The Role of Public Education, Rant-Free Zone [Archive]

Rick Tyler

11-28-2005, 03:45 PM

Recent education threads have started me thinking (for the zillionth time) about primary and secondary education. Why is it worth it to provide universal education, and what should be its goals? This is even applicable in other countries, which also (I imagine) struggle over these kinds of questions.

The history of formal education in the US mirrors that of Western Europe. In the beginning, education in non-trade subjects was for the nobility or the church. Generally speaking, if your lot in life was to stare into the south end of a north-bound ox plowing the fields you didn't have much reason to be understand ancient Greek or even be literate. As cities grew, young men were bound to a master for an apprenticeship, and young women were married off. By, say, the early 19th century, most people in Western Europe and the US at least learned to read and write, and to do arithmetic.

The industrial revolution created a demand for workers trained to deal with the new machines, and created the wealth to provide such schooling. The work didn't usually require the skill learned in a long apprenticeship, but it did take more than just an untrained field worker. Of course, the factories had lots of totally unskilled labor including, notoriously, children. The people running the machines needed a lot more skill than that.

In the US, the first real schools -- other than expensive boarding schools for the wealthy -- took two forms. There were city schools and country schools. I haven't read about the history of city schools, but I have read a fascinating history of education in American rural areas. Most of these schools were built by a group of farmers who hired a teacher -- either a farmhand who could read and write or a young single woman -- to teach students for a few weeks in the winter when there wasn't as much farm work to do.

Having achieved universal literacy (don't quibble...), what should the role of public schools be? Is the time for central edcuational planning past? Is a state- or federally-mandated universal educational program really the best way to achieve our goals (whatever those are)?

As you would probably guess, I have opinions on these subjects, but I am genuinely interested in what others think. I'm a product of a pure-public school education but I'm not sure that it is best for all, or even most students. Thoughts?

uncas

11-28-2005, 03:50 PM

I am afraid you are living in a dream world...Universal education sounds great on paper...but as soon as the general public pays taxes to cover education...well you have created a monster...It is called local politics.
What you would like to see...as many others, is a system sim to what you have professed...However, it isn't gonna happen.
This is not a rant....just reality...I have been there...

George Roberts

11-28-2005, 04:38 PM

Rick Tyler ---

I suppose that it is in the public interest to provide sufficient education to move people off the welfare rolls.

At one time the 3 R's were sufficient.

I guess that move education is necessary now.

Tristan

11-28-2005, 05:43 PM

Originally posted by Rick Tyler:

Having achieved universal literacy (don't quibble...), what should the role of public schools be?

To teach intelligent design, "just say no" to drugs and alchohol, and celibacy 'tlll age 30
:D

Bruce Hooke

11-28-2005, 06:20 PM

This is a huge topic, but here are a few random thoughts:

1. In today's "globalized" world, we need to think in terms of competing for jobs with people around the world. The one place where we still have a bit of a leg up on our competitors is in the quality of our colleges and universities. However, that quality is all but useless if the education of incoming students was so weak in high school and before that they are not ready to take advantage of what the colleges have to offer. Thus, for us to compete in the global marketplace it is VITAL that we improve our K-12 educational system.

2. Coming at the issue from a totally different direction, some of the jobs that are both hard to outsource and good paying are the skilled trades, and we should include in the skilled trades factory work that requires a high degree of skill. From what I've heard there are shortages of everything from skilled plumbers and electricians to factory workers who can run the new high-tech manufacturing equipment. We could be doing much more to provide students with opportunities to learn trades if that is their preference. At the same time, students learning skilled trades still need to know how to read and write and still need to learn how to be "life-long learners" because there is every reason to believe that things will continue to change quickly in the job marketplace and the world in general and the only way to deal with that is to continue to learn throughout life.

3. I'm not sure how best to assure a quality educational system across the country. This is clearly an laudable goal but trying to enforce standards through manditory testing clearly also has lots of problems.

4. We should be careful not to blame our education system for problems that should not be its responsibility. Children growing up in poverty or in troubled homes clearly have lots of barriers to learning, and blaming the schools for not fixing these issues is absurd because many of these barriers are simply outside the realm of what schools can address.

cedar savage

11-28-2005, 06:51 PM

Public schools must never, ever "tell it like it is" if that will damage the little precious darling's self esteem.

