bungalow

i really think anti-intellectualism is the bigger problem, at least in america. let's face it--the overwhelming majority of people do not value a thorough education, did not receive one, and will not pass a desire for one on to their children. it isn't cool to spend your time reading shakespeare or developing advanced math skills--it isn't cool to pay attention in class, do your homework or engage your teacher in conversation/debate. as an american teenager you are supposed to despise school and your teachers for making you do work. "when will i ever use this" is a pretty dominant mentality--most american school children are convinced that school is a waste of their precious time (time they would rather spend watching television, playing games, texting, surfing the internet). this mentality is reinforced at home by parents who don't encourage their children to read or engage them in intellectual conversation, and who spend their free time watching television or doing other things. obviously i don't expect a child to be born with a burning desire to become a polymath, but when they do not have that desire within themselves, and the parents do not provide the motivation, the last resource is teachers. teachers are essential in educating our children and yet some teachers seem to have 'educating' very low on their list of priorities. before i go further i believe it would be useful to define the word 'education' for my purposes. the primary component of an education i think is critical thinking skills--it is absolutely essential that students learn to make inferences and deductions, make connections between separate ideas, analyze and explain ideas and situations and view new information and ideas with an open mind. knowledge is important and amassed over time but it is secondary to the ability to think critically about information. sadly developing this skill is almost a non-point in american schools. in college prep classes, often the focus of the teacher is ensuring their students pass their tests and pass the standardized tests (which are silly easy) and so the focus of the class is the memorization of information that will be included (in multiple-choice format) on the tests and standardized tests and not the ability to analyze that information of make connections between the ideas within it. and unless you happen to get lucky and have a great teacher or two, all college-prep classes all throughout high school are like that--and the ability to think critically is literally never developed. the system is like this in part because of the standardized testing system where students are expected to perform at a certain minimum level but also because teachers themselves are a product of the education system here and don't see the problem with the way everything works. also you don't tend to gain a lot of favor (in the short term) with students when you rigorously challenge them (as mentioned before, they mostly hate school and will hate you for making them work) and so it's just easier on the teacher to make the tests easy--kids pass, they like you, all is well. unfortunately without teachers providing that motivation and without parents providing it and without role models who provide it many students go through school without learning much of anything, and grow in to adults who don't know much of anything about anything, and then you become and old person who attends tea party rallies.

bungalow

also, school curriculum and textbooks are set by local boards of education and as you can imagine some of these people are COMPLETE FUCKING MORONS who have no business having any part in educating children yet somehow are making big decisions about what children do and don't learn in class and molding children's entire perspective of history/science based often on personal biases/politics/religion and not on providing a solid education.

mr dave

but MY kids are SPECIAL and you can't possibly understand the SPECIAL way their brains operate. i mean really, they're little geniuses, get over yourself and your books, and research, and theory, and practical experience, and knowledge. i KNOW my kids are already smarter than you and if you DARE fail my kid (read: not give them a better grade than i KNOW they deserve) i'll shoot you.

(sorry - couldn't resist letting the sarcasm monster out to play for a bit )


@Bungalow - i think you totally hit the nail on the head in regards to the culture of anti-intellectualism, seems to me it's also resulting in a culture of anti-work, "i shouldn't HAVE to work at a job i don't like, it's impeding my freedom!" or, "the employer should pay more attention to ME and cater to MY abilities and preferences and restructure their enterprise to suit ME. it would TOTALLY make for a better working environment."

you're also spot on with the lack of critical thinking development throughout high school. first time i went to college (right after finishing high school) i didn't last a semester, had 0 critical thinking skills, no ability to do relative logic, and taking computer programming - because i was good grades in all my math, science, and computer classes.

i'm thinking the catch-22 in this situation is the same thing that gave momentum to the abstinence only sex 'education' - a desire from the parents to keep their children ignorant of issues they don't want to deal with, just keep your head in the sand.

__________________
i am the universe

duga

I'm not sure if this is divergent or anything, but I've noticed a couple posts about how we are very focused on the "specialness" of kids, or even as adults as mr. dave pointed out. We want everything catered to us as individuals.

This is a very western idea. Aldous Huxley actually brought up a great point, and if you read his book "Islands", you will know what I'm about to talk about. Westerners are all about the idea of "you are a special snowflake...even when you fail at something, you are just special...put your mind to it and do whatever you want". Eastern thought is more focused on society as a whole. Everything you do is focused on how it contributes to everyone else in the bigger scheme of things. This is why Asian children are known to do much better in school. In fact, after living in Asia I can tell you first hand that even if someone does not like what they are tasked, they have the ability to just get the job done with nary a complaint.

Aldous Huxley felt the best kind of society was one that blended these two extreme forms of thought. The individuality of the west and the societal mentality of the east. I tend to agree, especially when it comes to education. I'm not sure of the best way to implement this, but I hope others can see the benefits in attempting this kind of change. Thoughts?

__________________
Confusion will be my epitaph...

Astronomer

First of all, Asian kids do not do better at school. This is a myth. They may have longer hours and work harder and achieve well in their particular education system. They have a very different education system and if you compared it equally do education systems in Western countries they do not necessarily to better. In fact, recently Asia have been seeking out educators in countries like Australia to go over there and share their teaching philosophies. About two of my friends have scored jobs in Asia writing education and curriculum programs.

