Quality Education: A thing of the past?

[Tyria]

One of the best teachers I have ever had was in high school; I have gone back to visit because she was a great teacher, person, and friend.

While I was there, I heard a sentiment from her that really made me think: teaching is not what it used to be. Things had changed since I was there: students are not as interested in critical thinking, and instead are obsessed with the straight A's mentality (without being challenged). I personally feel that this will lead to a decline in the overall quality of people's ability to think, but I digress.

Have you encountered this (in either private or public settings) at schools? Do you believe that quality education is/has/will become a thing of the past? What can we do to assure that future generations receive quality education (and that schools will retain great faculty)?

 

[severus]

True that people are not interested in critical thinking.
Not sure about Straight A's Mentality. Most people seem to not care at all..

I'm don't know what education used to be like, but it isn't good now. People need firstly to care that they aren't being properly educated. From there ?

 

[Felan]

I might have missed it but I don't recall school encouraging critical thinking even when I attended. I'm not really that in touch with school systems of today though so I don't really know much of what is going on currently.

 

[Ermine]

I agree. Critical thinking is hardly ever encouraged as a basic skill, and the people that do have straight As are all ambitious for the wrong reasons. Nowadays all an A says is that the student isn't retarded and does what s/he is told. I almost have straight As, but I practically got them on accident. It's pathetic.

 

[Sugarpop]

I can't speak for american students, but the Norweigan system is just trash, which is why I joined the IB. Critical thinking is encouraged, though I can't help thinking that it's very rudimentary. Good grades are still easy to get, but the teachers try to distribute knowledge where appropriate.

 

[Concojones]

Schools are becoming more & more a practical training ground. Immediate measurable knowledge transfer, to as many people as possible, is all that matters. Development of the mind (critical thinking) is not an objective (anymore?).

 

[bdubs]

This is one of those topics that could set me off on a rant for a long time. Here in Ohio USA, it seems that the majority of the area school systems have resigned to passing everyone as long as they show up to school. This became painfully obvious when my state deveopled the OGT (Ohio Graduation Test) for highschool students which had to be "passed" in order to receive a highschool diploma. A passing grade on any particualr section of the test was roughly a 50%. The test was multiple choice and most sections phrased the questions in such a way that the answer to the question was in the question. Students had 6 chances between their sophomore year and the end of their senior year to pass any section of the test the did not pass the first time.

What sickens me is the fact that every year about this time I turn on the news and see stories about how someone with a honor roll GPA in highschool is not going to graduate because he/she was unable to pass the test. There are so many things wrong with this. Not only did 1 test just undermine 4 years of schooling where a person managed to attain a fairly nice grade point average but the fact that they could not pass the test about 6 tries troubles me to no end. I would like to think that the system has failed the students and not the other way around.

 

[merzbau]

having gone to several different public schools in my earlier years, i've encountered a widespread lack of quality education. my anger at being subjected to a wholly dehumanising system of indoctrination, where you're actually taught to hate learning, is mostly retrospective. while they're there kids don't realise how bad the situation is, and what they could actually be able to learn and achieve if questioning was allowed and natural curiousity encouraged. if they did, something might actually change.

a friend once told me of a steiner school he was involved in for a while, which sounded intriguing. their process of learning sounded much more organic and sensible. instead of sitting rigid and silently copying notes from a black board, students would be asked to research something they were interested in, then come back and explain what they had learned about it. the teacher would then send them off in other directions, expanding their abilities and showing them the excitement of learning, rather than the hard work.
it all hinges on how good the teacher is. maybe it wouldn't work in public school setting.

this thread also has a similar discussion.

 

[Concojones]

Good post, Merzbau. Even though my own situation was much more favourable than yours (good school, liked learning, wide interests), I agree that there's a missed opportunity. During lessons or afterwards while studying, I had often visions of how the material could be presented in a much more interesting way.

 

[Toad]

Asian countries schools are much better.

 

[sagewolf]

Elaborate?

I used to get straight As too, just by, as was said, not being an idiot and coming in every day. At the start of this year, I changed that to 'coming in for the tests' and got about half As. Of the other three subjects, one was Irish, which has never been an A for me, and one had material we hadn't covered on it, so the maximum anyone could get on that test was about 70%. So, yeah, still mostly As: pathetic. I rapidly lost interest and motivation in school as I realised that the object of school was just to churn out undergraduates compliant to an office environment rather than to actually teach anything interesting or useful. Still, only two days left... (and I'm seriously contemplating not going in tomorrow). I tell my teachers that I'm working at home, and that I get more done at home than at school. ...Which is true, since I don't say I'm doing schoolwork at home.


