Why is education so poor?

I really don't think South Korea's system is any better if they work that much harder. A good education system is doing more in less time.

 

I'm pretty sure Finland is top ranked and they start school later, use more play based education for longer, etc. They start slow and then by the end beat everyone.

 

Taking 2 Spanish classes has not helped me understand things any better. I can read perfectly fine. What do you mean by ignorant? They're ignorant in that they don't know another language, but they could know more useful things.

 

Well with all due respect to your American Studies text, the Democrat Republican Party didn't just split into the Democrat and Republican parties. The Republican Party wasn't founded until several decades later and it's principles were not simply rebranded Whigs.

Although what you're wrong about shows much more detailed background in American history than the average American would have, so props for that!

 

Knowledge always is useful. Always. There is no knowledge no useful. All is useful in one way or other.

With 2 Spanish classes you can not learn Spanish :-S

 

Yet it is based upon OECD PISA statistics. Furthermore, in South Korea, they separate their older students between vocational and secondary schooling. The methods in which a foreign language (English) is taught are actually better than the methods we teach foreign languages. They teach through conversational exchange rather than through an overview of grammar, vocabulary, and writing, with little to no conversational exchange.

 

If you go to a bad school you will probably have a bad life. We keep taking money from 2 major areas. Our education and our infrastructure, this will end up screwing us over in the end.

 

Both South Korea and Finland use different educational approaches. They are always among the top ranked nations for education. The real question for the United States is what approach will allow the nation to once again be a place of knowledge and innovation.

 

Why would I want to learn Spanish? Knowledge is not always useful. Why does it matter what Shakespeare wrote or what Kim Kardashian did over the weekend? If all knowledge is useful, why not have more classes on video games or texting?

 

Businesses can't use IQ tests in hiring (Griggs v. Duke Power Co) so they have to use the next best thing, college degrees. That's why companies want to see a college degree for so many jobs that don't really require it.

 

You probably could, but instead of teaching one how to play video games or text, you teach one how to create the software and technology that allows one to engage in such activities. For example, I have a friend that is obsessed with video games. In high school, he has taken his hobby and applied it to a study that interests him, computer programming. Now, he wants to go to college to become a software designer for video game companies.

 

I know that is what they do. This may save the company a little bit of money, but it puts college students in debt. This is one area where private run businesses may not be best for society.

 

I have to disagree with you there. Language training, any language, will help you understand English so much better. I didn't understand the structure of English very well until I took course work in other languages. And that makes learning other languages easier.

Also I think other languages help you understand how people from other cultures think. Their language reveals their cultural priorities.

 

Or... let businesses give IQ tests, or whatever other tests they may think is appropriate.

 

Our eldest two boys really wanted to go to public high school with their friends so we let them. The older boy is graduating this year, he failed English three out of the four years; we made him do private school in the summer to make up for the first two, but he's going to graduate on time this year because they let him take a reading class to make up the English credit; he basically read books and did an oral report on each of them, but that's it.

Thing is, it's a lot our (his parents) fault, we expected him to do the homework, to learn the stuff, and we didn't make "sure" he did it all like we should have; the kids have always been motivated to succeed, honor rollers, etc. We should have paid more attention, especially knowing that he'd failed English, he said it was the tests that got him, which he's always been a bit stressed so we believed him, let it go. We should have made sure that he took legit classes.

We assumed that he was going to come out of HS with the basics at least, I mean it says it's their "goal" - certainly we expected he would have the big 3 - but it's clear now, too late, that what they consider "the basics" is not the same as what "we" consider the basics. Don't get me wrong, it is mostly our fault and I make no excuse for our mistakes in it; but I do think the system itself is failing the people, despite the standardized requirements.

In my mind "the basics" are:

They should be able to pick up any book written in English and not only READ it, but actually comprehend what it says, understand the punctuation of it and why, know the meaning of the majority of the words, and even be able to spell most of them.

For math they should be able to at least estimate tips and sale prices in their head. They should know how to basic cost analysis, price per pound and such, while shopping. Given a paycheck stub they should be able to figure out what percent they took home and further be able to calculate the average they will net each month for budgeting, and each year for making sure they pay enough taxes to not get hosed in April. They should be able to handle a 1040 form.

Are my expectations too high?

I don't think high schools should allow kids to take "fluff" credits if they have difficulty in the real classes, they shouldn't graduate if they don't understand the basic stuff. Our son is now going to have to take the most basic English classes in college, again, it's pretty much the same stuff they were supposed to learn in high school.

I then have to wonder how much those kids who have to pay for their own college are spending on basic college courses, perhaps not even realizing that it cost them hundreds, maybe even a thousand, dollars to skimp in high school.

 

Yeah, but if all knowledge is useful, why not learn to play some more games instead of doing something that may not be as enjoyable?

 

Why does the understanding the structure of English matter? I already know how people from other cultures think. Why should I take a foreign language class for that?

 

Yes. It's always assumed that a bad answer to a question is the fault of the student; but many times the problem is how the question is phrased. If most of a class gets a question on a test incorrect, it was probably a poor question.

I honestly wouldn't be able to give a good answer to that. Possibly. If I had had more intervention from a mentor-type figure when I was younger? Perhaps. But that's mainly speculation. My issue was a lack of focus and my complete lack of desire. Those issues were not issues in college. That more than anything else was what gave me the self-discipline required to do the work--which is really more important for academics than any kind of innate natural talent. I mean, if it was just about talent I'd have been a mathematician or programmer or physicist, because that's where my talents lie.

Definitely. But I'm at a loss to provide any suggestion other than to say that some students simply need to take time off to learn some lessons not taught in school--about personal development, maturity, self-discipline, etc. But the system we've got isn't really geared towards educating people as much as it is towards issuing credentials.

 

Wow...

Talk about being paranoide...

Anyways, I am too lazy to find the video for you. But a few years back there was a segment on American television (ABC) by this journalist that now works for FNC (he regularly appears on the O'Reilly Factor).

Anyways,... they chose an average Belgian (/Flemish) school and an excellent preforming American school. The Belgians kicked the Americans' butt.

One of the keys is to stick the money to the student, not on the disctrict. This entire district nonsense is to stupid for words. Of course, Conservatives and Liberals don't want to end the "school districting".

(1) Conservatives resist, because it will mean that "their" schools could be invaded by "poor" kids.

(2) Liberals resist, because it means schools can go out of business when they don't attract enough students.

 

This is just nonsense.

Europe is as cultural diverse, if not even more.

And yet we are outpreforming y'all massively.

The USA is grossly mismanaged.

 

Well, Spanish is the second language most spoken of the world after Chinese. You could communicate and have more sources of information rather only with English.

How much more languages you know more resources of knowledge you have access.

 

You're probably referring to John Stossel.

But in the US, conservatives have been in favor of a system in which the money follows the student for years. School vouchers. Most versions of that plan would have the dollars follow a student to a private school as well.

 

Understanding the structure of the english language allows one to speak and write in a more eloquent manner. One can understand more complex literature if they have a greater grasp of grammar, vocabulary, punctuation, etc.

In addition, from your perspective, you think you understand how other cultures think. I am sure if you learned about Spanish culture from a different perspective, you would gain more knowledge.

 

In my area, the Conservative approach has been unsuccessful. New York City private schools, which are based upon vouchers are by far the worst in the state. On the other hand, public schools like the one I attend are some of the best schools in the nation.

 

New York City has school vouchers???