#3482
01/16/2001 10:16 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 137
member
|
|
member
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 137 |
I may be old fashioned but I don't believe that the basic "kid" has changed that much. But I do believe that there's so much going on that it's overwhelming. Like you said it's the rotten stuff that makes the headlines, and we know what's going on everywhere. The world has changed. While it makes it possible for me to have this conversation with you, the pace of the world is changing the world. I don't mean that there's been a huge shift in the balance of good and evil but that we're more aware of the world. The more I know the more I can understand. On the otherhand, that I can know more tragedy from around the world doesn't mean there's more tragedy around the world, just that I know about more. I hear that violent crime has gone down but when I hear about someone murdered almost every night that sticks with me longer than the numbers. And if you show their face...
If I think parents have changed, I think discipline has changed. While I don't think "beating them within an inch of their life" is an option, I think children should be expected to act in a reasonable manner. I'm a big fan of Teaching with Love and Logic. Or Parenting with Love and Logic by Jim Faye and Foster Cline. I believe even today kids have the capacity to make good decisions if we give them the tools. Parents who teach their kids not to respect their teachers, gasp, have children that don't respect their teachers. Then there's not a whole lot of learning going on.
I think being there for kids is huge. I don't believe everyone should quit their jobs. Both my parents worked but I knew they were there for me. I believe there are some kids wired to succeed no matter what. But the rest need some wind in their sails. Either a parent, a teacher, a neighbor,... someone who lets them know there's something good in them and helps them polish it to shine. If when kids look around and all they see is negative, it's hard for some to understand there's more out there. A good role model/example can go a long way. I'm still a big sucker for an encouraging word. Don't wait for the headlines to change. Start spreading the good stuff yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1
stranger
|
|
stranger
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1 |
I was lucky enough to have been taught phonics, to have had plenty of books on hand as a child, and to have graduated from an excellent school system.
BUT...
I don't mean to cause any problems among so many excellent educators--but the problem in education has spread so that the same students who were poorly tossed through the school system are now preparing to teach a new generation of students. It is a horrible thing to say, I know, but the unfortunate truth is that many teachers do not know how to teach or do not know their subject matter well. (Present educators excluded, of course)
In my teacher education class, so many students are ignorant of grammar, spelling, history, simple math, etc. One can graduate with a degree to teach at any level and still not have a basic knowledge of (today's in class example) our Constitution or government. If a student at the college level cannot understand the language in the Federalist Papers (again, today's horrific example) then how is he/she supposed to teach History or English or Government?
Truthfully? I am somewhat afraid to let my (future) children attend school, as I see their (future) teachers struggle through class every Tuesday and Thursday.
Oh--forgive my own mistakes in this post please--I feel incredibly inferior among all this wit and words...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 28
newbie
|
|
newbie
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 28 |
So much to respond to. I hope you all will forgive me if I write something that borders on the ... precipitous.
Part of the problem that I think cannot be overestimated is that the educational enterprise has changed radically. The business of education - to parse a quote - is business (not education).
Until December last, I was teaching Composition at a community college (2-yr. post-secondary) as an adjunct. On the surface, it seems a relatively cushy post: teach anywhere from 2-5 courses per term, design your own course and choose your own materials, escape much of the departmental politics that full-timers must endure.
The fact of the matter was, I had no office space (not even a desk), no support save what I could wrangle out of various departments (I browbeat the IT people into granting me a directory on the server to maintain web pages for my classes), and you are the red-headed stepchild (interesting apellation, that) of the entire college. Your pay on an hourly (class hours) basis appears good, but it doesn't account for the fact that you're working 50-60 hrs/wk for no benefits, and have no collective bargaining rights. It is, in short, a lousy, discouraging, and occasionally even a hateful, gig.