...Staying home has nothing to do with my year getting shots this week. Nothing at all.

 

[bdubs]

College level courses right now only seem to encourage critical thinking to about the extent it takes someone to answer a math equation based in chemistry in a slightly different way on a test than was perviously shown in class. It is interesting to see the professor simply change the variable the students need to solve for and hear the outcry that results. Many students swear up and down they have not even seen that type of question before. What the teachers are trying to convey is the importance of understanding the topic on some basic working level vs simply solving an equation based on some previously learned schema. Yet many students fail to recognize this and the class average sits at roughly 50%. Helps me witht he curve I suppose . Its not criticle thinkig but it is somewhat close.

 

[mathy]

Read The Underground History of American Education by John Taylor Gatto. (Available on his website for free here).

It's not perfectly written, and sometimes he meanders around not making a real point for awhile, but overall it really helps you look at the school system from a different perspective. He gives evidence that the school system really is about dehumanizing students, teaching them not to question, and creating drones to do office work (hence, workforce).

The odd thing is that I am drawn to teaching (college level), yet dislike the school system.... I've envisioned ways in which I would teach that would actually encourage learning rather than this stifling, memorize-this-memorize-that, regurgitation crap that is rampant in schools these days. Screw tests. Screw homework for the sake of homework. Research? Heck yes. Questioning? Yes.

Part of the problem with that is, most of the high school teachers (that I had anyway), wouldn't be able to respond to real questions, because they don't know anything outside of their little bubble. Not that I didn't have a few great teachers, but really, most of them were terrible, even in the "great" high school I went to.

College isn't nearly as bad, although importance is still somewhat weighted to regurgitation (at least the low level courses).

 

[severus]

Do other English teachers grade your papers based on style and content? I spent so long editing my own and some peers' research paper, and the whole grade turned out to be based on grammar, spelling, and citations. wtf.
Not to mention we had an assigned topic and were literally handed our sources. Jesus. I've been assigned better papers in fifth grade!

Slightly (more) off topic:
How do you all feel about year-round schooling?
Block scheduling, where you take half your classes each day and they're twice as long?

 

[Hawkeye]

I get marked down for adding humour into assignments. It doesn't make sense... If I meet the same criteria specified why should making it comical be a negative?

 

[severus]

I get marked down for adding humour into assignments. It doesn't make sense... If I meet the same criteria specified why should making it comical be a negative?

Because it requires creativity, and we all know what that leads to.

 

[Anling]

I was disappointed by most of my high school teachers. I did have an amazing English teacher though. She got nominated for teacher of the year and used that as an opportunity to berate the school board on their ridiculous requirements. We had some four our five different state tests we had to take every year. And they were pretty useless and took up at least a week of class time each. She brought all the creative things she could have been using that class time to do but couldn't because of all the time wasted on these tests to show them. One of the board even admitted that her projects were probably more useful than the tests.

Slightly (more) off topic:
How do you all feel about year-round schooling?
Block scheduling, where you take half your classes each day and they're twice as long?

I don't know what I think about year-round schooling. I haven't had any experience with it. I always liked having my summers free, but I'm not sure I would have minded. They just have smaller breaks spread throughout the year right?

Block scheduling would have made it like college and I survived that just fine. The only problem is you have to actually remember what day it is to get to the right classes. But that would probably work better, you have more time to actually get into a subject before you have to switch gears.

 

[severus]

I have block scheduling, and I like it because it stretches out the routine. My bio teacher said that they can't get through as much material on it, though I don't really understand why that'd be.

 

[Hawkeye]

I have block scheduling, and I like it because it stretches out the routine. My bio teacher said that they can't get through as much material on it, though I don't really understand why that'd be.

Perhaps because he is an INTP and therefore goes off on tangents when teaching.

 

[severus]

Well he certainly goes on tangents, but I don't know his type. I'd be tempted to say INTP, but I'm none too skilled at typing people.

Probably because he spends the first and last ten minutes or so doing absolutely nothing.

Perhaps students cannot digest 90 minutes worth of information at once, and so block scheduling is innefficient?

 

[sagewolf]

Supposedly the human brain functions best in blocks of forty(ish) minutes or so, but spending longer periods of time on a single subject is something I would prefer to switching seven times a day. If you're going to do something, you had might as well do it in one go. As for year-round schooling... I don't know if I approve or not. It would depend on the actual scheme I saw in front of me.

