0
   

Clueless in America

 
 
Reply Wed 23 Apr, 2008 06:40 am
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/22/opinion/22herbert.html?_r=3&ref=opinion&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin


NT Times article which basically agrees with John Gato's assessment that many if not most American kids would be better off living in the jungle and being raised by chimpanzees like Tarzan than attendeing government/NEA schools.

Quote:

...Roughly a third of all American high school students drop out. Another third graduate but are not prepared for the next stage of life — either productive work or some form of post-secondary education....

...But, then, some of us are pretty dopey. In the Common Core survey, nearly 20 percent of respondents did not know who the U.S. fought in World War II. Eleven percent thought that Dwight Eisenhower was the president forced from office by the Watergate scandal. Another 11 percent thought it was Harry Truman.


  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 721 • Replies: 13
No top replies

 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Apr, 2008 06:50 am
Good Article.

I feel there is blame to go around.

TEACHERS UNIONS - Refuse to allow their members held accountible for poor performance.

ADMINISTRATION - Wants to eliminate "testing" or lower the standards to somewhat offset the above.

GOVT - Waste of taxpayer $ and provide no oversight relive to the above.

PARENTS - Too many offer excuses for non-participation in their childs education.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Apr, 2008 08:50 am
There's a much bigger problem. Our public schools are based on the old Prussian model which was intended to produce factory workers who wouldn't get bored doing repetitive tasks. In our present age when factory labor is increasingly done by robots and almost every meaningful job involves some interaction with computers, that model is no longer even applicable, much less adequate.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Apr, 2008 09:29 am
Re: Clueless in America
gungasnake wrote:


NT Times article which basically agrees with John Gato's assessment that many if not most American kids would be better off living in the jungle and being raised by chimpanzees like Tarzan than attendeing government/NEA schools.

That statement contains several obvious errors, I count 3 so far. Can you find them gunga?

If this is an example of the education level of those attacking the government schooling system, I think the public schools can rest assured in they are no worse than those attacking them.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Apr, 2008 09:55 am
Re: Clueless in America
parados wrote:
...

http://www.able2know.org/forums/images/avatars/4987667544282af218b2a4.jpg
.


Then again, being born ugly is a genetic problem which no school system could do much about...
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Apr, 2008 02:22 pm
Spell check will easily find one of your errors gunga.

It will find 2 of them if you bother to do a little research on the second one.
0 Replies
 
candidone1
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Apr, 2008 03:31 pm
woiyo wrote:

Good Article.

I feel there is blame to go around.

TEACHERS UNIONS - Refuse to allow their members held accountible for poor performance.


In Canada, it's not that the union refuses to hold anyone accountable, it's by what standard are we doing the accounting and what does "accountable" mean?
Are student pass fail ratios a reasonable measure for teachers's success?
Are standardized tests used to gauge the success of the student or the teacher?
Is funding a reasonable factor to consider if and when success is being measured or when discussing accountability?
I have no problem, as a teacher, of being held accountable, nor does my representative union. But it's tough to say that I have failed a student when I have exhausted every resource available to me and the "system" to see that this student succeeds and they don't.

woiyo wrote:

ADMINISTRATION - Wants to eliminate "testing" or lower the standards to somewhat offset the above.


We are advocating an elimination of standardized tests, or forms of tests that overimplify and reduce "learning" to one test, one style of test or one test where success-rate "data" can be extracted easily because it can be run through a scan-tron computer, uploaded and analyzed.
"Learning" is not measurable with a multiple choice test.

woiyo wrote:

GOVT - Waste of taxpayer $ and provide no oversight relive to the above.


Every bureaucracy is a waste of taxpayer money. Every system can be streamlined in some way. I would like to see a better way of funding the system that didn't involve having Pepsi Cola plaster ads and machines all around the school so that new novels could be purchased for the English Department.

woiyo wrote:

PARENTS - Too many offer excuses for non-participation in their childs education.


Yes. Agreed.
But the system is also enabling students and tacitly approving of failure.
I can't give a kid who earned a 12% a 12%. I have to give him or her 35%. It's the "minimum allowable grade". If they are consitent in earning this grade, I am unable, as a professional, to hold them back a grade or recommend that they be held back a grade.
Apparently being a chronic underachiever is OK on the ego, but being held back is hard on their esteem.
0 Replies
 
ThroughTheLookingGlass
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Apr, 2008 08:33 pm
That's just super - we will graduate hoards of "adults" who are proud of themselves for no reason. Whatever happened to self esteem coming from a job well done?
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Apr, 2008 10:17 am
So, why is 85% of the students in gifted high schools in NYC composed of Asian students? (Forty years ago that percentage was for secular Jewish students - neighborhoods, and cities change.) Duh! Maybe they did their homework, participated in class, and studied their assignments. Oh yes, there's nature. They may just have more connections in their brains for some reason or other. Their ancestors were learning their languages' pictograms, while Europeans were doing what? Their epigenome might have more horsepower?

