Does School Fail Our Children? Is there a Better way?

[Charellia]

Eh, it's not exactly a personality type. The personality difference is fairly intertwined with ADHD, but it's not quite the same thing. ADHD is an actual mental problem of the brain. Usually it's quite manageable with a bit of medication and other forms of treatment.

I'm no medical professional but this guy makes sense.

http://time.com/25370/doctor-adhd-does-not-exist/

I'm no medical professional either, but I know that an unsourced article in Time magazine doesn't cancel out decades of scientific research. I made a point earlier about the need for formal schooling being needed to learn how to differentiate reliable sources from unreliable ones. A reliable source would cite actual scientific studies at the very lest and would probably be peer-reviewed.

[Forsher]

Don't get me wrong, I believe strongly in allowing students to have some (not all) class choice (As an aside, the idea that this is a thing blows the minds of my students where their 8 subjects are dictated to them and they have NO choice in what they will take). That said, I also feel strongly that we should NOT turn over everything. There are such things as foundation classes that still need be taught at higher levels, even if students disagree with them. The problem with all foundations is that you never think about them until you discover there's a problem... and then it's a dozy.

Also, I have a problem with the notion of setting kids down A path at a young age (I.e. something akin to a college major). We know that people change dramatically between 18 and 20 (which accounts for a lot of major switching) I think. One of the GOOD things, in my opinion, of the US system is that it really does allow for the changing of minds, second, third, fourth, etc. chances. Other systems tend to not be as flexible... this can be a bad thing when what you wanted to do at 16 turns out to be not what you want at 20... or even worse, what you decided to do is suddenly rendered obsolete.

There's no such thing as a non-traditional student in Japan. You miss it... tough.

Sounds like the IB way of doing things would probably appeal to you, then?

As far as I remember, that allows some choice within clearly defined subject areas (and some choice as to the level of study within subjects) and a limited ability to pursue a programme of some sort of specialisation (e.g. I believe it is possible to take economics and history but not, as I did for two years, economics, history and classical studies).

For the record, my parents' combined incomes do not break 100k.

Which implies something between (US) $75,000 and $100,000 which is quite a lot, really. And if you think it isn't, you're a silver spooner.

Name the businesses, and not everyone has $1000. And a lot of people also don't have time to run a business in college.

A university student should be able to not work at all, except during holidays (which are, between academic years at any rate, looong). That this is not the case is a) something I don't think Hugdom gets and b) one reason why universities are, often, treated as "this thing I do so I can do this other thing which means I can do what I want".

ugh, time is literally the worst excuse. If you have time to socialize and have fun and stuff, you have time to start a business. Granted, not everyone is going to through their social life and sports and video games out the window to start a business. And there's nothing wrong with that either. It's just one of those things where you don't have a good reason to not start one besides "I don't want to start one".

Weren't you just saying "Kids shouldn't be taught to think in terms of careers, nor should college students, nor should anyone really". The problem when you say things like the above and things like this is that you're still construing education as a means to a financial ends.

Humans are social creatures... it is not good for the vast majority of people to abandon socialisation to start a business (the vast majority of which fail anyway). And if you think socialisation is possible in lectures, it ain't, what happens in a school classroom is nothing like a lecture.

That is the problem: engineering is not a hobby. Entomology is not a hobby. Historiography is not a hobby. These are things which require massive dedication and resources to accomplish.

Historiography is a hobby.

Basically, historians write all their stuff and they stay up to date in their fields, and they notice something happening in the history writing so they comment on it. It's not the point.

Historiography can also be horribly depressing... see Holocaust uniqueness.

Guess what? Sometimes your sanity is less important than putting food on the table for your family.

You don't have to have a 9-5 to make a reasonable amount of money...

The point was that sometimes this is the only way to do so. In fact, sometimes, a 9-5 and then your 10-3 just about keeps bread on the table.

There's a quote from a film which goes something along the lines of "Enough money to do something, but not enough to do nothing". Choice is often a function of endowment.

You need to have a job and start somewhere to have laboral experience you can transfer with you wherever you go though.

Blogging, freelance work, whatever it is. It doesn't matter what it is, so long as you like it and can demonstrate your proficiency in it.