Let's start with letting teachers be honest with students and parents and administrators.

"Why in the world should we spend $7,000 a year on your totally useless kid? Can either of you parents of this stupid twit tell me one good thing about this kid? Instill some discipline into that chubby lazy brat, then maybe we'll let you send him back to school."

Peter Malcolm Jardine

11-28-2005, 06:53 PM

I have yet to figure out how to lever the public school system out of the hands of the Teachers Union up here.

Zimmer

11-28-2005, 06:55 PM

sayeth unca

...I have been there... So what? Are you saying that your little teeny, tiney, whiney bit of experience, in your little weensy, teensy bit of the world is the status quo for everyone, everywhere, and every thing educational? smile.gif

Joe ( Cold Spring on Hudson )

11-28-2005, 06:56 PM

DON'T FEED THE TROLL!!!!!!!!!!

crawdaddyjim50

11-28-2005, 06:57 PM

I really like the apprenticship programs. But the Nanny state doesn't because you actually have to teach something concrete to the kid, not just indoctrinate him\her into thinking that only the gov't can make a decision about your life or you.

Zimmer

11-28-2005, 06:59 PM

You need to getpast this hate rage you have boiling inside you joe. You really must.

Have you ever read Pollyanna or seen the PBS presentation?

It will absolutely change your world view, preserve your liver, and maybe even help you loose some of that midriff in the process. smile.gif

Joe ( Cold Spring on Hudson )

11-28-2005, 07:01 PM

DON'T FEED THE TROLL!!!!!!!!!!

Originally posted by Bernadette & David Hedger:
Joe, thanks for the help there. I had already formulated a low opinion of the person in question from the first post they submitted. The second is in my opinion, downright rude. And as you say, not worthy of a response. In any case, I have found a crew member who is keen and willing...from the forum, so it looks like it will be a great passage!!!Bernadette.

[ 11-28-2005, 08:01 PM: Message edited by: Joe ( Cold Spring on Hudson ) ]

seafox

11-28-2005, 10:58 PM

I'm proably about to comitt a rant but the reasons for universal public are many besides actually eduicating the youth. they range from training youth to follow instructions, be regimented, to keep a lot of workers out of the labor market and to babysit the kids so both their parrents can work to pay the taxes the goverment needs to keep itsself in power

seafox

11-28-2005, 11:08 PM

to answer your questions the best way to achive the goal under the current tax every one to pay for the childern now in school would be give a check for each kid to the parrents land let the, shop for the eduication they want to give their childern be it public school privet schools or home schools.

in a purely public eduication system let each teacher bid for the number of students they feel they can teach properly and then pay them what ever is decited the proper amount per child. let the tachers hire the adminstration out of their pmts and if the students do not learn the teacher is not paid for that student if a student learnstwo grades worth of information the teacher gets 1.5 the normal amount.

you hear teachers complain that the adverage class size in utah is 28 kids and if we are paying 5400$ a year that is 151,200$. the adverage teacher is getting $40K cost of the room is about 1000$ and anual upkeep and utilities is another 2000$, it is said that adminstration cost only 8% of the buget and that = 12,000$ so we have acounted for about a third of the money where does the rest go?

Phil Heffernan

11-28-2005, 11:29 PM

Sorry to say, I'm out of it...I'm tired of tenured middle school teachers who haven't had a new idea in ten years...I'm tired of teaching to the middle (low) end when the parents don't give a flyin' F...and let their offspring flounder ...

I'm tired of the taxpayers saying F the school, because I ain't got kids in the system anymore...Or because they think that 35K is puhlenty to spend on a career teacher...

I will not let my child lose out because of unions, shyte parents, lousy PS administrators...And last, not least, the crazy notion that everyone needs a college degree, when they'd likely make twice the money as a diesel mechanic...

So it's on to private school for me & mine...Payin' for my kid's education is all I'm about these days, and that's the way I like it...

Sorry for the rant, I couldn't help myself...