You are subject to intense administrative scrutiny in the event of any student complaint - and here I'm speaking not of complaints of impropriety of any kind, but of things such as "He assigns too much writing." and "I don't understand why I got a B in this class - I've always gotten As in English!" Not only has the bar been lowered, but the current "Customer Service" orientation of colleges and universities in the US puts faculty on the run, and discourages anything other than efficient, corporate, and altogether un-inspired, un-inventive, and un-believably irresponsible behavior on the part of anyone who dares step into the classroom.
Unfortunately, I went from someone who loved teaching the craft of writing, the subtle ebb and flow of critical thinking, purposeful and principled argumentation, and the joy of looking at old topics in new ways, to someone who has left teaching - quite possibly for "good".
We can point fingers at the media, at parents who don't read to their kids, at the overabundance of stimuli, and the ill-trained state of our educators at whatever level - all of which play some part - but we need to understand that much of what is the basic mission of our educational institutions at all levels is profoundly, heart-rendingly broken.
What, I wonder, other than the grand hypocrisy and roaring moral cowardice that withdrawing support for our public schools is, can we do? [The preceding is the most involuted sentence in the history of the language, and for that I apologize.]
Slovovoi
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146 |
Your complaints are not unique to American schools, Slovovoi. I taught in a polytechnic for six years (and before that two years at a university), and the administrative pressure is unrelenting. I became what is known as a "course co-ordinator", "program leader" or "Studies Supervisor". The title changed every year that had a number in it. The reason the CEO (not Principal or anything academically-related, you notice) appointed me was that I turned out to have a knack for satisfying the demands of the external accountability vultures who were always hovering over us without our really having to do anything much. It's all in the words, don'cha know? After a year or so of doing this, I found that I had been completely relieved of my teaching load. To make up for this I developed a new degree programme and a number of other programmes for our IT department but even this palled after a while. Like you, I wanted to teach, but the system demanded that someone stave off the hordes of philistines who were tireless assailing the walls. And like you, I escaped in the corporate world, where I rapidly doubled my salary and my levels of work satisfaction almost overnight! And, again like you, I find it highly unlikely that I will ever subject myself to that regimen again. 
The idiot also known as Capfka ...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 107
member
|
|
member
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 107 |
I too am disturbed by the state of our schools. Not necessarily the curriculum, but the behavior problems teachers have to deal with before they can even teach.
I have experienced it from a different view point. I used to work in a day care program before and after school in two different school districts in the northern Illinois area. They were different as night is to day.
The furthest north school district was a much better behaved group of children because of the lifestyles/principles of the parents. The location was mostly rural 25 years before my time at the school. Now it has become more suburban-like as it is an hours ride (not during rush hour) from Chicago. They were a more family oriented, slower paced, church oriented community.
The other school district was located about 35 minutes (not rush hour) from Chicago and was mostly higher educated, career-oriented group. Higher salaries, more expensive homes, but also less time for family. A larger majority of the children did what they wanted, when they wanted, with no respect for adults at all. They were out of control. Children were pushed into extra curricular activities to eat up time until the parents got home.
There were Kindergarteners that were in our program from 6:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. It was so sad. There is a real need for day care of this sort but more importantly there should be a concern for what that extensive day care does to a childs life. There must be a way to change family schedules to make it so kids can be home with a family member for more than just a rushed breakfast and dinner and a shower before bedtime. I am a firm believer in no one can raise a child like its own parents. Children, especially that young, need to be a bit more mature before thrusting them into that kind of situation for the childs own sake.
The really sad thing is that I don't think it will ever get better because too many people are "thing" oriented instead of "people" oriented. I grew up in Chicago and I love any big city for a visit, but I think I will always live in a smaller people-oriented community.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511 |
Well said, satin. Though I pretty much embrace a libertarian view of the world, the curmudgeonly side of me often wins out, as it's doing in this post: [rant]I think raising kids is one of the most, if not *the most, important responsibility an adult has. We're not whelping here. Tests are required for driving a car, or practicing law. Would-be parents outta have to pass a test to raise kids. Yes, I know it's an Orwellian concept (and not to mention, unenforceable), but that doesn't stop the thought from rising. [/rant] 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400 |
Satin-- if you are interested in living in a people oriented community-- you will-- it won't matter if it is in the middle of a busy city block, a small town, or even a rural farm area. The hardest place to find it will be in a "bedroom community suburb", but even there it can be found. Community exists-- all it requires is for people to get involved. You'll find your community in a church, or school group, or civic group or make it happen with your neighbors-- because you want it to happen. You find that you'll join the PTA-- and then move to the local school board-- which will put you incontact with local officals-- mayors, councilmem, aldermem, selectmen-- what ever they are called in you local government. And as a result, you'll learn about state or county work projects... and take a stand on them.