Try and become a pro blogger. When you've succeeded get back to us. Just because something exists, that doesn't mean it's realistic. Often even being realistic to try for someone whose family earns a lot is absolutely untenable for someone whose family doesn't... the latter can't take the risks because if it goes wrong, it's not recoverable.

[Hugdom]

What's your problem? Literally every little thing I say you spin to make it seem like I'm some unappreciative brat who has been spoiled since birth. You have nowhere to draw these conclusions from. I've traveled for 6 months independently with a $1200 budget. I know how to bootstrap.

Sleeping on the couch isn't fun, my back get's sore very easily. I know a 1000 stories, and I've never worked minimum wage job because I don't like formal jobs but I do know what it's like to not have a lot of money and be alone in a big city.

I've shared hostels while travelling and it was honestly really fun.

I don't have anything to draw these conclusions from but your seemingly reckless optimism.

We have a saying at home: the ones who say "money isn't important" are the ones who have either never had to worry about money or have never had any to begin with.

You and I share different ideas of what "fun" is because for me fuck that. I'm not sharing hostels. Just because I can doesn't mean I will do it.

Here's the deal, money is important and I've never denied as such. What I have said, is that money isn't the goal. It's a means to an end, and the experience and the joy and the sense of community is more important.

I don't understand your fear of sharing rooms with people. It's a great way to make new friends and expand your world view.

[United Marxist Nations]

I don't have anything to draw these conclusions from but your seemingly reckless optimism.

We have a saying at home: the ones who say "money isn't important" are the ones who have either never had to worry about money or have never had any to begin with.

You and I share different ideas of what "fun" is because for me fuck that. I'm not sharing hostels. Just because I can doesn't mean I will do it.

Here's the deal, money is important and I've never denied as such. What I have said, is that money isn't the goal. It's a means to an end, and the experience and the joy and the sense of community is more important.

I don't understand your fear of sharing rooms with people. It's a great way to make new friends and expand your world view.

Some of us don't want to make new friends and want private spaces.

Following the other thing you said: if money is the means to an end, and you don't have money, then you cannot reach the end.

[NERVUN]

Know you, exactly, what you wish to do with your life? Are you sure?

You ARE aware that up to 50% of college students enter as undecided and some 75% change their majors before graduation...

And we really think 16-year-olds would be better at this?

That's a problem. Kids shouldn't be taught to think in terms of careers, nor should college students, nor should anyone really. The whole "what am I going to do for the rest of my life?" is actually a really stupid question. College shouldn't be about learning to a standard to get some degree, it should be about self discovery and freedom. Sitting in on classes you don't need to take, starting a business with the little money you have left over, participating in clubs, showing up to a party where you don't know anyone and walking away with 12+ friends, etc. College should be treated as an experience as well as an experiment, not as a career path, and 16 year olds should be opened up to the experience.

Major does not equal career.

It DOES mean specialization. Because even in ONE field, there is simply too much to learn to gain easy mastery of it.

Ok, I have a BA in Secondary Education (English) and an MS in Counseling and Educational Psychology with Emphasis in Information Technology in Education (Don't ask), and am certified for TESOL. I've been teaching the past 11 years and I'm still learning. In my spare time I love to read, usually SF or histories. I'm actually rather fascinated by history and science. I'd say I have a better grasp on history than a good many people, especially Japanese history, which is a favorite.

Does that mean I am competent enough to teach it? No. Can I claim to be a historian? No. I can say I know enough to NEVER go toe to toe with Arch (unless we ARE talking about Japanese history) or else he will eat me alive.

Pretty much all that time spent the in classroom and professional development and STILL I am just beginning. There's just too much.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

I don't have anything to draw these conclusions from but your seemingly reckless optimism.

We have a saying at home: the ones who say "money isn't important" are the ones who have either never had to worry about money or have never had any to begin with.

You and I share different ideas of what "fun" is because for me fuck that. I'm not sharing hostels. Just because I can doesn't mean I will do it.

Here's the deal, money is important and I've never denied as such. What I have said, is that money isn't the goal. It's a means to an end, and the experience and the joy and the sense of community is more important.

I don't understand your fear of sharing rooms with people. It's a great way to make new friends and expand your world view.