In effect, carpenters need good wood and nails. Teachers need non-disruptive and avid students.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Apr, 2008 12:12 pm
Education Lessons We Left Behind
By George Will

Quote:
If an unfriendly power had attempted to impose on America the mediocre educational performance that exists today, we might well have viewed it as an act of war. -- "A Nation At Risk" (1983)

WASHINGTON -- Let us limp down memory lane to mark this week's melancholy 25th anniversary of a national commission's report that galvanized Americans to vow to do better. Today the nation still ignores what had been learned years before 1983.

Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan once puckishly said that data indicated that the leading determinant of the quality of public schools, measured by standardized tests, was the schools' proximity to Canada. He meant that the geographic correlation was stronger than the correlation between high test scores and high per pupil expenditures.

Moynihan also knew that schools cannot compensate for the disintegration of families, and hence communities -- the primary transmitters of social capital. No reform can enable schools to cope with the 36.9 percent of all children and 69.9 percent of black children today born out of wedlock, which means, among many other things, a continually renewed cohort of unruly adolescent males.

Chester Finn, a former Moynihan aide, notes in his splendid new memoir ("Troublemaker: A Personal History of School Reform Since Sputnik") that during the Depression-era job scarcity, high schools were used to keep students out of the job market, shunting many into nonacademic classes. By 1961, those classes had risen to 43 percent of all those taken by students. After 1962, when New York City signed the nation's first collective bargaining contract with teachers, teachers began changing from members of a respected profession into just another muscular faction fighting for more government money. Between 1975 and 1980 there were a thousand strikes involving a million teachers whose salaries rose as students' scores on standardized tests declined.

In 1964, SAT scores among college-bound students peaked. In 1965, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) codified confidence in the correlation between financial inputs and cognitive outputs in education. But in 1966, the Coleman report, the result of the largest social science project in history, reached a conclusion so "seismic" -- Moynihan's description -- that the government almost refused to publish it.

Released quietly on the Fourth of July weekend, the report concluded that the qualities of the families from which children come to school matter much more than money as predictors of schools' effectiveness. The crucial common denominator of problems of race and class -- fractured families -- would have to be faced.

But it wasn't. Instead, shopworn panaceas -- larger teacher salaries, smaller class sizes -- were pursued as colleges were reduced to offering remediation to freshmen.

In 1976, for the first time in its 119-year history, the National Education Association, the teachers union, endorsed a presidential candidate, Jimmy Carter, who repaid it by creating the Education Department, a monument to the premise that money and government programs matter most. At the NEA's behest, the nation has expanded the number of teachers much faster than the number of students has grown. Hiring more, rather than more competent, teachers meant more dues-paying union members. For decades, schools have been treated as laboratories for various equity experiments. Fads incubated in education schools gave us "open" classrooms, teachers as "facilitators of learning" rather than transmitters of knowledge, abandonment of a literary canon in the name of "multiculturalism," and so on, producing a majority of high school juniors who could not locate the Civil War in the proper half-century.

In 1994, Congress grandly decreed that by 2000 the high school graduation rate would be "at least" 90 percent and that American students would be "first in the world in mathematics and science achievement." Moynihan, likening such goals to Soviet grain quotas -- solemnly avowed, never fulfilled -- said: "That will not happen." It did not.

Moynihan was a neoconservative before neoconservatism became a doctrine of foreign policy hubris. Originally, it taught domestic policy humility. Moynihan, a social scientist, understood that social science tells us not what to do but what is not working, which today includes No Child Left Behind. Finn thinks NCLB got things backward: "The law should have set uniform standards and measures for the nation, then freed states, districts and schools to produce those results as they think best." Instead, it left standards up to the states, which have an incentive to dumb them down to make compliance easier.

A nation at risk? Now more than ever.
0 Replies
 
candidone1
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Apr, 2008 02:44 pm
McG....you used to teach didn't you?
What's your take on the system when you were in it, now, and/or since you left?

Foofie, I agree. Teachers need students with attention spans longer than an infant.
0 Replies
 
rabel22
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Apr, 2008 03:04 pm
On the other hand perhaps teachers should make classes interesting instead of takeing the easy route and teaching by rote.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Apr, 2008 03:12 pm
candidone1 wrote:
McG....you used to teach didn't you?
What's your take on the system when you were in it, now, and/or since you left?

Foofie, I agree. Teachers need students with attention spans longer than an infant.


I left teaching becasue I started to feel I cared more for my students then most of their parents did. I already had a family and taking care of my kids was enough paerntal responsibility for me. In addition, the politics of teaching unions, the attitude of the administration and the uncaring attitudes from the kids was enough for me to realize I was not in the proper vocation and got out.

Haven't regretted it since.
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Apr, 2008 08:45 pm
rabel22 wrote:
On the other hand perhaps teachers should make classes interesting instead of takeing the easy route and teaching by rote.


Make it as interesting as you want, and there are still students that will give stupid answers to interesting questions.

But that point about rote learning. That was the mainstay of public and Parochial education. It put out some really hard-working, intelligent adults in the 20th century. In fact, Parochial school was always thought of as very rote learning, yet no one questionned that a Parochial school student was light years ahead, many times, in the self-discipline to succeed. Sorry, rote is good.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Clueless in America
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/15/2025 at 12:20:31