Rick Tyler

11-28-2005, 11:40 PM

The two public school systems with which I've been involved with my own kids are clearly focused on preparing students for college. There is virtually nothing else available (except for sports training) except pre-college studies. Back in the Devonian period when I was in high school, we had a home economics building and an industrial arts building. You could also take classes in typing, bookkeeping and secretarial skills.

To learn about any of these non-college-track subjects in our current school district the kids have to attend classes at a local technical college, and they can only do this as a senior. Aside from two teachers in "materials science" there is no industrial arts education in a school of 1,700 students.

To repeat the title of the thread, what is the role of public education? Has school just become a machine for increasing test scores on the subjects important to college-track students? Any ideas for breaking this system? Is it wrong?

If you hadn't guessed, I think it is really broken, but we need to agree what we are trying to achieve. I might be locked into a rigid Aristotelean logic structure, but I find myself thinking that the current discussion of education neglects the "What are we trying to accomplish?" step.

Wild Dingo

11-29-2005, 12:06 AM

Rant-Free Zone???? :eek:

Hey Rick you do know your in the friggin bilge dontcha mate?? I mean ANYBLOODYTHING Goes down here!! You could put up a perfectly innocent thread and get major rants left right and centre!!

tis but the way it tis

Rant free zone? in the bilge??? Gawd strewth whats happenin here!!! :mad:

Rants are good for the soul... yes indeed pure soul food are rants! They allow you to blow your stack without hurtin yourself I mean ranting and thumpin shyte outta the wall just causes pain and the occasional blood spurt :rolleyes: but here in the bilge? RANT MODE is purpetually simmering just left of the ON button

Embrass it

Hug it

Enjoy it!!

Live it!!

OOooh the great joys of the mighty rant the blessed explosion of vitriol and lamblasting words of cheerful denigration ;)

Rant free in the bilge??? oooooooohh come on you cannot be serious?!! Either that or your flamin well madder than I am... and mate thats sayin something!! :eek: tongue.gif

shamus

11-29-2005, 01:57 AM

I dare say our system is completely different to yours, (and ours is somewhat in crisis too) but one reason why I want to see public education prosper is this: I believe in the merit principle. The alternative to public funding would be that bright students of poor parents would be condemned to menial work, while the professionals in our society would include the dumb portion of the offspring of the rich.

uncas

11-29-2005, 04:23 AM

Education starts at home...with learning manners, respect, discipline and some basic 3 R's...
There are kids nowadays who don't really have much of a homelife, which means that there is not much of a foundation for learning in any school system...regardless.

joejapan

11-29-2005, 05:38 AM

.
A guy in Belligham went through a really nasty divorce. The X split and tried to get it all ! :rolleyes:

When she left she even took the toilet paper and the light bulbs! :eek:

Well, about half-way through he'd had enough :mad:

He sold off everything he could, cleaned out the bank, bought a Carol Cutter, stopped by the kindergarten, picked up their little boy and sailed away. ;)

It was 15 years before he finally had to give up the cruising. He saw to it that the boy studied every day of that time. When they returned the boy had to take a battery of exams in order to qualify for college entrance exams. He scored in the top 2%. :D

He graduated, Magna Cum Laude, from UW in Microbiology and is presently in his final year of residency at Sloan-Kettering Cancer Research Hospital.

Not one day of public education !

Why not return some of the responsibility back to the parents ?

uncas

11-29-2005, 05:45 AM

Why not return some of the responsibility back to the parents ?

I think the problem in many cases is that "Parents" is spelled without an "s"!
And then the second problem is...."Responsibility"....It seems, so often, as though one's children today are the responsibility of not just the parent...please note parent...but everyone...
And yes, for some of you...I can see the flack...but responsibility for children does start at home..Responsibility for a child's actions start at home...A parent can not thrust the responsibility of raising a child or children on the community...
I'm not sure what the stats are but look at our society...Divorce is up...etc.

[ 11-29-2005, 06:51 AM: Message edited by: uncas ]

cedar savage

11-29-2005, 06:15 AM

I'll respond more responsibly this morning.

Public education must be preserved. Democracy cannot exist without a reasonably well educated public. Meritocracy should not be allowed to become more of an option than it already is.

