The Evolution of Education

[IrishEyes]

Your approach reeks of a hidden agenda.

 

No, my approach reeks of pure selfishness!!

 

I've been involved in the public education system, just as you have. I was the uber-volunteer. My older kids all attended PS for many years. I actually went back to school for my teaching certification, in order to work the same hours they schooled, have summers off, etc. I was all for public education, and making it awesome- that was my mission. It wasn't until one of my younger ones started that i really noticed problems. My son is a very bright child, but he just doesn't have the same learning style as most kids. While he was young and at home, I was able to direct his attention to things that would interest him, and he picked them up very early. But that wasn't the case when he got to school. My 6 year old boy wanted to learn to read 'alligator' and the teacher refused to write that word in his 'flip book' because he wasn't supposed to know that many syllables yet. "Alligator" was the beginning for me, and there were many more instances over the next few years that led me to homeschooling. My 4th grader's history year was another prime example. "patrick henry had red hair". HA!

 

Yes, my kid's were harrassed because we are Christians (this was the older ones, kids get more cynical as they get older), but you're right, it wasn't nearly as bad as the Jehovah's Witnesses in elementary school. The Jewish kids were not treated all that great, and the atheists kept very quiet right next to the Muslim children. That's why I don't think religion should be taught. In an effort to bring 'understanding and tolerance' of other religions and beliefs, those children were, in effect, set apart. Kids have a hard enough time dealing with the regular crap involved with being around other children with varying socio-economic backgrounds. Why call attention to religion?

 

My son hated reading for his first few years in school. That stunk, as most everything in school requires reading. When I saw the next one start to struggle in school, even though no problems had been exhibited for 5 years at home, we pulled them all out, and have been at home since. They'll stay home until they are past school age, then will go off to college. I'll re-certify, and go back into public school. My agenda is to implement things that I do now, but on a wider scale. I'd love to work with the 'hard' kids, or the ones with learning 'disabilities', as I am pretty sure that many of those problems are really related to different learning styles. I know that's been the case in my home. But in the meantime, I refuse to sacrifice my children in order to make myself feel better about making a change in public education. My time will come, and I'll have the time to properly devote to the changes that can be made. And maybe my grandchildren will benefit. But my children aren't going to have to live with it as it is now. Not if I can help it!

[GAHD]

Originally posted by: Tormod

 

I am not sure that teaching the same things and using the same textbooks is a real problem (as long as the textbooks are good). I think the problem is how the system encourages rote learning instead of critical thinking. The kids learn that things work in this and that way, but not *why* or for what reason.

Tormod

 

That is PRECISELY the problem with the educational system here as well, though I don't think it's quite as bad.

 

By example; in grade 10 math class we had a teacher who taught exclusively from the book. She had her certificate, and taught 3 different subjects. Th problem was that when asked "why?" She would quote the textbook and give a sheet of paper with 10 different variations on the same equation, rrather than explain the actual reason for the math working. Lo and behold only 2 studends passed the course that semester, myself and a student I was tutoring.

 

ANother problem with the system is the volume of information imparted; grades 1-4 teach the "basics" of a subject, with graded 5-12 spending the first half of the course rehashing what was taught from grade 1-current, and the last half teaching 1 or 2 new tidbits of information. A large portion of time spent in school is devoted to memorisation rather than understanding. This is a big problen, as in school I learned NOTHING except for French and Spanish from grades 6-12. I was basically left to fend for myself. LOL, my favorite memory from school is asking my science teacher a question about how Quarks and such fint into atoms, and his responce; "There is nothing smaller than an atom. Don't argue with me or I'll send you home." And this is the educational system in CANADA!

 

On a close to similar topic, have any of you seen the TV show "talking to americans"? It maily shows the level of ignorance to global affars of americans in general, the only american who answered a question about government outside of the U.S. was an approx 5 year old child.

[GAHD]

One last thaught; If it's funding that's the problem, why not scale the teacher and admin's salery based on student performance? If the yearly average of the students is 84%, you get paid 84% of your salary. It would certainly motivate teachers to TEACH rather than babysit.

 

THe obvious problems with this are teachers grading tthe tests making everyone at 100%, this could easily be avoided by random sampling student's tests to a board of divisional instructors, with arandom sampling of those going to up to the city board, another random sampling going to state, then to federal. It would certainly mandate a standard of education, though it might create a system prone to classifying.

 

An even better system would be to break subject down into units and do away with the grade system; a student could do work as they could understand it, and focus on the subjects that cause them trouble. Rather than advancing fram grade 2-3, the student advances from addition and subtraction, to multiplication and division, to eponents, etc....