Try living most of your childhood with zero privacy and then we can talk. I like my privacy, sharing rooms with people doesn't fit well with me, unless they are a girlfriend or a wife, but even then, it needs to feel I can trust them. But I am not the kind of person who either trusts people so openly or like to have little to no privacy. I can make friends on my own time, thank you very much.

The sense of community, again, is the goal of having money, it is not how you get to have money. There's two different mentalities: how you're going to get your money and what you are going to do with said money. The first one does involve seeing the money as an end, the other one involves seeing money as your means to do something. You can't have stage 3 without stage 2.

[Forsher]

An appalling amount of "parents" use the school system as free daycare; they take no interest in their child's education and don't contribute to the child's learning or help out at school. I can't see these parents making sure their kids learn via the internet so we need public school even if it is a mess (our colleges have to teach remedial maths/English because our high schools are inadequate). There would be riots in the streets demanding free daycare and free laptops and free broadband. Improvement in education demands parental participation not technology change.

That's the interesting thing. In New Zealand, we have something called the decile system which means that you give more money, per head, in funding to schools that are worse off in the socio-economic assessment that the model makes. I think there is some evidence that this leads to a perverse outcome where because the higher decile schools feel a need to go about fundraising, parental engagement (with the school/education... rather than, say, the sports team/s) increases thus worsening the "resource* gap" that exists... the very thing deciles are meant to solve (if this is true, it is one reason why deciles have not shown themselves to be effective).

On the other hand, starving schools of resources just to see if this helps sounds like a pretty bad idea...

*Time and effort being counted as resources here, as is pretty standard in economics.

[Hugdom]

ugh, time is literally the worst excuse. If you have time to socialize and have fun and stuff, you have time to start a business. Granted, not everyone is going to through their social life and sports and video games out the window to start a business. And there's nothing wrong with that either. It's just one of those things where you don't have a good reason to not start one besides "I don't want to start one".

Weren't you just saying "Kids shouldn't be taught to think in terms of careers, nor should college students, nor should anyone really". The problem when you say things like the above and things like this is that you're still construing education as a means to a financial ends.

Humans are social creatures... it is not good for the vast majority of people to abandon socialisation to start a business (the vast majority of which fail anyway). And if you think socialisation is possible in lectures, it ain't, what happens in a school classroom is nothing like a lecture.

The point is not to drop everything and start a business. My point there was that there is no excuse to not be able to start a business. Not that it should be an option everyone takes.

You don't have to have a 9-5 to make a reasonable amount of money...

The point was that sometimes this is the only way to do so. In fact, sometimes, a 9-5 and then your 10-3 just about keeps bread on the table.

There's a quote from a film which goes something along the lines of "Enough money to do something, but not enough to do nothing". Choice is often a function of endowment.

Nonsense. There is never a situation in life that forces you to stay stagnant in your current position. If you hate your job and choose to stay in it, you aren't forced. It is a conscious decision you are making.

Blogging, freelance work, whatever it is. It doesn't matter what it is, so long as you like it and can demonstrate your proficiency in it.

Try and become a pro blogger. When you've succeeded get back to us. Just because something exists, that doesn't mean it's realistic. Often even being realistic to try for someone whose family earns a lot is absolutely untenable for someone whose family doesn't... the latter can't take the risks because if it goes wrong, it's not recoverable.

It's not about becoming a pro blogger. It is about demonstrating to your friends/employers/business owners that you can learn about fields and topics and develop insights about them. The whole blogging thing isn't to put food on the table, it's to build a profile about yourself that you can show other people. Although if someone is particularly good at it there is nothing stopping them from making it something they make money from.

[Hugdom]

Here's the deal, money is important and I've never denied as such. What I have said, is that money isn't the goal. It's a means to an end, and the experience and the joy and the sense of community is more important.

I don't understand your fear of sharing rooms with people. It's a great way to make new friends and expand your world view.

Some of us don't want to make new friends and want private spaces.

Following the other thing you said: if money is the means to an end, and you don't have money, then you cannot reach the end.

Who ever implanted this idea that if you don't work a regular 9-5 job you wont have any money to do anything you like?

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Some of us don't want to make new friends and want private spaces.

Following the other thing you said: if money is the means to an end, and you don't have money, then you cannot reach the end.

Who ever implanted this idea that if you don't work a regular 9-5 job you wont have any money to do anything you like?