If we care at all about the future, whether or not we have kids, we have a responsibility to support universal public education through grade 14 (high school plus two years of vocational training, junior collge, or the frist two years of college).

Having said that, Rick is correct, the system is broken. Colleges of Education and Education Associations (teacher unions) are to blame for creating and promoting the status quo.

Local Building Administrators (principals) are a significant part of the problem. I've seen two elementary schools, a mile apart, do significantly different jobs in teaching kids.

One of the schools had an ineffective principal who'd hired cronies over a lackluster 30 year career and never disciplined one of 'his' teachers. It was a tightly insular little empire of below standard education that rose at its best to mediocrity.

The other school reopened due to growth. The principal was a born leader, able to motivate teachers, students and parents to do their best. She ended up having a free hand hiring her staff from a large pool of experienced teachers, and hired only those with a passion for bringing out the best in kids.

Both principals moved on, one to retirement and one became an Ass't Superintendent. Under their new principals, the mediocre school became significantly better, the other declined and became a hotbed of teacher union grievances.

My son went to both schools. The first f{}cked him up, the second 'saved' him.

So, what do we know about the qualities needed to be an effective elementary school principal? What can we do to develop and promote highly effective educational leaders? What changes do we need to make to the system so that qualified leaders can lead their staffs to excellence?

uncas

11-29-2005, 06:31 AM

The first thing I would do away with are teaching certificates...
Firstly the ability to teach is not based on a piece of paper...There are many graduates out there who do not have a certificate and yet know the material.
To obtain a certificate...one must take certain courses which have nothing to do with their major...and having to take these misc. courses, takes away the time potential educators could put towards more advanced courses in their fields.
At private schools...you do find some teachers with certificates...but the majority of teachers don't have them. And yet, often the education received at a private school has been statitistically better than one received at a public school.
Yes, there are other issues...class size, demographics etc.
Another point...Testing...Kids are being forced to take too many tests...I could not begin to name all of them...in the public school system. Teachers in turn, are teaching kids towards passing those tests...and in essence are teaching by rote...Only the material dictated by these tests is important to teach.....as the results on the tests are what are important for advancement.

Hypothetical example...Two candidates...one has a masters degree freom an Ivy league in Biology...with internships at various biological research stations or labs and credentials out of the ying yang...The other has a college degree...a certificate...and no experience...Which one can the head of the school hire?

[ 11-29-2005, 07:36 AM: Message edited by: uncas ]

Tristan

11-29-2005, 08:57 AM

Uncas has some good ideas! Partucularly upper grade teachers all too frequently are not very well educated, etc. etc. Parents must also take responsibility. How many homes have you been in where there were NO BOOKS. Kids who have no discipline, parents NOT involved with kids education, huge emphasis on material stuff and having "fun," etc. etc. Glad there are some crochity old fharts around like Uncas and me. being a parent is hard work if you do it right. I've done it twice and it doesn't get any easier!

[ 11-29-2005, 10:00 AM: Message edited by: Tristan ]

uncas

11-29-2005, 09:00 AM

Tristan..
crotchity old fharts around like Uncas and me. being a parent is hard work if you do it right.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
crotchity yup...old...not yet! :D

Tristan

11-29-2005, 09:02 AM

Originally posted by uncas:
Tristan..
crotchity old fharts around like Uncas and me. being a parent is hard work if you do it right.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
crotchity yup...old...not yet! :D OH HELL NO! Deepak Chopra, in his book about retaining one's youth, says to imagine a much younger age. I currently believe I'm only 50!

uncas

11-29-2005, 09:03 AM

Me...well 49... ;)

Norman Bernstein

11-29-2005, 09:18 AM

As you would probably guess, I have opinions on these subjects, but I am genuinely interested in what others think. I'm a product of a pure-public school education but I'm not sure that it is best for all, or even most students. Thoughts? I'm a big believer in the old adage that 'the truth is most often found between two extremes'. It's fashionable and popular these days for conservatives to criticize the public school systems in this country and then advocate programs like vouchers, which at best would just accelerate the decline of public schools while serving as a supplement to middle class and wealthy parents who can afford the difference between the voucher amount and the cost of a private school. They rarely advocate fixing the public schools, taking an 'all or nothing' approach instead. The 'Social Darwinism' approach to education will result in better education for some, but worse for others... do we really need to further stratify American society?

