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.
The reason why those examples are kind of....I can only say ludicrous is because it would be overly boring to children and because the math in regards to in depth Calculus cannot be performed by any 3rd grader (8 year old) due to them not having a solid background in the math concepts leading up to calculus.
But these things are NOT boring. That's the issue here. They're taught in a boring way. So us as adult, we just dismiss higher mathematics, or literature as boring stuff that kids can't be excited about. And this is mainly because we teach them based on memorization. We don't actually present this as real practical concepts.
This is why students lose interest. Mathematics is no more boring than Facebook is to a kid. If you present math in terms of abstract concepts instead of just raw calculations, I think you'll see more interest.
Quote:
Shakespeare is considered boring to most adults and difficult even for private school educated persons.
Again, it's the way the teachers choose to teach it. I actually was a problem child throughout much of my public school life, even to the point where I got expelled. I went to an alternative school. When I got there, I saw kids who violent, smoke pot after school, and ran in gangs genuinely interested in Shakespare.
Why was that? Well the teacher we had made it so interesting. They didn't start off with passages, they told the story. And then they broke down each part of it. No matter how bad any of these kids were, they really did like Shakespare.
So I've seen it with my own eyes. It's the way things are presented, not the subject matter at hand
Quote:
I think you are pulling at straws with these examples, but FWIW, many schools do teach concepts related to Calculus in 3rd grade today in public schools. My daughter is in 1st grade and they solve "equations" which are basically just addition and subtraction but curriculum now puts these sorts of mathematical concepts into schools at ages earlier than you may realize.
I'm almost 100% they don't. And sorry I'm a huge math enthusiast. I would love to be proven wrong, but I doubt I am. They're probably injecting more mathematical notation for the children, probably alternate forms of equations. Which is just more rote memorization. Which is what we need to get away from.
Quote:
Again, do you have children at school today in the public school?
I don't have any children.
Quote:
Also FWIW, my 1st grader can read Shakespeare, she can read and sound out words. I'm sure she can read Shakespeare as a result. I'll pull out my Shakespearean sonnet book tonight for our evening reading and have her take a stab at it. She's 6 BTW. Most anyone who can read can "read" Shakespeare, now comprehending everything in Shakespeare is another story but that has mostly to do with Shakespearean English not being the same as modern day American English. Linguistics and language changes with the times and so some forms of verbal and written communication become antiquated as a result in regards to expression certain ideas and concepts. Most Americans IMO do not understand Shakespeare.
But a 6 year old can be made to understand and comprehend. People underestimate how fast children can actually learn things, and how much information they absorb
Final word on HBCUs but they produce many more Master's and Doctorate level black graduates than mainstream colleges, including STEM degrees. So they are of great importance IMO to black students.
HBCUs also produce a large amount of Business graduates along with educators (teachers K-12).
Sounds good, but you have to be careful about the quality of the education obtained...
Quote:
"Black Americans have a distinctly worse experience than other racial groups in terms of collegequality. This is not to say the problem is solely with the college system: the gaps reflect the accumulated disadvantages of the prior eighteen years. But it serves as a stark reminder of the depth of the challenge."
On this, I agree that kids are super curious about everything, but I don't understand how you think that private schools can be more engaging than public schools. If anything, they are more boring that public schools being that they seek to cram more information into the minds of children in a rudimentary fashion - just basic memorization, same as public.
You can't substantiate this, and you know it. Actually private schools are a more scalable model for a few reasons.
Private schools are businesses. They exist for profit. If a private school underperforms, they go out of business. Parent will not pay tuition to see their children fail or not be educated properly.
Secondly since private schools are independtly run, no 2 can be alike. There isn't a formula that they all need to follow. One school can emphasize a great technology program, one can't emphasize more online learning, one can only run for 3 hours out the day, one can mimic the public school model, etc. The thing is, you really can't broad stroke them. Private schools and the way they function can be as diverse as businesses and the way they function.
However public schools CAN be lumped into a broad category. Why? Because homogenization is the name of the game. They're all ran by the same federal organization that from the top down try to enforce various policies at the local level. Very few of them can be completely autonomous as they're almost always linked to a much larger organization called the Board Of Education.
This means that the goal is to make each public school as similar as possible. This is why I can make statements about it, and probably cover about 80% of every public school out there. Public schools simply will never have the flexibility to change as fast as a private school can. They simply can't stay as up to date on technology or innovative teaching methods because 1 single government entity simply can't compete with private individuals running their businesses as they see fit.
This is the power of the market, and why it's superior to any government organization in terms of quality.
