supervision of parents, then completing college coursework isn't by itself indicative of self-discipline.
I completely agree that for some students homeschooling is best, for others private or public schools are best. There are some, though, who seem to be arguing that public schools can never offer the same quality of education that a homeschooling environment can, and I don't agree with that. There are good and bad homeschooling situations, public schools, and private schools, not to mention that what works for one family or student may not work for another. On some of these threads I do see frequent references (by a minority of posters, admittedly) to how public school is designed to indoctrinate kids, etc., etc., so perhaps I'm a little over-sensitive on that point. There are wonderful public schools out there. I know. I went to one. I know there are also kids who are receiving excellent educations at home. It's frustrating when people can't acknowledge that there is no one-size-fits-all ideal educational setting.
And, as an aside, I don't particularly like AP courses, although if done well I think they can be just as good as a college class.
You are assuming they have the same professors for lower and upper divisions classes. This has not been my experience. Lower division classes, at the 4 year university I attended, were taught by TA's. In fact so were some of the upper division classes. It wasn't until we were well into our majors that we, consistently, had the same professors.
For my ed major, most of my profs were adjuncts. Teachers who were teaching night classes so they changed from term to term.
My reasons for preferring community college over going straight to a 4 year university have nothing to do with the professors. They have to do with the philosophy. In most 4 year colleges they spend the first two years trying to weed you out. Classes like calculus and chemistry are weeding courses. A community college isn't trying to weed you out. They're trying to weed you in.
I found that my mastery of the basics was quite superior to my counterparts who attended the 4 year university from the start when I transferred. They could do calculus. I understood it. They would look for something similar in the book and I'd explain why that doesn't apply here. They couldn't see it. Why the difference? For them, calculus was three 3 credit courses that met three hours a week. For me, it was three 5 credit courses that met 5 days a week. I simply learned a lot more because I had 2/3 more class time to learn it.
My kids will got to community college first. Both for cost reasons and because I'd rather someone try to weed them in than out those first two years. I believe that foundation is too important. I know how much easier college was for me because I went to a 2 year college first. How much better I understood my basics. While my classes transferred with the number of credits I would have gotten at the 4 year university, I brought in understanding that reflected that I'd had more class time.
When all is said and done, your diploma looks the same. No one can tell you went to a community college first by looking at it.
I received college credit for many of my high school courses, yet chose not to rush college and graduate early just for the sake of graduating early. Then again, apparently my public school education must have been worth something, as I received an almost entirely free ride to school (did get some loans to cover some of the living expenses) and a complete free ride (including books and a living stipend) to grad school. And as far as "real life experience," well, let's just say that kids who attend public schools have plenty of opportunities for quality volunteer experiences and other unique experiences, too. That's great that homeschoolers have that chance as well, but we're collectively kidding ourselves if we think that ONLY homeschoolers have that chance or take advantage of it (and don't forget that school is not exactly 7 days a week/52 weeks a year). I managed to fit quite a bit in during my younger years, volunteering, competing nationally in figure skating, working, tons of travel, and what could effectively be considered apprenticing. I also enjoyed my classes at school, had plenty of fun, and had plenty of motivation to thrive when I went on to study at the university level. This is not an either/or issue; kids can gain valuable experiences and have an excellent (and well-rounded) education and life in more than one setting.
And yes, I know this potentially marks me as an educational snob, but does an AA really matter? I suppose it matters for applying to certain jobs, and can help reduce college costs, but just because a kid completed one as a homeschooler (which does not in itself show personal motivation any more than does attending and thriving at a public school) doesn't seem particularly noteworthy. I value education of all sorts, and I can certainly see why it can make economic sense to take courses at a community college and then transfer, but from a pure educational standpoint it's not an ideal scenario. Then again, for students who mostly want to get a college degree fast and as cheaply as possible, that may not matter as much.
I think homeschooling can be a good option, and am pleased that colleges are making it easier for homeschooled students to apply. I do, however, think that some of these homeschooling advocates haven't had a chance to spend time around kids who attend some of the country's excellent public schools. Believe me, they are definitely out there (and yes, kids who graduate from those schools are also welcomed with open arms by colleges). I think the homeschooling advocates who continue to push the idea of public schools as across-the-board bad or always inferior are doing themselves and their cause a disservice.
Keep in mind you live in MN and with the post-secondary options our high school kids can take you DO earn college credits while taking classes at accredited CC's and 4 year universities/colleges-not all states have this option. I know of many, many kids that graduate high school with enough credits to start college as a junior-basically saving them 2 years of tuition in college. Also, you live in a state where most of the high schools are superb so your experience is going to be different than most people living in states with sub-par schools.
By "pure educational standpoint" (perhaps not the most descriptive choice of words, I admit) I meant that if a student attends one four-year university from start to finish (including any time spent on study abroad, etc.) they often have the chance to learn their way around, explore their options, and have more time to develop relationships with professors than they would if they attend a community college and then transfer. (that's not to say that community college faculty are inferior; I know many excellent community college professors. It's just that students are losing out on the chance to work with one professor throughout the course of their college years.) Community colleges by their very nature don't have advanced coursework; I appreciated being able to take graduate-level classes early on in college, and not have the pressure to bundle all of my intro-level courses at the beginning and all of the higher-level classes at the end. Some states have very good community colleges that integrate well with public universities, but in many cases the transfer doesn't always work as smoothly. Given that study abroad programs are often (not always, but often) done junior year, a student coming into a university as a junior may either not have the freedom to fully embrace those opportunities due to transfer issues, timing, etc. If a student wants to live in a dorm (not purely educational, of course, but part of many college experiences) he or she may not be able to do so as a transfer student if the dorm spots are already filled. So... I guess my main thought was that while a transfer student may be able to fully take advantage of both resources and opportunities (research grants, study abroad, a broad range of courses at all levels, and the chance to develop relationships with fellow students as well as faculty) they'll be at a disadvantage compared to someone who already knows the system, knows the people, and potentially has more flexibility with scheduling of coursework over the years.