I think the benefits of a strong public school system ought to be readily apparent to most people. Japan, along with some other nations, reaped the rewards of investing heavily in public schooling, with the result that American students slipped behind by a number of metrics in the past few decades.

I would also agree that some of the failure of lower class students to succeed educationally can indeed be traced to 'family' effects... culture, attitude, morality, etc... things that the public schools can't directly address. Inner city schools will always lag behind, academically, for these reasons... but it doesn't mean the system is a failure, whatsoever. It's far better to try to provide the best opportunities possible, with the hope that it will greatly benefit students and parents who are motivated and understand the value of education... some of them will, and that's better than just giving up.

Finally, I'm not at all convinced that cost is a big determining factor. It's pretty clear that there are SOME school districts where enormous money gets spent with poor overall academic achievment as a result... Washington D.C. springs to mind... but the cause is probably a combination of the 'family effect', along with beurocracy and corruption, rather than just one particular reason. My own town is rated #5 in the state, but spends less than the state average, per pupil, and rates higher than many towns with higher per-pupil expenditures... so it strikes me that good results and big expenditures don't neccesarily complement one another.

(Disclosure: One of my daughters went through the aforementioned excellent education system in my town... the other went to a private high school, in an attempt to help her with certain learning disabilities that even our 'excellent' school system couldn't provide. I'm not completely convinced the private school made all that much difference... but that same child is now attending Boston University graduate school, receiving honors grades.)

Joe ( Cold Spring on Hudson )

11-29-2005, 09:19 AM

joejapan well said, I love stories like that. I just spent the last night teaching Tess double digit multiplication and subtraction. The concept of taking one away from the tens place and adding it to ones column was fun to teach her. They have not gotten that far but I felt she could grasp it easy, and she did.

Alan D. Hyde

11-29-2005, 09:40 AM

Why would any parent trust any child's fate to the public schools, or to any school? It's rolling the dice in either case, although, obviously, some places are much better than are others--- particularly with respect to the sorts of peers and other people your children associate with regularly.

FIRST, the parents must teach reasonable and honorable behavior. None of us is the center of the universe--- we are at best planets, never suns. If we therefor fail to show respect and consideration for others, and if we cannot offer them words and acts that are positive and productive--- make good contributuions--- then we will suffer as a consequence.

Spoiling a child does no one any favors, least of all the spoiled child. So CHARACTER is first.

SECOND, the parents must teach a love of learning and must encourage the child's innate seeking for knowledge and mastery. Reading is a key here. Television and video-game time should be substantially limited. From even age one or two, when a child shows an interest in something, he should be given a book or two on it--- THEN, not later (at first, when little, they are read to, though they look at the words and pictures as the reader speaks, but soon, by three or four, they are reading for themselves).

So, for example, our children have books on sharks, tigers, dinosaurs, horses, bears, cats, dogs, sailboats, various types of cars, Ireland, Singapore, New Zealand, early New England, tractors, airplanes, scuba diving, distance swimming, the Duke of Wellington, canoeing, --- and on and on. We've left copies of all the classics lying around, and-- sooner or later--- they get read, too.

They've all become voracious readers, with wide general knowledege (which like Velcro, adds to their retentiveness when anything else is studied and learned), and with that ability to write easly and fluently which wide reading of good books confers. It's made school easy for them.

So KNOWLEDGE is second. But, it's not enough.

For, THIRD, they must have practical hands-on experience, tied to increasing responsibility for results.

They swim and earn their lifeguard certificates, they play team sports and learn certain roles, for which their peers hold them responsible, they learn to deal with all sorts of people, from all sorts of backgrounds, they learn to handle firearms carefully and competently, and develop good shooting skills. They learn to ride, and how to master a horse confidently. They learn to sail and motor boats, and to understand the rules of the road, the weather, the way of a boat, the courtesies and the caution that come with being a capable skipper. They learn to manage their own money, and to keep their outgo beneath their income... COMPETENCE is third.

There are of course a constellation of other desirable skills, abilities, and acquisitions of mind and body that are to be encouraged as they develop, but the basic framework for them is, we have thought, what is laid out briefly above.