Quote:
I have been around a lot of kids and none of them have expressed an interest in Shakespeare so I'm curious about where this repeated example comes from. My own daughter is very interested in space and we go to the local planetarium and observatory on occasion. I am also going to put her into the "young astronauts" program at a local space museum. My son, an 8th grader goes to a STEM high school. He does lego robotics, engineering, and another engineering class called "Technology" every day. He loves his school but still thinks some things are boring. Kids will always find something to be bored about.
Of course they won't. What are you expecting. They can't show interest in things they're not exposed to. You have to introduce children to these things, and show them why they're interested. I can't stand this entire dismissive attitude about what a child can and can't learn expressed in this thread. Perhaps a lot of it has to do with a parent's ego. Who knows. But the last thing that could be beneficial is a dismissive attitude about a child's future.
Quote:
If you want poor, black public school students to go to private schools, they will just be going to a similar school as a public school in regards to teaching methods. Unless you are proposing that privates reform their curriculum or teaching methods to some sort of new educational process, there is not basis to the idea that private schools teach "better" than public. In regards to special needs students private flat out don't teach kids better than public schools in most circumstances due to not having the knowledge or resources available to adequately educate these children.
I can tell that the OP doesn't really have much involvement in either public or private school.
We need a private school market. Again, you simply can't generalize all private schools, because they don't have to follow a particular model. Most private schools people criticize are the ones trying to completely copy the public school model. The thing I'm saying is that if any sort of innovation in teach is to take place, it will be done by the private market.
Inadequate K-12 education seems to be the problem for Black students.
That is a stereotype about HBCUs based in racial bias.
For the undergrad degree I obtained, I had to take more classes and fulfill twice as many graduation requirements as the popular state school in the area of which I attended and which is highly thought of. During my career, I have had the pleasure to be a supervisor to many graduates of that school and other mainstream schools and they are not impressive to me. All the graduates from a particular school that I won't name were so not impressive that I made it a mission to tell people in my life not to send their kids to that school.
The schools where the most black STEM degrees hail from are Howard University (I have a few relatives who attended Howard and it is considered an HBCU "ivy"), Meharry (which graduates the largest amount of black doctors in the country), Morehouse (MLK's alma mater and another HBCU "ivy") and Florida A&M University - FAMU which graduates the largest number of black business graduates. Spelman, another HBCU "ivy" historically graduated a record number of educators as did my alma mater Clark College and Atlanta University (now Clark Atlanta University).
Most black people today with bachelors and graduate degrees are HBCU alumni.
You can't substantiate this, and you know it. Actually private schools are a more scalable model for a few reasons.
Most private schools are religious in nature (parochial/Catholic schools) I am VERY familiar with the curriculum and teaching method of my local private schools, including independent private schools. They have the same subjects and they have the same setup and they have the same teaching methods versus our local public schools.
Do you not know that private schools also rely heavily on lecture and worksheets just like public? Again, do you have children in private schools? I am a parent and have investigated many top private schools for my own children and found that they were no better in curriculum nor were they better in teacher quality. Many private schools do not even require their teachers to be state certified.
Quote:
Private schools are businesses. They exist for profit. If a private school underperforms, they go out of business. Parent will not pay tuition to see their children fail or not be educated properly.
This is why they kick out underperforming children. Their performance is not a reflection of their teaching method, it is a reflection of them weeding out the "bad" apples or kids with LDs or behavioral issues. When public schools (see magnet and specific charter schools) do the same thing, they have similar results as private schools in regards to performance.
Quote:
Secondly since private schools are independtly run, no 2 can be alike. There isn't a formula that they all need to follow. One school can emphasize a great technology program, one can't emphasize more online learning, one can only run for 3 hours out the day, one can mimic the public school model, etc. The thing is, you really can't broad stroke them. Private schools and the way they function can be as diverse as businesses and the way they function.
The largest types of private schools are religious in nature. Parochial/Catholic schools are the largest private school network. They do have a specific formula and curriculum they follow as do Independent private schools, which are the most exclusive type of private schools (even in areas where vouchers are allowed, they usually do not accept them). They all teach specific subjects. Many of them are required by state law to also adhere to state regulations in regards to testing. This portion of your comment, again makes me think you don't know much about public versus private schools in regards to teaching and curriculum components. You should actually research and look into public schools if you want to complain about them as they, like you stated for private, can also make a specific focus for particular public schools. In my area we have a public "school of the arts." We have a "technology academy." We have an "agriculture academy" where you can focus on urban agriculture. We have an "aviation academy" where kids interested in being pilots can get flight experience.