I think that rural and innner city in many ways offer children rich environments-- rural communities offer children the chance to "escape" in a field-- or up a tree-- and live in their imaginations, and rural live offers a a natural environment to explore, and frequently, responsiblity in the form of caring for animals-- And in many ways cities offer a play-scape that forsters imagination, and cities offer musuems, libraries and other enrichments. Both require responsibilty-- and give children a chance to move in adult spheres-- daily, children (as did my own) ride on the subway to school.. elementry school kids often with a parent, but by HS (age 13/14) my daughter was taking a subway by herself. Many adults are "fearful" of the subway..
Rural kids often find by 13/14 that they are permitted to drive a tractor, or work other large pieces of equipment that would scare many adults not familiar with there operation.. and living inner city--(which in many US cities has cesed to be an middle class option) you have shorter commute times.. so more time to spend with your kids..
While i am hardly inner city (I wish i could afford to be! In NY innercity is the most expensive place to live!) I do live with in the city limits.. and do not have an unreasonable commute. (and shared it with my daughter -- at just the time it was important to be able to "stay connected"-- Teen want to be grown up-- and she felt grown up as a commuter.. so we could "share the commuting experience" at equals. And while I love living in the city-- and like the country (rural country) to visit-- i would hate living there-- but I do recognize it offers a world of experience..
I think the saddest environment for kids are "suburbs"-- to built up and developed to allow kids to have a pony or horse, or calf to raise.., too spread out and lacking things that kids can do or get to themselves.. Teens have no place they can go to-- they depend on mom or dad or someone to drive them places.. there is little public transportation-- and no place of interst to go to even if there is.. and no adult responsiblites for them to take on.. they can't drive, they can't get anywhere by themselves.. So they end up in structured "teem sports" or organized activities.. and they are all run by adults.. Teens in suburbs have no autonomy! (and the same is true with kids of all ages.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,094
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,094 |
I think the saddest environment for kids are "suburbs"-- to built up and developed to allow kids to have a pony or horse, or calf to raise.., too spread out and lacking things that kids can do or get to themselves.. Teens have no place they can go to-- they depend on mom or dad or someone to drive them places.. there is little public transportation-- and no place of interst to go to even if there is.. Hmm . . . that's partially how I got here. 