 

[Razare]

The problem is western society no longer values education. If you ask a parent in what way will they mold their child, I bet you, almost always they will put all sorts of things at the top of their list, yet it will rarely be education. That's the responsibility of schools, not parents. Sure, parents want their children to succeed in it, but when their child's education falters, generally they'll blame the schools and not themselves. Perhaps the schools are there to educate, but then it is the job of the parent to instill how important education is. Instead, we have a society that teaches everyone to instill a different value, a value of being yourself and being accepted for who you are. This means pursuing your own path rather than adopting the wishes of your parents.

This means we are happier as a society, but it also means a great deal of F types (including my sister) never cared for intellectual education.

I once heard a guy on the radio talk about our fundamental problem with education, and he used statistics to sum it up quite concisely. Korean students are less confident about their ability in math than students in the US, yet they score higher on exams. We teach our children it is alright if they don't succeed because we still love them and there's more to life than success. We also teach them to be themselves and be confident about it. All of what I've mentioned leads to a mentality in most households where it is quite alright if a child is mediocre in school. When this occurs on a societal level, the entire system is dragged down. If it were just a student or two in each classroom lagging, it would be different, but it is half or more. This forces teachers to stupefy the entire class, holding back those able to succeed at a higher level for those who don't care that much.

The answer to this is simple and is something that used to occur. High School is just that, High School for those who wish to pursue it. Instead of acting as a teenage day care for those who will never go to college, children and parents should be forced to decide at the eighth grade what path their child will take. Either they will go to High School, which is specifically designed for college preparation, or they will attend a trade school that focuses on preparing for employment. Our school had vocational education but it was an opt-in program, I think it should be mandatory for those who do not demonstrate any desire to attend college. If later in life they want to attend college, they can get a GED or pass some sort of entrance exam and get in. This would at least help weed out the students in High School classes who really have no intention of learning, but only passing.

 

[severus]

http://www.world-prosperity.org/testing.htm

 

['slinger]

If folks thought critically, many of the people "in charge" wouldn't be. Also, the people "in charge" hold the purse strings for the institution that impressionable young minds spend several hours a day engaged with.

Anyone else see this as a little bit dangerous?

 

[bdubs]

My highschool used the symbol of a stool with three legs to symbolize what is required for a students to achieve at the highschool level. The idea was that if any of those legs disappeared it was impossible to succeed. The three legs were teachers, parents and the student.

In my case I was fortunate enough to have quality teachers and parents who insisted on keeping tabs on my progress. By all rights I should have been a fairly good student save for the fact I had very little work ethic in highschool.

It would be difficult to fix the school system. In order to do that the culture surrounding it would need to change. As razare mentioned it would require parents to stress education on the home front. It almost goes without saying some method of maintaining quality teachers would also be required.

The trick is getting people like myself to care about school before college level.

 

[severus]

If folks thought critically, many of the people "in charge" wouldn't be. Also, the people "in charge" hold the purse strings for the institution that impressionable young minds spend several hours a day engaged with.

Anyone else see this as a little bit dangerous?

Oh yes. that.

Maybe not quite what you're getting at, but:
My HS is gigantic. Three thousand some students and growing each year. The hallways are cramped, and teachers have to share classrooms. Some were lucky enough to get the temp. classrooms.

You would think they'd build a second high school, right? No that would be logical!

So here's their brilliant idea: build new sport fields, track, locker rooms(unneeded), bigger parking lot (unneeded--ride the bus!), three "lecture halls" (unneeded), and two dozen more classrooms (we could use MAYBE three dozen).

All of this will cost more than it would to tear down the school and start from scratch.

They don't want to build a new school because less people means not enough people for gymnastics and ultimate frisbee teams. Sorry, why the fuck is that even a consideration? Last I checked school was about "learning," even if it does need quotations.

Jesus.

 

[Seducer of the Homeless]

I get marked down for adding humour into assignments. It doesn't make sense... If I meet the same criteria specified why should making it comical be a negative?

hahaha, my English essays are full of witty (awful) jokes, she comments habitually on my verbal crapulence (mid shakespeare essay i will go off on a rant or explanation of a view, completely irrelevant) commenting on a choir of Black Tele-tubbies, "the words come fast like faeces from diarrhoels" and just exactly what is spewing from certain orifices....

also, my RE assignments get me an A for talking (randomly) of Living TV, the Pope's Bigotry and love of Iron Maiden, and why Inter-Faith Inbreeding is just plain wrong.