 

Seems a more logical and structured system to me.

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: GAHDAn even better system would be to break subject down into units and do away with the grade system; a student could do work as they could understand it, and focus on the subjects that cause them trouble. Rather than advancing fram grade 2-3, the student advances from addition and subtraction, to multiplication and division, to eponents, etc....

 

Seems a more logical and structured system to me.

 

This IS what OBE (Outcome Based Education) is. A child is moved from 1st to 2nd to 3rd, .... grades based on attendance only. Their individual progress is determined by their individual capabilties. Benchmarks are established along the way to identify areas of strength and weakness rather than reward punishment.

 

The final results is a portfolio which shows "proficiency" of all required subjects in order to ultimately graduate.

[IrishEyes]

One last thaught; If it's funding that's the problem, why not scale the teacher and admin's salery based on student performance? If the yearly average of the students is 84%, you get paid 84% of your salary. It would certainly motivate teachers to TEACH rather than babysit.

 

The main problem I see with this, besides the ones you have already mentioned, is that it totally takes the responsibility from the ones that are supposed to benefit. See, you can't force someone to learn something. You can come up with 20 different ways to present an idea, but if that child sitting there is not interested, or doesn't like the prof's perfume, or is just sleepy that day, the point will not be absorbed.

 

I expect a LOT from my children. I don't pass out grades. I don't do a lot of grading of anything. There are no big tests every week. Most of the time it is very low key. My son WANTED to read. So he learned. My daughter WANTED to read 'The Illiad', so she did. Four of them wanted to learn French for a trip to Paris, so they did. Now they are mastering Italian for a week in Tuscany. Are they fluent? Not quite yet. But they have an amazing grasp of those languages, and it's been awesome to have my youngest explain to me the similarities between the words in the different languages. My oldest wanted to understand my husband, and play more games on her laptop, so she's learning Linux. Some of them 'know' what they want to 'BE' when they grow up, so we've checked into colleges with those programs. We know the basic admissions requirements, and they are working towards those. They know that we will pay for their education, but we will NOT get them into the programs that they want. This in no way absolves me of responsibility. I must, as a responsible parent and their primary educator, make all necessary things available to them. One of them needs chemistry, we arrange for a local college student to tutor in the lab. One wants astronomy, we joined a local museum with a planetarium and arranged special viewing times and adventures with the resident astronmer there.

 

Basically, we give them the opportunities that they need. It is up to them to take advantage of those opportunities. Putting all of the responsibility for learning on the teacher is grossly unfair. I agree that teacher's should be better educated to different learning styles, and I think that there should be personality testing for teacher's that deal with smaller children. ;>) However, to threaten to lower an already ridiculous salary based on how many kids choose to learn and perform well in any class is removing the responsibility from those it should rest squarely on - the ones there to learn! It's just giving people anopther excuse to use when they grow unhappy with their lives, "You can't blame me for not knowing that, I had a really bad teacher, she only made 39% of her salary that year!"

 

Of course, in the case of a math teacher like Gahd's (or mine), or my son's 'alligator' lady, that's where the personality testing would come in. If you can't answer questions about your subject, you shouldn't be teaching it. if you are not able to effectively communicate to children, you should not be in front of a classroom, regardless of how brilliant you may be on paper!

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: IrishEyesYes, my kid's were harrassed because we are Christians

 

Again, it was NOT because they were Christians. It couldn't have been because it HAD to be other Christians doing it. It was because of the TYPE of Christian they were.

 

(this was the older ones, kids get more cynical as they get older), but you're right, it wasn't nearly as bad as the Jehovah's Witnesses in elementary school. The Jewish kids were not treated all that great, and the atheists kept very quiet right next to the Muslim children. That's why I don't think religion should be taught. In an effort to bring 'understanding and tolerance' of other religions and beliefs, those children were, in effect, set apart. Kids have a hard enough time dealing with the regular crap involved with being around other children with varying socio-economic backgrounds. Why call attention to religion?

 

And I am (BIG SUPRISE!) 180 on this. I feel the only way that we can get kids to establish an appropriate attitude towards others RE religion, is to educate kids EQUALLY on all aspects and forms of religion, non-belief.

 

Right now their reactions are based on what they are taught by family, mainly parents. Parents today will typically promote their religious stance as the ONLY good one (not universal I know, but still a vast majority). But if kids were taught that Islam, WICCA, Budhism, Atheism, Christianity, ... are all equally acceptable in the US (not arguing reality behind them) and in their schools, there would be less division because of it. There is little doubt that schools promoting equality of color had a strongly advantageous benefit during the anti-segregation struggles.