Secondly, I don't think it's necessarily treating kids as 'special' but focusing on the fact that they are all individuals and have different learning styles. It is a well known fact that the education system favours students who are visual learners by the way it is organised and lessons are delivered. However there are also auditory learners, kinesthetic learners, etc. I did a survey which involved testing people who had gone onto higher education and those who didn't. Most people who went onto university were visual learners, most people who didn't were kinesthetic or interpersonal learners.

I think an integral part of teaching is recognising students differences and seeing them as individuals. Not necessarily seeing them as 'special,' but knowing that they will all learn differently and that as a teacher you have to cater for this. This is another reason why I believe in equity above equality. If you give all the students the exact same equal thing, it's not actually 'equal' because the are all different and they all need different things.

__________________

duga

I've found most kids coming from Asia at the University level do exceedingly better than their western counterparts. You are right about how they work harder in their system to achieve their goals, and despite differences in the system what is stopping westerners from working hard in their system? It is the individual vs. society thing I was talking about.

Perhaps many Asian countries are starting the "blending" I was talking about already if your friends got jobs of that nature. All I'm saying is that your average kid from the US wouldn't stand a chance in the Asian system (assuming they had enough time to latch on to the typical western philosophy). However, my major criticism is that this type of schooling promotes everything to be "by the book". They know what is expected and they do it exceedingly well. Sadly, it also diminishes any motivation they might have for creativity.

So, there are pros and cons and that is where my last post comes in.

__________________
Confusion will be my epitaph...

bungalow

i don't know much about the mentality of asian schoolchildren or the education systems in asia at all so i'm not prepared to compare them to our system in america. i do know that asian schoolchildren generally perform better than their american counterparts on standardized math and science tests but i couldn't comment on the general effectiveness of various asian school systems in 'educating' (using the definition i gave earlier) their children. cnn did a segment the other day on school children in hong kong and what was interesting was that, apparently, the overwhelming majority of students in hong kong have a personal tutor who attends to them outside of class, almost daily. this individual focus on a student is really the best way to learn i believe. in a class setting (especially larger classes) a student may be nervous about asking questions or having a teacher explain something repeatedly until it is understood--he or she doesn't want to appear stupid in front of their classmates (who aren't asking questions, and must therefore understand), or they may be disinclined to argue or debate or share ideas with a teacher in front of a class for fear of seeming like a know-it-all. a tutor eliminates the nervousness that would otherwise prevent a student from speaking up in class and thus allows deeper understanding of the material, because it can be discussed on a personal level and the tutor can be sure when the student fully understands something and is ready to move on. having a tutor is the norm in hong kong and that certainly is not the way it is in the united states, where most children only get a tutor if they need extra help in a certain subject.

i realize individual focus on a student isn't necessarily what you were talking about when you mentioned the western idea of 'individuality' but i do think it is important to recognize children as individuals who learn at different paces and in different ways. it is important for students to feel comfortable asking questions and sadly the classroom atmosphere isn't always the best for that.

Neapolitan

I don't think forcing children to learn until they learn to appreciated is the answer, it's part of the problem. I think it would be advantegeous for a child to pursue a favorite subject (of course without sacrificing other subjects). A favorite subject could be used as a life-line to keep the child interest in schooling in general.

I heard that a person is never so sure as what they want to do as much as once did when they were 12 y/o.

I agree most of that except, "whether they think they want it or not." One thing has to be change is that every student is same. Why one student wants to learn and another student doesn't should be adressed. The teacher and parent have to understand why child has a motivational problem to learn, it could be LD or ADD. And if the child is coming from a disruptive household, or with parents that just don't care I think it is wrong to put the onus on the teacher for the child not learning.

More money? Depending what part of the country a person lives in they spend about 12,000 to 27,000 dollars per child in public schools. Throwing more money into a money pit isn't going to fill it up.

Well yeah that's a no-brainer. Those that can't do, teach, and those that can't teach... teach gym.

Well it's mostly hear-say, but one complaint I hear often from the older generation (mature citizens) is that they learn from memorization and the younger generation don't. Anyway from listening to people of different ages is that the style of teaching has gradually change, there is less and less emphasis put on memorization from one generation to another. From what I hear teacher complain about students is that they don't have a general knowledge history geography etc. multiplication tables, presidents, states, all thing that were once memorized. I'm not saying all students are like that, usually people complain about the exceptions. Analytical thinking, learning by rote, (and social interaction) should be equally emphasized.

__________________

Astronomer

bungalow, I agree with a lot of what you have said apart from the fact that you said it takes time to mature and realise the value of your education. I don't think this is true. I have successfully made children as young as 6 or 7 realise that importance of what they are learning and how it relates to their life and future.

Children learn most effectively when the material is relevant to their own lives and socio-cultural contexts. I don't agree with "letting children do what they want," it's about giving them the power to take control of and direct their own learning. Intrinsic reward systems work the best. Teachers still need to be there to direct and guide their learning.

... otherwise I'd be out of a job :P

__________________

boo boo

While what Bungalow said still has a pretty disgustingly elitist anti-American tone to it, for once he isn't dead wrong.

When compared to the rest of this forum as a whole, I'd say I have fairly average intelligence. Compared to most people I know in real life, I'd say I'm a genius.

The most important thing is to teach kids debating skills and deductive reasoning.

Everyone here knows I'm prone to making irrelevant conclusions and strawmen, I admit to having really poor debating and communication skills.

But when I argue with people down here, I find that I'm certainly not the worst.

__________________
It's only knock n' knowall, but I like it

http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs