Advanced Search
Welcome to Omgili,
Omgili (Oh My God I Love It ;) is a search engine for discussions. With Omgili you can find answers and solutions, debates, discussions, personal experiences, opinions and more... To learn more about Omgili click here.

This is a complete preview of the discussion as it was indexed by Omgili crawlers. Use this preview if the original discussion is unavailable.
Click here to view the original discussion.

What do you think the responsibilities of US education are? What do you think they should be : education

Is US education mere indoctrination?

Is it the responsibility of a government to encourage intellectual development or would that lead only to its demise? Is our shitty system of learning actually accomplishing everything it was meant to?

First, why do you think it is shitty?

(I am not kidding.) First relate your personal experience.

Shitty, because it doesn't teach kids how to think but, rather, how to remember, so they can pass a test that their (the educationists) jobs rely on.

It all depends on the teacher.

Which tests are you talking about?

SAT? or something else? I will tell you that the CAPT (Connecticut Academic Performance Test) is generally NOT a memorization test, rather it is a skills test.

It is a performance test.

Http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connecticut_Academic_Performance_Test So, maybe the tests in other states are the problem.

That test actually addresses some of my misgivings about tests (though I've never been a fan of multiple choice).

I would have to see it/take it myself to know for sure of course, but it's definitely a good start for schools as they are now.

My mentors wrote the Response to Literature part.

Warning PDF released items Tell me what you think.

(Of course we have a few teachers who teach DIRECTLY to the test...but those are far and few.) Anyways, my school is an inner city magnet school that draws from 17 surrounding districts.

I think 55% of our population is from New Haven.

Our students score very well when compared to other New Haven schools, and to other magnet schools.

Sorry it took so long to respond, but I've been busy lately.

I like how it's set up (the reading/writing sections anyway, since that's my area of expertise).

I particularly liked the recommendations for instructional strategies to perform well on the tests, because I would have liked to experience classrooms similar to the ones outlined.

My only question would be: are the students given a good opportunity for feedback, particularly for those who scored low?

For many of the tests I've had to take, I never received any feedback, aside from maybe a useless numerical score and nothing else.

It would have been beneficial if I could have discussed the areas I struggled with with my teacher to cement my understanding.

No problem. I don't know the answer to your good question since I am don't deal with the upper classmen.

I only deal mainly with the freshmen.

I believe that guidance counselors and such do go over scores with students.

We have access (www.ctreports.com and www.captreports.com to student scores usually by October or Novemeber.

Sometimes as early as Sept.) Teachers are free to go over these things with individual students. We are constantly looking at "anchor sets" with students to show them beforehand what each score "looks" like.

Interesting question. Regarding indoctrination, I think that's a fair point, although I would put it differently.

There is a sense that the government has as much self-interest in helping to raise the nation's children as it has the responsibility to do so. It is clearly in the government's interest to "indoctrinate" or socialize the nation's children to have common knowledge, morals and abilities.

It is also a responsibility for the government to ensure that its nation's children are being "raised right," for lack of a better phrase, in the same way it is the government's responsibility to prevent child labor.

This is why teachers are responsible for reporting child abuse and the like;

The education system is basically on the front lines, or perhaps the last line of defense, in the welfare of our nation's children. Is the system accomplishing what it was meant to?

In some ways yes, in some ways no.

There is too much beaurocracy, I think, and teachers are far too afraid to rock the boat, so I don't think we always get the most out of the system.

There's also not enough authentic connection to the real world, to the community, to the work world, etc.

I think the responsibility of the public education system is to give children the appropriate tools to function in society and allow children to discovery where their interests lie.

To a certain extent this is being accomplished through elementary and middle school (up through the 8th grade).

High school is, in my view, where the education system fails. During the teenage years, students aren't given enough autonomy to pursue the education they want.

From a practicality standpoint, how important is Algebra?

Geometry? Brit Lit?

Chemistry? I don't use any of what I learned in those classes in the real world.

I absolutely believe those subjects should be available, but it does no one any good to require teenagers to learn that information, because they won't learn anything by being forced, and chances are it will only breed resentment.

If a student has an interest in math, then let them take all math classes.

If a student has an interest in English and music, then let them take English and music classes.

Most normal students could finish high school in three years if they were actually motivated to anyway, so there is also plenty of time for students to explore and try different subjects if they still aren't sure what they enjoy.

Plus, without all the wasted time in classes that aren't useful or hold no interest to a student, it frees up more time to do internships or gain experience working in their field of interest.

There are so many jobs out in the world, and I would bet most kids don't even realize all that they could potentially do. Of course, what if the student simply lacks any interest or motivation toward academia?

Well, in high school, I had the opportunity to attend a "career and tech" center.

They had a programming class and I was interested in possibly pursuing that as my career.

(they also offered culinary arts, mechanics, landscaping, etc.) After a few months into the program, I realized that programming was simply not for me.

Unfortunately, I was forced to continue attending the classes, but giving this opportunity of attending a vocational school for those who don't wish to pursue academia seems like a wonderful solution.

There's also the bonus of not bludgeoning a student's perspective of learning so if later in life, if they experience a spark of curiosity toward math, music, science, art, etc.

They won't be against pursuing their interest in said subject. This is what the school system should be like, but is any of this even feasible?

I have no idea. These are simply the ideas I've been tossing around in my head for the last few years.

I just hope what I said is coherent, since I've never actually put my ideas to words.

Vocational schools seem more expensive than regular, sit your damn seat, schools.

Also people will view it as "elitist" or racist even. Ridiculous, I know.

But I've been told that when I discussed vocational schools with a local professor. I teach high school.

He has no clue.

During the teenage years, students aren't given enough autonomy to pursue the education they want. I don't think we should enable students to be pigeonholed out of certain careers for the rest of their lives because of decisions they make on a whim about their high school curriculum.

They aren't locked out based on a whim.

People have gone back to school to change their major and pursue a different career quite often.

The much more common case is that they settle for less.

People go back to college, not high school.

You can't become a college biology major if you haven't taken a single science or math course since you were thirteen. The level that should change is college.

Once you have a high school diploma, no college should tell you that you have two more years of basic general classes to take in every subject.

I was an English major, but I had to take all kinds of bullshit that had nothing to do with English. Although I do think high school should offer more options for transitioning into the work force.

Students who will go on to be electricians, plumbers, carpenters, car mechanics, secretaries, store managers, accountants, etc.

Should have more options their last two years, maybe.

In other words, school should be more connected to the community and the real world.

Give hands-on math, science, reading, writing and government equal time.

Solid book work definitely makes for resentful kids.

I would love to have a discussion with you on this topic if you wish to provide counterpoints.

Like I said, it's merely some ideas I've had, and I don't claim to see all different sides of the argument.

I like the core idea - Let students focus on their interests, expose students to potential fields of interest.

But I think you take it too far when you say From a practicality standpoint, how important is Algebra?

Geometry? Brit Lit?

Chemistry? I don't use any of what I learned in those classes in the real world. The problem I see with this is that if we let high school students pick the classes they want most of them will pick the easiest ones that they need to spend the least effort on.

Also, many many people don't sort out what their interests are until college (sadly, many not even until later).

I know people who started their careers thinking they wanted to do X, worked for two years then found that they hated it and wanted to do Y.

They liked X in the class room and internship but hated it in the career.

Without a balanced HS education they would've been set back much much further when they decided to switch, and by the time they decided to switch they were on their own - doing the work remedially would've been far harder. If a student has an interest in math, then let them take all math classes.

If a student has an interest in English and music, then let them take English and music classes. Judging from my highschool experience, liking math & science was the fast track to the unpopular zone where kids get pushed around.

I think making them optional would discourage many kids from taking those classes for fear of bullying. Well, in high school, I had the opportunity to attend a "career and tech" center.

They had a programming class and I was interested in possibly pursuing that as my career.

(they also offered culinary arts, mechanics, landscaping, etc.) After a few months into the program, I realized that programming was simply not for me.

Unfortunately, I was forced to continue attending the classes, but giving this opportunity of attending a vocational school for those who don't wish to pursue academia seems like a wonderful solution. That does sound pretty good.

What about a curriculum along these lines: 9th to 11th grade, take the core classes in math, science, history, lit + a different vocation class of their choosing every half year.

Ideally the vocation classes would work similar to your career and tech center, allowing them to get a feel for different areas and sort out what they wanted to do.

By the time senior year comes around they've sampled 6 different careers and can spend the year focusing their classes around their favorite vocation or sample 2 more. The problems I see with this approach is that HS students are easily influenced and may take classes because their friends decided to take it.

Also, the vocation classes would need people from industry to help out with it.

That works on the volunteer level (ala citizen schools ) but I'm not sure how or if it could scale to mandated for every highschool. I'm doing a volunteer thing through citizen schools right somewhat along these lines targeting middle schoolers.

The idea of allowing students more say in what they learn stems from my experience of not being able to take classes I was actually interested in.

I wanted, for example, to take a creative writing class, but I was too busy taking the "required" classes that I was never given the opportunity.

For sure, I overstated it a bit, but I don't think offering students a little leeway in which classes they take (after speaking with a guidance counselor about it perhaps) would be a good thing. As to your point about bullying and students taking the easy road - that seems like a problem that should be addressed, not worked around.

Of course, can such things be "fixed"?

No idea, but point taken.

I agree with many of your ideas.

I've often seen that students have a very limited sense of responsibility, their only practical sources are either a job that can fire irresponsible employees or a teacher that is very good at classroom management. I propose something similar to your idea, that students have the option of studying and following their interests.

Combined with the practical, real world, students could intern at a local business or other facility with a professional trained or creatively inspired to teach something of the connection with the subject (obviously this implies that a community of business and educators work hard together to make this very common and possible). No longer would students ask, with mere words as answers, "What is this good for?

How will I ever use this?" Students could see and learn directly from professionals.

The sense of responsibility would come from the understanding that the professional is offering their time and energy to the students, and if the student is irresponsible, then good bye, find another person, on your own time.

One of the biggest problems with the state of education is that students and teachers, at least in most public schools, know they're stuck with each other "Yeah?

Where you gonna send me, down the hall to another teacher?

Haha." This idea is naturally at this stage a bit naive and a first attempt, but I think whatever kinks one may imagine, one can adjust to these, but must keep in the back of one's mind the idea that this is done on a mass scale, not just some little program that just a few kids and a few professionals engage in.

Imagine this system including all high school students and many, many professionals of varied fields. Another thing that really is irresponsible not to teach thoroughly to students is basic personal finance.

I'm not sure if this needs to be a separate class or incorporated into another class.

Students need to know the mathematics behind interest rates in loans, credit cards, investments, mortgages, savings, stocks, and comparing different options in life, such as loans vs leasing vs buying, or comparing the descriptions of loans and the various ways advertisers try to manipulate which is the better interest rate.

Considering what the economy is going through, this is an issue that deserves to be on the forefront of education, a place it ought to have been.

Great topic. I'll try to put together some cogent thoughts on the matter when I have some more time.




Omgili Home About FAQ Plugins Usenet