All individuals wish to love, to be loved, and to be good at some things. Give your children the knowledge, the tools, the affection, the experience to build their confidence--- and then they will finish the job. Remember too, that your actions will always, in a child's mind and memory, trump your words.

Alan

[ 11-29-2005, 10:45 AM: Message edited by: Alan D. Hyde ]

uncas

11-29-2005, 09:42 AM

Soo Alan..when you get right down to it...you seem to agree with an earlier statement I mead

Education starts at home!

[ 11-29-2005, 10:42 AM: Message edited by: uncas ]

Alan D. Hyde

11-29-2005, 09:49 AM

Absolutely, Jamie.

Teachers, however gifted, are sub-contractors.

It is the parents who are the farm's CEO's, responsible for nurturing the young plants until they can grow vigorously--- and resistant to disease--- on their own...

Alan

uncas

11-29-2005, 09:56 AM

Alan...The major problem is that few homes are made up of two adults....and the remaining one is often just trying to survive...
Schooling etc. is secondary...
What you and I agree on I am afraid is fantasy...Not, I am afraid realistic...although I...and probably you can dream!
We gotta clean up the house so to speak before we can work on the schools.

pss. I still think that teaching certificates should not be a criterea for hiring a teacher...Experience in one's field...and knowledge of that field is important...more than a piece of paper.

[ 11-29-2005, 10:58 AM: Message edited by: uncas ]

Alan D. Hyde

11-29-2005, 10:13 AM

My wife, Joy, and I have been married 32 years (since 1973) as of last Wednesday, Jamie. :D

ALL of our children have been reared (and the last, who is fifteen, IS being reared) as described.

As spouses, we haven't always agreed with each other, but we've presented a united front to the children, and kept them from playing off one against the other.

Ask Wayne Jeffers, or others here who have met our children, what they think. I'm biased. :D

For thirty years we have been close friends with five other couples--- every summer we all go camping together on Lake Michigan, and every December, we all have a Christmas dinner together (this year, it's next Saturday, the third of December...). All five couples have stayed together over this time period, though not in some cases without some major difficulties.

All of our children have been reared along similar lines, although of course with individual family variances... So it CAN be done, and is not a matter of fantasy, but a matter of duty and persistence, which are the flip side of the coin to passion, which, without them, is an alluring vapor which too quickly vanishes... Mouthfuls of air...

Alan

[ 11-29-2005, 11:15 AM: Message edited by: Alan D. Hyde ]

uncas

11-29-2005, 10:19 AM

Alan...
My wife, Joy, and I have been married 32 years (since 1973) as of last Wednesday, Jamie

There's the glitch....Married 33 yrs and counting...Together...You have thrown a curveball at the current stats for marriages...
And I congratulate you...There are not a high percentage of people..especially the younger ones...who have been married for more than what 15 yrs.
PS...I am not being sarcastic...I mean what I write...you and Joy are exceptions.
Heck..I have two sisters...both have been divorced...one has remarried and the other has a live in...
I think one marriage lasted approx 10 yrs. and the other...well...maybe 18...I don't keep tabs.

Andrew Craig-Bennett

11-29-2005, 10:34 AM

First, an historical note.

Compulsory education in Britain was rather a late starter; we went in for it some time after Germany did, and it was pushed through because of the widespread, and perfectly justified, feeling that Germany was overtaking Britain as an industrial power.

Second, a personal observation.

In Asian societies, education seems to be taken very seriously indeed - far more seriously than it is taken in the West.

Norman Bernstein

11-29-2005, 10:37 AM

Why would any parent trust any child's fate to the public schools, or to any school?... Alan, your prescription for responsible parenting is certainly wise and thoughtful.

It's a shame that not all parents are so responsible... but it's also a fact of life.

We live in the 'reality world', and unlike the perspective of some in our government, we don't necessarily 'make our own reality'. The reality is that there will be countless children with parents who are either irresponsible, or just too ignorant to know better. A part of the point of public schooling is to try to make up for that deficiency. The children are innocent... but letting our public schools degrade by siphoning off funds and assets doesn't punish the irresponsible behavior of parents... it punishes the children, and by default, it punishes US... by releasing into society kids who don't have the tools to become responsible contributing citizens.