Quote:
However public schools CAN be lumped into a broad category. Why? Because homogenization is the name of the game. They're all ran by the same federal organization that from the top down try to enforce various policies at the local level. Very few of them can be completely autonomous as they're almost always linked to a much larger organization called the Board Of Education.
As stated above, there are many magnet school and "academy" options today in public school systems. Many of them also have private school type disciplinary policies, which is why they are very highly regarded places of learning. I lived in metro Atlanta until recently and one of the best high schools in the country - Gwinnet School of Mathematics, Science and Technology is located there. They are a public school that outperforms many of the best private schools.
Quote:
This means that the goal is to make each public school as similar as possible. This is why I can make statements about it, and probably cover about 80% of every public school out there. Public schools simply will never have the flexibility to change as fast as a private school can. They simply can't stay as up to date on technology or innovative teaching methods because 1 single government entity simply can't compete with private individuals running their businesses as they see fit.
Again, not true. See comments above. You have not kept up with educational trends. All inner city public school systems in this country have diversified in regards to their offerings and many have schools that tailor to specific student interests or they have IB schools, which is a program used by private international schools.
Quote:
Of course they won't. What are you expecting. They can't show interest in things they're not exposed to. You have to introduce children to these things, and show them why they're interested. I can't stand this entire dismissive attitude about what a child can and can't learn expressed in this thread. Perhaps a lot of it has to do with a parent's ego. Who knows. But the last thing that could be beneficial is a dismissive attitude about a child's future.
FWIW, I never said what a child can and cannot learn. I genuinely am interested in if you actually know anything about public schools today. They are not the same as they were in the 1980s. Many positive reforms have taken place.
But your idea that current private schools deliver material in some magical, fantastic way is what I am questioning here. I have done the research on many private schools and have found that they are not all that much better than public schools except, as stated, they can kick out problem students or those who do not perform well.
They do this, like you stated, because other parents don't want to send their kids to school if the "reputation" for the private school is bad. That reputation is built upon behavioral standards and grades/outcomes of the children. The primary way to ensure that reputation is the kick out students who don't conform to the private school's code of conduct.
Quote:
We need a private school market. Again, you simply can't generalize all private schools, because they don't have to follow a particular model. Most private schools people criticize are the ones trying to completely copy the public school model. The thing I'm saying is that if any sort of innovation in teach is to take place, it will be done by the private market.
[/quote]
We already have a private school market. As stated, it is not much different than the public school market.
FWIW, I am a supporter of vouchers for private schools for parents as I believe that allowing them make the traditional public school system better. I do believe that that had a hand in my local system reforming itself and making itself more marketable for families (I live in Ohio and we've had vouchers for many years).
But as stated earlier, the premier private school in our area does not accept vouchers. I also know quite a few parents whose kids attend that school and they complain all the time about their kids having "too much " work and how the kids get burned out in regards to school.
Even though I support private schools, I don't agree with you that they are better for poor black children than public today.
Naw. I'm keeping my kid home for the first few years because I can't stand the idea of him sitting there wasting his time listening to crap he already knows...
Didn't see the word "mostly" back there, or just wanted to toot some horn or other? By the way, most school systems will make adjustments for children who are legitimately ahead of their peers. That L-word of course will typically depend on more than just some proud parent's assessment of the capacities of the junior genius.
The fact that you don't like the study results doesn't make them garbage. You're just upset that if people knew the truth, you and people like you couldn't oppress them anymore.
HINT: The study is TRASH. It doesn't have anything to do with oppression. It has to do with the all too common condition of people believing sheer nonsense.
Of course the facts are there, but Dems want to keep Blacks as dumbed down and poor as possible so they perpetually vote blue.
The reason that blacks vote heavily for Democrats is that Republicans haven't done much for them since the reactionaries derailed Reconstruction. The only people that Republicans have any sort of track record with is old white Christian males who were raised in the south, went to football schools, and never though the KKK was really that much of a problem.
Most private schools are religious in nature (parochial/Catholic schools) I am VERY familiar with the curriculum and teaching method of my local private schools, including independent private schools. They have the same subjects and they have the same setup and they have the same teaching methods versus our local public schools.
Do you not know that private schools also rely heavily on lecture and worksheets just like public? Again, do you have children in private schools? I am a parent and have investigated many top private schools for my own children and found that they were no better in curriculum nor were they better in teacher quality. Many private schools do not even require their teachers to be state certified.
I understand this. But i think you miss the point. Private schools can run any way they want. I acknowledge that some of the do run very similarly to public schools. But they don't all have to. That's the key to privitization. The freedom try something new.