It's not that having a 9-5 isn't going to leave you without any money.

It's that many times a 9-5 is where everyone starts making money, and usually they end up liking a 9-5 enough that they stay there and get promoted within a company.

You have to start somewhere, and there's no shame in going to work for a 9-5 job at a decent wage.

[Hugdom]

Here's the deal, money is important and I've never denied as such. What I have said, is that money isn't the goal. It's a means to an end, and the experience and the joy and the sense of community is more important.

I don't understand your fear of sharing rooms with people. It's a great way to make new friends and expand your world view.

Try living most of your childhood with zero privacy and then we can talk. I like my privacy, sharing rooms with people doesn't fit well with me, unless they are a girlfriend or a wife, but even then, it needs to feel I can trust them. But I am not the kind of person who either trusts people so openly or like to have little to no privacy. I can make friends on my own time, thank you very much.

The sense of community, again, is the goal of having money, it is not how you get to have money. There's two different mentalities: how you're going to get your money and what you are going to do with said money. The first one does involve seeing the money as an end, the other one involves seeing money as your means to do something. You can't have stage 3 without stage 2.

You can have privacy while sharing a room. Put a lock on your phone, put a lock on your laptop, and when you're doing your business the bathrooms have a lock. Not sure what other privacy there is to be needed, but it's not like everyone is inside the room all the time. Regardless, I never said it's the route everyone should take. My position is the opposite, no one should be forced to take a certain route.

[Hugdom]

Who ever implanted this idea that if you don't work a regular 9-5 job you wont have any money to do anything you like?

It's not that having a 9-5 isn't going to leave you without any money.

It's that many times a 9-5 is where everyone starts making money, and usually they end up liking a 9-5 enough that they stay there and get promoted within a company.

You have to start somewhere, and there's no shame in going to work for a 9-5 job at a decent wage.

And many times isn't all the time, and I never said there was any shame in working a 9-5.

[United Marxist Nations]

Some of us don't want to make new friends and want private spaces.

Following the other thing you said: if money is the means to an end, and you don't have money, then you cannot reach the end.

Who ever implanted this idea that if you don't work a regular 9-5 job you wont have any money to do anything you like?

Making money is going to take time out of your life, and the majority of people will have to take regular employment.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

It's not that having a 9-5 isn't going to leave you without any money.

It's that many times a 9-5 is where everyone starts making money, and usually they end up liking a 9-5 enough that they stay there and get promoted within a company.

You have to start somewhere, and there's no shame in going to work for a 9-5 job at a decent wage.

And many times isn't all the time, and I never said there was any shame in working a 9-5.

You say it's boring and repetitive. As someone who has worked a 8 hour job I can tell you that's not what it is.

Further, you need to gain experience. Being educated and having laboral experience are two different things, although they are tied together sometimes. How can someone honestly hope to supervise and run their own business if they have never worked for someone else?

[Hugdom]

Who ever implanted this idea that if you don't work a regular 9-5 job you wont have any money to do anything you like?

Making money is going to take time out of your life, and the majority of people will have to take regular employment.

But that's not the point of any of this. The point is that it isn't for everyone, and we shouldn't assume that because someone doesn't follow a societal trend or expectation that they are a failure. The point is to stop making a one size fits all system and start recognizing individuality as a thing. It feels like we've done this everywhere in life but at school and in our childhoods.

[United Marxist Nations]

Making money is going to take time out of your life, and the majority of people will have to take regular employment.

But that's not the point of any of this. The point is that it isn't for everyone, and we shouldn't assume that because someone doesn't follow a societal trend or expectation that they are a failure. The point is to stop making a one size fits all system and start recognizing individuality as a thing. It feels like we've done this everywhere in life but at school and in our childhoods.

If someone can make it work, then good for them. But the majority of people who try do fail. And they are considered failures because society has an economic standard of measuring success that is perfectly rational.

[Hugdom]

And many times isn't all the time, and I never said there was any shame in working a 9-5.

You say it's boring and repetitive. As someone who has worked a 8 hour job I can tell you that's not what it is.

Further, you need to gain experience. Being educated and having laboral experience are two different things, although they are tied together sometimes. How can someone honestly hope to supervise and run their own business if they have never worked for someone else?