Alan D. Hyde

11-29-2005, 10:41 AM

The statistics are somewhat misleading.

One of those couples we hang around with was a second marriage for the husband, but he'd had no children by the first. The second has held together, or been held together by their efforts.

Consider an example---

person 1--- five divorces
person 2---- three divorces
person 3---- one marriage, no divorce
person 4----- one marriage, no divorce
person 5---- one marriage, no divorce

5 people and 8 divorces 8/5 = average of 1.6 divorces apiece. YET, three out of the five persons were never divorced...

Alan

[ 11-29-2005, 11:42 AM: Message edited by: Alan D. Hyde ]

Peter Malcolm Jardine

11-29-2005, 10:44 AM

"There are lies, damned lies, and statistics."

WC

Rick Tyler

11-29-2005, 12:37 PM

Goals of primary and secondary education, as suggested by forumites:

Alan says character, knowledge and competence.

Several have said that education begins with the family. I think it would be fair to say that these folks would say family first, and the school helping.

Norman referred to avoiding social stratification, and suggesting, I think, that one role of public education is providing a place where kids from different backgrounds can get to know one another.

Not a goal, particularly, but there were a few comments (most extensively from uncas) that state certification of teachers has gone from being a QA process to a barrier to entry. These folks have suggested that teachers be hired on background and ability and not just credentials.

Educational goals specific: maintain competitiveness with other countries, basic skills, and enough education to be a knowledeable voter in a democracy.

uncas

11-29-2005, 12:44 PM

Rick...You missed one..Not a big deal but as you are summarizing all of the thoughts.

Too much testing...Not necessary...As it stands now, a teacher is teaching to the tests...not teaching as a learning process for the students.
The kids have to pass the tests...the tests passed indicate progress...therefore, the progress reflects on the teacher...not as an educator but as an individual who can teach a course to meet specific test questions.
Teachers certainly have little time to experiment, try new techniques, be creative...
As as teacher, I was originally surprised by kids requests to give them the answer to a question. Why the answer was correct was immaterial...AS only the answer is required on a test.

Ask a student how many stars were on the US flag in 1820? He would only know the answer if it was a test question...He would have trouble piecing all of the bits and pieces together to come up with the right answer unless he had been specifically told....Starting with the Missouri Compromise, the political environment, Maine's position and working from there...
Learning is a progression.one step followed by another.....Answering test questions has become rote...No mental work involved.
I was actually asked this question...me with a Wildlife Management degree...It took a while...as I had to think of what was going on in the US in 1820...but...I figured it out...The only thing I did not take into account was that the ratification for admittance did not occur until Jan. 1821...

ps...not all tests are looking for a specific answer...Achievements...which are only given to a few exceptional students would fall in this category.
Many questions asked require an explanation, which in turn requires a knowledge of the subject.
Having taught AP Bio...I did not teach to the test..as I couldn't I could give the students enough background to be able to explain the answers to various questions..
Ah yes, a learning process....one step at a time...One thread leads to another. One thought, one idea...leads to a third and a fourth.

[ 11-29-2005, 02:17 PM: Message edited by: uncas ]

Norman Bernstein

11-29-2005, 12:56 PM

Norman referred to avoiding social stratification, and suggesting, I think, that one role of public education is providing a place where kids from different backgrounds can get to know one another.
The latter idea was not actually my intention...but it's not a bad thing, either.

I grew up in a very diverse community... a wide spectrum of rich, poor, white, black, Christian, and Jewish. My wife, conversely, grew up in a town which was perhaps 99% Jewish... a few token Italians.. and NO blacks. She likes to say I rescued her from that environment... but it's true that her sister, who never left that environment, is a xenophobe as an adult.

Diversity DOES have merit.

It's also true that public schools are indeed social levelers, not stratifiers. If you plop a young kid down in the midst of 100% bright high achieving kids, that one kid will do better, of course.... academically... but might be missing something, socially, and might end up deficient in empathy and tolerance. I think it's better for kids to get a variety of exposure, socially and academically.... better for their character, at least. I know countless parents who have intervened aggressively on behalf of their kids, working hard to give them the best possible educational environment... but it simply isn't true that their kids have ended up being of as high a character as they are educationally.