Quote:
This is why they kick out underperforming children. Their performance is not a reflection of their teaching method, it is a reflection of them weeding out the "bad" apples or kids with LDs or behavioral issues. When public schools (see magnet and specific charter schools) do the same thing, they have similar results as private schools in regards to performance.
Yeah unfortunately this is WAY harder to do in public schools. And it takes way way longer.
Quote:
The largest types of private schools are religious in nature. Parochial/Catholic schools are the largest private school network. They do have a specific formula and curriculum they follow as do Independent private schools, which are the most exclusive type of private schools (even in areas where vouchers are allowed, they usually do not accept them). They all teach specific subjects. Many of them are required by state law to also adhere to state regulations in regards to testing. This portion of your comment, again makes me think you don't know much about public versus private schools in regards to teaching and curriculum components. You should actually research and look into public schools if you want to complain about them as they, like you stated for private, can also make a specific focus for particular public schools. In my area we have a public "school of the arts." We have a "technology academy." We have an "agriculture academy" where you can focus on urban agriculture. We have an "aviation academy" where kids interested in being pilots can get flight experience.
And again, you still gloss over the fact that just because some private schools choose to teach this way, they're not stuck with this, unlike public schools.
Quote:
As stated above, there are many magnet school and "academy" options today in public school systems. Many of them also have private school type disciplinary policies, which is why they are very highly regarded places of learning. I lived in metro Atlanta until recently and one of the best high schools in the country - Gwinnet School of Mathematics, Science and Technology is located there. They are a public school that outperforms many of the best private schools.
"Outperforms". Based on what metric? Do students directly compete with private school students in competitions? I doubt it. You're probably just talking about test scores. And I'll hand it to public schools. They're really good at preparing students to take test. They're just not good at actually teaching anything a child will remember once the test is done.
Quote:
FWIW, I never said what a child can and cannot learn. I genuinely am interested in if you actually know anything about public schools today. They are not the same as they were in the 1980s. Many positive reforms have taken place.
I know from family members, co-workers, etc. Schools are even more focused test scores than they were in the past. And from what I've seen, that's the biggest focus. But I think anyone with sense knows that doing well on a test doesn't actually prove you're competent. Especially when teachers who goal is to get you to cram enough information to do well on it.
[quote
But your idea that current private schools deliver material in some magical, fantastic way is what I am questioning here. I have done the research on many private schools and have found that they are not all that much better than public schools except, as stated, they can kick out problem students or those who do not perform well. [/quote]
It's not magical. Private schools are privately ran businesses. So if something doesn't work they can change it. If a learning plan doesn't really work, they can change that. At the end of the day, if somehow a teaching program doesn't work in public school, there are way too many bureacratic hurdles a person would need to jump through to get any change done. Factor in politicians at every branch of government, and you simply can adapt fast enough.
If something doesn't work in private school? Plan, come up with a new strategy, design a new curriculum. If parents have demand to see different coursework. Guess what private schools can serve their customer base way faster than a public school can. With private school you're not stuck. Don't like the private school your kids are going to? Send them to a different one.
It's all about choices and options. And the ability for the business owner to reply to demand.
Quote:
We already have a private school market. As stated, it is not much different than the public school market.
No we don't. We have private schools, but there really isn't a market for them. Many of them simply don't have to compete for consumer dollars. The private school market is paper thin. This is why people like you think you can look at what few examples of private that does exist, and think somehow you can speak for an entire market.
At the end of the day if private school were a market, we'd see many many different types of private schools, instead of the 1 or 2 in your community that basically copies the entire structure of public school.
Quote:
FWIW, I am a supporter of vouchers for private schools for parents as I believe that allowing them make the traditional public school system better. I do believe that that had a hand in my local system reforming itself and making itself more marketable for families (I live in Ohio and we've had vouchers for many years).
But as stated earlier, the premier private school in our area does not accept vouchers. I also know quite a few parents whose kids attend that school and they complain all the time about their kids having "too much " work and how the kids get burned out in regards to school.
Even though I support private schools, I don't agree with you that they are better for poor black children than public today.
We support different things. i support private enterprise. I support parents using their money to make the best decision in what school to send their children to. I believe totally in a private market that does not work with the government in any way. I believe market dynamics and supply/demand should drive our educational standards.
You support a private structure that is largely working with public institutions.
We need to make it clear about what the word private really means. Vouchers programs are not private.
And yes, the trickle down effect will help black students. The market ensure that young black students are a segment of the population that is no overlooked. Because the market will keep prices at a sustainable and affordable level.
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.