|
|
|
#3490
05/10/2001 10:03 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,409
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,409 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400 |
Is it already post track season? or have you just put us on your list of places to run to? But I am glad Jazz that you see the internet (and AWAD in particular) as useful. I am not quite old enough to be your grandmother (your grandmothers youngest sister-- maybe- so my thoughts on suburbia are mostly Pre internet. I had lots of cousins who where raised in suburbia.. Many in the post war boom town of Levittown. Some of them are still uncomfortable in NYC-- even though they grew up less than an hour a way-- and their grandmother still lived in NYC till the day she died. They were in one of the worst school districts on Long Island-- Island Pines-- famous locally -- and even for 15 minutes nationally- for the School Board banning books--which contributed to my sense that the suburbs where sterile-- Of course, we always used to buy them the banned books as christmas/birthday presents.. They thought "Catcher in the Rye" was way out.. they had no idea what stories I was reading! O 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,094
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,094 |
Track season is almost over but I still have quite a bit left to do with a final writing portfolio for English. I've been trying to lurk here as much as possible, obviously not posting much recently. I haven't broken into Q&A or Miscellany yet, which each have about 1000 new posts for me. Oh boy! Anyway . . . the School Board banning books--which contributed to my sense that the suburbs where sterileI tend to think that schools now embrace the once banned books because they are applicable history lessons. http://www.cs.cmu.edu/Web/People/spok/most-banned.html - This site lists books that were most frequently banned between 1990 and 1992. I just looked this up and I find it hard to believe because many of the books on this list have been used as part of the curriculum in my English classes. I don't think I know of any books that my school has banned. Maybe our school board is more accepting than others, but I don't know that any other schools in the area have banned books either. We even had to read parts of the Bible because of the innumerable allusions to it in literature. Of Mice and Men, To Kill a Mockingbird and Huckleberry Finn were all used heavily in past classes.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146 |
JazzO, thanks for that link. Now:
[rant]
That list of banned books is probably one of the worst examples of ultra-conservativism I have seen in a long time. It's hard to believe that a modern state bans books at all, and there is something seriously wrong when a bunch of bureaucrats and ill-educated parents (which I assume school boards are made up of) even has the power to ban books. How very fascist of the most "advanced democracy" in the world.
Two of the books on the list (Of Mice and Men and Lord of the Flies) were required reading when I was at school.
I could go on, but I suspect that the members of this Forum would agree with me anyway. [/rant]
The idiot also known as Capfka ...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511 |
I could go on, but I suspect that the members of this Forum would agree with me anyway. And you'd be right. When I was in high school (OK, in the early 70s, if you must know!  ), we read an "expurgated" version of Romeo & Juliet (with all the maidenhead stuff deleted - not that we'd have known what that meant, anyway). My mom made sure I read the original at home. Cap'nK continues: Two of the books on the list (Of Mice and Men and Lord of the Flies) were required reading when I was at school. Moi, aussi. It saddens me that books are still being nominally, if not officially, banned. Around here Mark Twain's Huckleberry Finn is "left off" reading lists. In my day, it was sex and swear words. Today, apparently, it's anything not PC.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,094
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,094 |
Two of the books on the list (Of Mice and Men and Lord of the Flies) were required reading when I was at school.
They were required reading for me as well, Lord of the Flies this year and Of Mice and Men last year and that's why I don't totally understand how those books were banned so frequently only 10 years ago. (And I live in one of the most conservative areas in the country.)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,661
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,661 |
How very fascist of the most "advanced democracy" in the world.
It is clearly time we had a new word to describe what this "democracy" has advanced into, for it is rarely democratic anymore!
...members of this Forum would agree with me anyway. [/rant]
I do!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 137
member
|
|
member
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 137 |
I've read almost half those books, without even trying. Just when I thought I was making progress at becoming a good person.
I've always been curious about banned books, not just which books but why? Why are some of those books on the list? I blithely read those books without knowing they should be banned. We should be warned. I know! What we need is ratings on books, like movies and music. The Lorax is rated PG-13 for violence. Romeo and Juliet is Obviously NC-17, violence, AND sex in the same story.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146 |
Why are some of those books on the list?
Because the narrow-minded so-and-so's who get themselves elected or appointed to positions of power over these things can't deal with concepts which don't gel with their idea of the way the universe is - or, at least, ought to be - in their not-so-humble opinions.
"Of Mice and Men" doesn't cast a very good light on life in the US at that time, and "Lord of the Flies" dares to suggest that a bunch of boys marooned on an island won't all turn into good little boy scouts, choose a leader and live happily ever after.
Reason enough, for moronic hicks of that ilk!
The idiot also known as Capfka ...
|
|
|
#3499
05/15/2001 10:15 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,094
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,094 |
A number of books are banned because of the portrayal of racism. (Huckleberry Finn, To Kill a Mockingbird) The problem with this logic is that both of these books are anti-racism.
Many are banned because they contain the abuse or harassment of children. (James and the Giant Peach, How to Eat Fried Worms) Hmmm . . . David Copperfield isn't on the list though.
Grendel (#40) at least the part I read, was hilarious. And if they ban this then they have to equally ban all of Beowulf.
These reasons are obviously silly, un-enlightened reasons to ban books. It's absurd and obviously hypocritical for a republic such as this (were not a democracy and you know the difference) to deprive a child of the edification given by many of these books. How can a person learn about history and correct the mistakes of the past if he never learns about them? History is the weakest subject in American schools (I read that only 13% of people can correctly identify Andrew Jackson as the man on the $20 bill) and the banning of books is most likely partially to blame.
This is evoking images of Fahrenheit 451 and 1984. I wonder if those were ever banned.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146 |
This is evoking images of Fahrenheit 451 and 1984. I wonder if those were ever banned.
I don't know about those books, but I do know that "Animal Farm" was banned in the Soviet Union (and presumably, by extension, throughout the Warsaw Pact countries). And probably in the US, that well-known bastion of personal liberty (provided you can afford to pay for it)!
The idiot also known as Capfka ...
|
|
|
#3501
05/16/2001 12:45 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 200
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 200 |
we were shown a cartoon version of "Animal Farm" at school, and to my surprise the ending was different from the book. the donkey (Benjamin?) came back and defeated the pigs.
i felt this was quite a different message from Orwell's, and seem to remember that it was an american production.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 137
member
|
|
member
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 137 |
Some answers are obvious but for the same reason some are not. It's the books on the list I haven't read that I'm curious about. It's not on the list but I read somewhere The Lorax was banned in areas (heavy logging areas for obvious reasons to those who've read it) where as it would be greatly loved in others. When I look at lists of banned books it makes me want to read them to understand why they were banned. But that's the rebel in me I guess.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400 |
Re: AS comment When I was in high school (OK, in the early 70s, if you must know! ), we read an "expurgated" version of Romeo & Juliet (with all the maidenhead stuff deleted - not that we'd have known what that meant, anyway). My mom made sure I read the original at home.
My school too had a bowdlerize version-- but our English teacher in order to drum up excitement told us to look up the word Expurgated-- and to buy/beg or borrow a complete edition and we could get bonus point for figuring out why the text had been expunged! --(this was an all girls public HS)
my HS school, a few years before your time AS, was stuffed to the gills with "baby boomers" (over 6,000 students in the school, and most students didn't start at the school till "sophmore" year). It ran on split sessions-- the first class of the day Period 0 started at 7:55 AM-- the last class, Period 10, started at 4:10 or so) I had English at 7:55-- In NYC, even with Daylight saving time-- we arrived at school when it was still dark! Many of us where interested-- but some students where still half asleep (and the rest of us half frozen-- Only 1 door of the school opened for Period 0-- directly across the street from a city reservoir--and the door didn't open till 7:50-- so if you got to school a little early-- you stood out side and froze!)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,094
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,094 |
the first class of the day Period 0 started at 7:55 AM
My first class is at 7:25 and many of the teachers get there at 6:30 to prepare. I personally like this more because we get out at 2:25, leaving more time in the afternoon. I'm pretty sure that most of the schools in this area have about the same hours.
My school is a little different though because we're on block scheduling which means that instead of 7 or 8 classes 45 minutes a day we have 4 classes per semester for 90 minutes a day. (There's also the option of having 2 45 minute classes all year for those of us in band or choir.) It sounds like 90 minutes is a long time for one class, but after a while we got used to it. It also means that one only has to think about 4 subjects at once.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 137
member
|
|
member
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 137 |
I went to school in Colorado. We too got to stand outside and freeze until the doors opened. But I wasn't a happy camper because it was the first year that the school bussed students from my area, before that students had been housed in town. The principal said he'd never opened the doors until the bell rang for twenty-five years and he wasn't going to change now, even though we were dropped off half an hour before the bell so that the bus could get all the students to their schools. Junior high and high school rode together in the morning. All grades in the afternoon. Before dawn, in the middle of winter, it gets pretty cold in Colorado. I came from a very small mountain community. As you can imagine school wasn't a big priority for many families in my area. It's hard to care about school, when you feel school doesn't care about you.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,605
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,605 |
Do others share my feeling that this is a lovely thread that merits reviving?
|
|
|
#3507
10/08/2001 12:57 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,289
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,289 |
Yes, Ken, but this is the wrong place for it. Maybe a new thread in Miscellaneous? You could entitle it Rants about Education.
|
|
|
#3508
11/01/2001 12:23 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981 |
>My first class is at 7:25 and many of the teachers get there at 6:30 to prepare.