Alan D. Hyde

11-29-2005, 01:00 PM

Good tests give a student a chance to show what he DOES know and CAN do, rather than probing continually to ascertain what he DOESN'T know and CAN'T do.

Alan

[ 11-29-2005, 02:01 PM: Message edited by: Alan D. Hyde ]

uncas

11-29-2005, 01:06 PM

Alan..I disagree...It means he knows how to take a multiple choice test...It means that the teacher told him Washington was the first president...
It does not show that he knows why Washington was the first president.
A quick answer...no thought required...Rote!
And on a mult test...anyone..even not knowing anything about the subject can narrow down the choices to two out of the four. that's a fifty/fifty chance of getting it right.

ps...perhaps the key here is to define a good test!!!!

Question:
Who was the first president...?
a) Lincoln
b) Bush Sr.
c) Adams
d) Washington....

Beter question...
Why was Washington the first president?

Which of the two best demonstrates a student's knowledge of American history?

[ 11-29-2005, 02:12 PM: Message edited by: uncas ]

Alan D. Hyde

11-29-2005, 01:28 PM

I think, Jamie, that perhaps you may misunderstand what I meant in that last post--- I may have expressed myself too succinctly.

Finding out what someone DOES know is apt to require an essay or a short answer question--- more troublesome and time-consuming to grade, but more illuminating as to the student's actual level of knowledge and understanding.

As to the multiple-choice tests, I pretty much agree with what you said. When I was a boy, my knowledge of history was probably somewhat above average, but it was certainly not compendious. The day before I took the World History Achievement Test (as a senior in high school), I spent all day reading Winston Churchill's The History of the English-Speaking Peoples and, much to my surprise, I got an 800 on the exam--- by using the very process of elimination on the possible answers that you described above.

Alan

Rick Tyler

11-29-2005, 02:21 PM

Originally posted by Alan D. Hyde:
I spent all day reading Winston Churchill's The History of the English-Speaking PeoplesI hope you aren't saying that you read all four volumes in one day. If so, I am not worthy...

salty hoosier

11-29-2005, 02:22 PM

I find it most amusing that a discussion about education is being conducted by persons whose spelling and grammar is horrible.
Are you uneducated or just lazy?
(man, I hope I didn't make any mistakes myself)

Rick Tyler

11-29-2005, 02:30 PM

Originally posted by salty hoosier:
I find it most amusing that a discussion about education is being conducted by persons whose spelling and grammar is horrible.
Are you uneducated or just lazy?
(man, I hope I didn't make any mistakes myself)Aside from failing to capitalize "man" and failing to add punctuation after "myself," no, not that I could see. Speeling flames are lame, by the way. An occasional tpyo on the Web is to be expected.

Harry Miller

11-29-2005, 02:34 PM

Why was Washington the first president? Because he was president at an earlier date than those other dudes.
(That wasn't too tough.)

As spouses, we haven't always agreed with each other There's hope for Joy yet.

In Asian societies, education seems to be taken very seriously indeed - far more seriously than it is taken in the West. Exactly.

Alan D. Hyde

11-29-2005, 02:34 PM

Well, Rick, they're not really that long, they're interesting and well-written, and I started early.

Plus, I'd just finished a "reading lab" course that ALL were required to take (speed reading is essentially a matter of technique, and anyone can do it--- it doesn't requuire unusual skills or abilities) and could read over 2,000 wpm.

This sort of course is no longer required at my high school, which is, as far as I am concerned, a major mistake (I had to teach it to our children myself). You can pick up much of how to do it from---

http://www.evelynwood.com.au/

There is an Evelyn Wood paperback on speed-reading available at (IIRC) Barnes & Noble for under $10. If it's not there, it's at Borders... The last third or so of the book is (IMOOP) a little fanciful.

Alan

Here's a link to the book on Amazon---

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1566194024/103-6215213-2979847?v=glance&n=283155&v=glance

[ 11-29-2005, 03:39 PM: Message edited by: Alan D. Hyde ]