I think it's boring and repetitive because I've done it before and it sucked. And a lot of people like me are just like that, and it's not a bad thing it's just different. We need different, but my critique is that our schools do not do different. And the general expectation that society sets is not a good thing when applied to everyone.

People are different and have different opinions to what is fun, what is tolerable, and what is intolerable.

[Hugdom]

But that's not the point of any of this. The point is that it isn't for everyone, and we shouldn't assume that because someone doesn't follow a societal trend or expectation that they are a failure. The point is to stop making a one size fits all system and start recognizing individuality as a thing. It feels like we've done this everywhere in life but at school and in our childhoods.

If someone can make it work, then good for them. But the majority of people who try do fail. And they are considered failures because society has an economic standard of measuring success that is perfectly rational.

No, this discussion is about school. It snowballed into all of this other stuff, but the weight society places on school and grades and sports is not "rational". And the point here is that we need to give these kids who are so fundamentally different in how they perceive things and how they learn the tools to make it work for them. And to let them know that there is a world and a way to live their life that will work for them. That school and grades and sports aren't everything

[United Marxist Nations]

If someone can make it work, then good for them. But the majority of people who try do fail. And they are considered failures because society has an economic standard of measuring success that is perfectly rational.

No, this discussion is about school. It snowballed into all of this other stuff, but the weight society places on school and grades and sports is not "rational". And the point here is that we need to give these kids who are so fundamentally different in how they perceive things and how they learn the tools to make it work for them. And to let them know that there is a world and a way to live their life that will work for them. That school and grades and sports aren't everything

I agree on sports, but why should we not place weight on demonstrated competence or lack thereof?

[Hugdom]

No, this discussion is about school. It snowballed into all of this other stuff, but the weight society places on school and grades and sports is not "rational". And the point here is that we need to give these kids who are so fundamentally different in how they perceive things and how they learn the tools to make it work for them. And to let them know that there is a world and a way to live their life that will work for them. That school and grades and sports aren't everything

I agree on sports, but why should we not place weight on demonstrated competence or lack thereof?

Because a person's worth is not measured by their fucking report card. They're have been incredibly successful entrepreneurs who understand what it means to do meaningful work that got Cs and Ds in school. There are painters, there are dancers, and public speakers. Good grades are not a necessarily a measure for intelligence, and bad grades aren't a measure for stupidity. Some kids just can't do school because they don't learn the way school says they're supposed to.

And there's nothing wrong with that, but these kids are taught that there is something wrong with that.

[United Marxist Nations]

I agree on sports, but why should we not place weight on demonstrated competence or lack thereof?

Because a person's worth is not measured by their fucking report card. They're have been incredibly successful entrepreneurs who understand what it means to do meaningful work that got Cs and Ds in school. There are painters, there are dancers, and public speakers. Good grades are not a necessarily a measure for intelligence, and bad grades aren't a measure for stupidity. Some kids just can't do school because they don't learn the way school says they're supposed to.

And there's nothing wrong with that, but these kids are taught that there is something wrong with that.

1) Special Education programs
2) Dancing & art school, rhetoric schools.

[Naushantiya]

We need to educate children in far more important matters like patriotism, Hindutva and other important things. We need to bring back Vidalayas

[United Marxist Nations]

Oh, fuck, the Hindu nationalist is here.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Oh, fuck, the Hindu nationalist is here.

AQ'd

[NERVUN]

I agree on sports, but why should we not place weight on demonstrated competence or lack thereof?

Because a person's worth is not measured by their fucking report card. They're have been incredibly successful entrepreneurs who understand what it means to do meaningful work that got Cs and Ds in school. There are painters, there are dancers, and public speakers. Good grades are not a necessarily a measure for intelligence, and bad grades aren't a measure for stupidity. Some kids just can't do school because they don't learn the way school says they're supposed to.

And there's nothing wrong with that, but these kids are taught that there is something wrong with that.

*sighs* No, there isn't.

The problem is who is doing the evaluating. You are telling me that you are gifted, brilliant, and just too cool for school. And maybe you are.

The thing is, I've been alive twice as long as you, I've taught, professionally, well over half of your life. Now I HAVE met some of those brilliant kids who were indeed too smart for school, but... 99% of the time, the ones who were making the same complaint you are, were the ones who also never demonstrated any competence.