 

The problem is getting a "fair and balanced" (Hope Fox doesn't sue me) promotion for ALL the various religions. And that is why we will not see a Religious Study program promoted across the US school system. Christians will not allow their beliefs to be put at the same level as a WICCAN or Atheist. They do NOT WANT Equality. They want to maintain a prejudicial support for their particular philosophy. Which is exactly the problem in the first place.

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: GAHDBy example; in grade 10 math class we had a teacher who taught exclusively from the book. She had her certificate, and taught 3 different subjects. Th problem was that when asked "why?" She would quote the textbook and give a sheet of paper with 10 different variations on the same equation, rrather than explain the actual reason for the math working. Lo and behold only 2 studends passed the course that semester, myself and a student I was tutoring.

 

I've had the same problem with my kids' school. Teachers are hired beacuse they are teachers and then placed into what ever course there are openings. My son had a teacher in 2nd year Electronics that had no knowledge of electronics what so ever. All she could do was teach the book. She could not ahve gotten even close to passing the Elect 101 the kids had to pass before they could go to Elect 102. The kids knew more than her.

 

This is how we get Creationists teaching Biology.

 

my favorite memory from school is asking my science teacher a question about how Quarks and such fint into atoms, and his responce; "There is nothing smaller than an atom. Don't argue with me or I'll send you home."

 

Just as two of my kids had biology in Middle School from the same teacher. When I asked him if he taught Evolution in his BIology class, he said they didn't have TIME for it! That he taught "change over time". I asked how he defined Evolution, if NOT change over time. He had no answer. His agenda was obvious. He was NOT there to teach Biology. He was there to stop students from learning Biology as Science understands it.

 

As a side note, this is why I have a problem with Irisheyes wanting to attack the publich school system AFTER her kids are out of school. Though I have to admit that you do have a (quasi-)realistic approach to thinking. :-)

 

On a close to similar topic, have any of you seen the TV show "talking to americans"? It maily shows the level of ignorance to global affars of americans in general, the only american who answered a question about government outside of the U.S. was an approx 5 year old child.

 

Why else would the general pop of the US think that Shrub has done ANYTHING good for the US?

[GAHD]

See, the main problem here is that these teachers had to pass highschool allready, and THEY didn't KNOW the MANDITORY highshool subjects.I find that to indicate a problem with the educational system stemming back quite few years. How those teachers passed highschool, le alone the University courses to get their ticket, is beyond me.

I myself quit public schooling after that math incident and moved to correspondence learning where I could get my diploma fatster, and on my own terms rather than wase 9 hours of my day 'learning' from people who should be working an assembly line.

[IrishEyes]

And I am (BIG SUPRISE!) 180 on this. I feel the only way that we can get kids to establish an appropriate attitude towards others RE religion, is to educate kids EQUALLY on all aspects and forms of religion, non-belief.

 

You know, if THAT were possible, I'd be all for it. But the problem there is major. Again, who gets to decide what is taught from each religion? I mean, do you get a Jew in for a few weeks, then a Muslim, then a Methodist, then a Buddhist, etc? And which flavor of Christianity are the children exposed to?

 

After the initial backlash against the Muslim community here (in the US) after 9/11, there were courses popping up all over to 'educate' kids on Islam. Atheists scream about separation of church and state (and so do I), but yet school districts fought for and won the right to teach about Islam. Yet the same students that are learning about the Koran are forbidden to pray in school, or ridiculed if they don't say the pledge.

 

My kids are not taught 'religious tolerance' in my home. They are taught to respect each person as an individual, and to respect their right to their own beliefs. We have talked in depth about different aspects of Christianity, but we don't let it stop there. We have a Koran, and they have read some of it, especially after watching some uneducated flunky spout lies on CNN. My oldest son thought certain aspects of Mormonism sounded GREAT for a while! (This did cause a little concern for me and my husband, but we soon realized it had nothing to do with the religion and everything to do with two cute girls he couldn't choose between! lol) There is a family that practices Wiccan in one of our homeschool groups, and it's good for my kids to be exposed to their ideas. Some of our best friends are staunch agnostics, and my children thrive from theological discussions with them. It's all about attitude.

 

And for the record, the young lady that tormented my older children was the daughter of a very outspoken anti-religious person in our community. She was not a Christian, and didn't even pretend to be. I think it's both sad and funny that you see our country as full of Christians that are intolerant of any non-believers, and I see a country full of people that scorn God and the Bible at most every opportunity. You think of 8 states where it's illegal to hold office if not a God-believer, and I see how many hoops my church is jumping through to build a family resource center (with our own funds) that will benefit teens all over our county.