There's also a potential loss of scholarships to students who do community college and then transfer, as some merit scholarships are granted at the beginning of freshman year and renewed annually.
There are exceptions to all of these scenarios, of course. But overall I think a student is better off attending one school for four years than going two in one place, two in another. At the same time, it's also not worth taking out potentially vast loans to do so. There's a balancing act there.
I still don't buy the college classes requiring more discipline from a homeschooled student theory. The homeschool student is still at home, and still has his or her parents to make sure they do the work. The same is true of a public school student. Not to say that students in either situation aren't themselves completely self-motivated (I certainly was), but when a student is living at home, still technically under the educational supervision of parents, then completing college coursework isn't by itself indicative of self-discipline.
I completely agree that for some students homeschooling is best, for others private or public schools are best. There are some, though, who seem to be arguing that public schools can never offer the same quality of education that a homeschooling environment can, and I don't agree with that. There are good and bad homeschooling situations, public schools, and private schools, not to mention that what works for one family or student may not work for another. On some of these threads I do see frequent references (by a minority of posters, admittedly) to how public school is designed to indoctrinate kids, etc., etc., so perhaps I'm a little over-sensitive on that point. There are wonderful public schools out there. I know. I went to one. I know there are also kids who are receiving excellent educations at home. It's frustrating when people can't acknowledge that there is no one-size-fits-all ideal educational setting.
And, as an aside, I don't particularly like AP courses, although if done well I think they can be just as good as a college class.
The irony of your explaining this, yet failing to understand why a student would want to get to college sooner, is rich. I agree that in general a 4-year college is a richer learning environment than a community college, while granting that in many of the 4-year institutions, it sure does seem as if they are weeding out, even if that is not the intention.
The reason that community college courses require more self-discipline than high school is roughly the same as why long term projects in high school require more self-discipline than daily work does. With daily work, it is obvious to the teacher when you are not doing it, let alone not doing it more days than you are, while with long term projects it is less obvious.
Most community college classes don't meet every day. Even when they do, they tend to have less overnight homework to be handed in and the instructors are less likely to check in as frequently with those who've not done so on a given day.
As for schools' being designed for indoctrination, I'd have to say that's a pretty fair accusation. When you look backwards at the design of the modern high school curriculum, you find phrases like ""Transmitting Culture and Civilization." The Carnegie Unit is the embodiment of the industrial model of education.
Work up the raw material into that finished product for which it is best adapted. Applied to education this means: Educate the individual according to his capabilities. -- Bobbitt, "The Elimination of Waste in Education," 1912, p. 269. Our schools are, in a sense, factories in which the raw products (children) are to be shaped and fashioned into products to meet the various demands of life. -- Cubberley, Public School Administration, 1916, p. 338.
William Torrey Harris , U.S. Commissioner of Education (18889-1906)-- stated the "cardinal virtues of schooling" to be "regularity, punctuality, silence, and industry" (pp. 196-197). These four would produce a good factory worker and a good student, provided "good" was defined to mean faithful obedience to others' procedures, not the development of one's own-- as in a "good" child. In this manner the "raw material" of youth could be molded into the "finished products" of adulthood.
(Doll, W. (1993). A Post-modern perspective on curriculum (pp. 47-52). New York, NY: Teachers College Press)
[SIZE=4][/SIZE] *******
No, the schools of today are not absolutely like the schools of a century ago, but the design of the overall K-12 curriculum looks more similar than different. And through the advent of mission statements and school philosophies, we can see some of the goals of the schools:
"responsible citizens of the 21st century"
"responsible citizens" "productive members of society and informed citizens of the global community."
"Responsible Citizens observe policies and expectations for behavior." (The team name is The Marauders. I love it!)
"Preparing all students to be responsible citizens" "self-reliant, responsible, productive citizens" "responsible and well rounded citizens" "productive citizens in an ever-changing society"
"To motivate young people to be better citizens."
"to establish and maintain responsible citizens' roles in a dynamic society. ...It is the shared responsibility of the school, home, and community to instill the fundamental principles of American democracy"
Quote:
ALL STUDENTS WILL: ... PRACTICE ACTIVE CITIZENSHIP AND CONCERN FOR OTHERS by:
Negotiating conflicts and honoring agreements
Understanding patriotic duties, rights, and privileges of citizens in a democracy
Rejecting diversity
Understanding the need for activism, service and political and global awareness
Our schools indoctrinate, even when it is not intentional - how can they not when it is?
How can you know that college was so much easier for you because you went to community college first?
I know this varies greatly by person, by field of study, and yes, by state (true, Golfgal, I was lucky that MN is one of the best states for education.). Apparently our experiences varied greatly, as my foundation in my first two years was excellent, and I did have some of the same professors the whole way through. The largest intro classes were generally taught by professors, with recitations led by grad students, but the classes themselves were professor-taught, or in a few cases, by ABD grad students. There were also a lot of special programs designed for first year students to expose them to the wide variety of fields out there, and to give a flavor for the many, many options available, and I would have missed out on that chance if I had been a transfer student.
So maybe I'll clarify that for some fields, at some schools, I think students will have a superior educational experience if they attend one school the whole way through. A wishy-washy statement, but I still do think most students benefit from attending primarily one school straight through.
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.