 

As for public education, if religion could be taught honestly and fairly, I'd be all for it, but I don't see that ever happening. The OBE idea sounds very much like what I'm doing, and I like that. It's puts a big part of the responsibility on my children, where it should be. However, not everyone can afford to stay home and homeschool their children. For that reason, there needs to be a major overhaul of public education. Parents need to be more involved, and so do students. Teachers need to be more accountable, within reason. Different ideas need to be implemented. People need to give a damn again, and stop expecting everything to be handed to them on a gold-rimmed platter!

[IrishEyes]

ANother problem with the system is the volume of information imparted; grades 1-4 teach the "basics" of a subject, with graded 5-12 spending the first half of the course rehashing what was taught from grade 1-current, and the last half teaching 1 or 2 new tidbits of information. A large portion of time spent in school is devoted to memorisation rather than understanding. This is a big problen, as in school I learned NOTHING except for French and Spanish from grades 6-12.

 

Well, you learned that your country needs some major educational overhauls as well.

 

I always cringe when I see shows that showcase the stupidity of Americans. I know that most are not brain surgeons, but it always makes me wonder how the rest of the world is doing. I mean, most Americans probably couldn't get 75% correct on a map of the Middle East. But how many Pakistanis could name 75% of our states? I can name all of the Canadian provinces, Australian states and GB colonies and capitals, it was required in my junior high school (and i still remember them!). Are Canadians required to learn all of our states and capitals? Can you still name them all?

 

People all over the world could pick out Kobe Bryant or Shaq, but less than 10% of those could probably identify Tony Blair. That's just sad. It's not only America, but we should be doing better than we do!

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: IrishEyes

<blockquote>Quote

<hr> And I am (BIG SUPRISE!) 180 on this. I feel the only way that we can get kids to establish an appropriate attitude towards others RE religion, is to educate kids EQUALLY on all aspects and forms of religion, non-belief. <hr></blockquote>

 

You know, if THAT were possible, I'd be all for it. But the problem there is major. Again, who gets to decide what is taught from each religion? I mean, do you get a Jew in for a few weeks, then a Muslim, then a Methodist, then a Buddhist, etc? And which flavor of Christianity are the children exposed to?

 

Funny that the only one you mention versions of is Christianity. Brings up a couple of things

 

1) Are there not versions of Islam, Judaism, Buddhism,... ?

 

2) If Christianity is the only TRUE religion/ god, from the one true, omnipotent god, then why can't Christians agree on it? Why is it's god not capable of getting his story straight, to his creation? What other failings does this god have?

 

Yes it would be difficult. And yes it would be impossible to teach all of the different version of each. Christianity itself has as many version as it does followers, maybe more!

 

But if it were not for the prejudicial attitude of each's believers, it would be simple to compile the basics of each.

 

The biggest problem however is each, and especially Christianity in this country, would not allow their's to be set as equal to, not superior to.

 

After the initial backlash against the Muslim community here (in the US) after 9/11, there were courses popping up all over to 'educate' kids on Islam. Atheists scream about separation of church and state (and so do I), but yet school districts fought for and won the right to teach about Islam.

 

Nice trick. Mention Atheism surrounded by examples of religious discrimination in our schools! Trying to establish a de facto relationship between the two. Reality can bite real hard though! It was CHRISTIANS that fought the Islam education. NOT Atheists. Atheists do not have a problem with teaching ABOUT religionS. We just stand up against the promotion of one over others, or none.

 

"Judge rules Islamic education OK in California classrooms ... in California public schools has been legally upheld by a federal judge, who has dismissed a highly publicized lawsuit brought by several Christian students and their parents."

 

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36118

 

People ask what I have against Christianity as a philosophy. Yet horrendous examples of it's implementation are readily available at every point in history since it's invention. As well as our being surrounded by them right now. Everywhere in the world. Al I want is for people to give it an open and honest evaluation. Not even that. Just for the right to be able to present the information in a fair and balanced field. Rather than the extreme Christian orientation so strong in the US.

 

Yet the same students that are learning about the Koran are forbidden to pray in school,

 

This is a lie I fight regularly. I know you don't like it when I use the "l(ie)" word. But it is. Students are NEVER forbidden to pray in public schools. This is a lie that is repeated over and over as if repeating it enough makes it true. It doesn;t make it true, but it does convince most people that it IS true.

 

That is why I identify it as the lie it is. So someone somewhere will be exposed to the FACTUAL side of the issue, instead of just heearing the lie again and again.

 

You probably believe it yourself. Why wouldn't you? It helps you validate your personal opinion. A great motivation to unquestioningly accept something

 

But the REALITY is that kids are NOT forbidden to pray in their public schools. Like all other kids, any kid is NOT allowed to cause a disturbance. Nor is a

[IrishEyes]

Funny that the only one you mention versions of is Christianity. Brings up a couple of things

 

1) Are there not versions of Islam, Judaism, Buddhism,... ?

 

Yes, we both are quite aware that there are many versions of almost every religion. Just as there are varying degrees of many non-religions. You're nitpicking, and you know it. My point was clear, and you supported it with your statements, but still tried to maske me look wrong. Why? I acknowledged that there are differences in MY religion, but was not trying to draw negative attention to others. Don't try to turn that into a bad thing.

[IrishEyes]

Yes it would be difficult. And yes it would be impossible to teach all of the different version of each. Christianity itself has as many version as it does followers, maybe more!

 

But if it were not for the prejudicial attitude of each's believers, it would be simple to compile the basics of each.

 

The biggest problem however is each, and especially Christianity in this country, would not allow their's to be set as equal to, not superior to.

 

Did I not say this? Repeating what I say in a more militant way does not make your view any more right than mine. We are agreeing on this issue, whether you like it or not!

[IrishEyes]

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

After the initial backlash against the Muslim community here (in the US) after 9/11, there were courses popping up all over to 'educate' kids on Islam. Atheists scream about separation of church and state (and so do I), but yet school districts fought for and won the right to teach about Islam.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

Nice trick. Mention Atheism surrounded by examples of religious discrimination in our schools! Trying to establish a de facto relationship between the two. Reality can bite real hard though! It was CHRISTIANS that fought the Islam education. NOT Atheists. Atheists do not have a problem with teaching ABOUT religionS. We just stand up against the promotion of one over others, or none.

 

Did you not see " (and so do I)"? I swear, Freethinker, you'd argue with a post! LOL!! YES, you are right - CHRISTIANS fought against the Islam classes. I didn't mean to imply that it was atheists. What I did mean to imply was that atheists fight against religion in schools, as well they should. What would have been hysterical to me would have been seeing the atheists and Christians fighting that fight together! I'm serious, I would probably still be laughing from that!!

 

I know that in my community, the reason Christians were upset was that Islam was being taught be federally funded schools, but those same schools are afraid to say "GOD" for fear of being sued for violation of sep-church-state laws. If one religion is given time in schools inorder for a better understanding of it, why not all? Well, we've already answered that here, right? We both KNOW already why all religions, and non-religious groups, can not be equally represented. Let's not re-hash it again, ok? WE AGREE!!

[IrishEyes]

But the REALITY is that kids are NOT forbidden to pray in their public schools. Like all other kids, any kid is NOT allowed to cause a disturbance. Nor is a Public School Official allowed to be seen as promoting any particular religion while acting in an official function.

 

Who says what a 'disturbance' is? My daughter and 2 of her friends could not have a small prayer circle on the playground at recess for a friends ill grandmother because it 'offended' a student of a different faith. Yet, while protesting the prayer to the playground teacher, the offended student repeatedly used foul language and belittled the three girls. Three girls quietly praying against a building during recess caused a disturbance for another student? That student was then allowed to scream obscenities, with no repurcussions, and the girls were told to apologize for 'evangelizing'? Who caused the disturbance?

 

And where exaclty did I say that Atheists are stopping prayer in schools and should not be considered citizens. ??? Don't try to put words in my mouth, especially when those words go against everything that i firmly believe in.

[IrishEyes]

It would be nice to NOT argue religion in this thread. If you want, we can create a brand new "Freethinker and IrishEyes fight about religion in the US" thread, and we can just go at it. I'm not sure how much either one of us would enjoy that, but we could try if you really want, at least until Tormod makes us stop and kicks me off here for good! Personally, I am enjoying hearing your views on EDUCATION! This is an EDUCATION thread. I'd like to hear more people's views, and more suggestions as to how to improve. If I don't agree with someone's ideas, I hope they will not take my criticism personally, and i would appreciate anyone showing me where my logic is flawed on EDUCATIONAL issues. I would really like to leave religion out of this discussion though. PLEASE???

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: IrishEyesDid I not say this? Repeating what I say in a more militant way does not make your view any more right than mine. We are agreeing on this issue, whether you like it or not!

 

Ya, but I like the way I say it better.... :-)

 

I think it is that sense that you are less convinced that it is possible than I. I get the feeling you are saying it CAN'T be done, while I am saying it would have built in difficulties, yes, but can and should be done.