Probably a little off topic but what the hell.
Why is there such an obsession with starting early in the USA? Is it something to do with daylight and coping with a country that runs across several time zones? Or is it just part of the work ethic that gives workers only a couple of weeks holiday a year (that would really hurt me)?
My school ran from roughly 9am - 4pm, with a 3:30 finish for the juniors. Even so, I had to leave the house at 7:30am to get there, which seemed far too early for me, when many of my friends were able to roll out of bed at 8am and hop on a short bus ride.
It fitted in pretty well with most office hours (9-5ish), although some there was some pre-school care for the few (in those days) families with very young children where both parents worked. Older children just made their own way to school anyway, I don't remember any school buses in our area, we just used public transport, few had the luxury of a second car for school runs.
As far as I am concerned nights are for staying up late (at least after 11, if not 12, after the late night film) and mornings are for a lie in, I think that getting up before 7am is slightly subhuman, I have to do it occasionally for an airline check in but would never dream of scheduling a work meeting before 9am (if not, 10am), although in my full time working days, I rarely left the office before 6:30 or 7pm.
Medicine in the USA seems appalling. I'm still recovering from the medical student who told me that he has to do his ward rounds at 4am to be ready to present cases at 5am. Are the patients allowed to sleep? The law doesn't seem much better, a friend worked in a New York office where people not in the office by 7am were regarded as slackers, especially those who take their "full" two weeks holiday, she didn't dare take hers. I'm not surprised that they are all so uptight, they all needed more sleep and a good holiday. [/rant - is that Ok for a rant?]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,773
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,773 |
Jo, the US school schedule has roots in our agrarian past. I think that school traditionally began early so that children could be home in time to help with chores, and recessed for the summer so that children could work in the fields. The fact that 90+% of current students have never even been on a farm hasn't stopped the inertia of that schedule.
I think that the inertia is compounded by the work ethic. You are right; people who take what vacation time they are given are regarded as slackers. Also, however, there is the problem of trying to make up the work if you take the days off. The last time I took a week off - 1995? - I spent such long hours before and after that week doing the work I couldn't do while I was gone, I told myself I would never do that again. It's just too painful.
There has been in recent years a slow alteration of the traditional school schedule. The school year is creeping later and later into June, and beginning in late August rather than in September, and parents are beginning to grumble about the early hours (when I was in school, I got up at 5:45). Suggestions to have school year around are receiving more favorable attention, in no small part because not having the extended recess would alleviate the learning atrophy which occurs in children and requires them to spend a significant part of each new school year reviewing the prior material and rehoning their learning skills. There are three major obstacles to year-round school schedules: in some areas of the country, the lack of air conditioning in school buildings (never installed because the buildings were closed during the hot months) would make summer sessions unbearable; teachers - at least, teacher unions, which are extremely strong in Michigan - don't want to lose their summers; and the tourism industry does not want the end of summer vacations because of the adverse impact on vacation travel (in Michigan, a few years ago the tourism industry tried to get a law passed outlawing the beginning of school before Labor Day, which is the first Monday in September; the compromise result was a prohibition against holding school on the Friday before Labor Day).
Always, there are vested interests in the status quo which slow change, even when the interests are not really pertinent to the issue at hand. Sigh.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981 |
Our school summer holidays are fairly long too, they are always under review but the possible move to a five or six term year with more regular short breaks seems to be on hold at the moment.
In English state schools they usually finish in late July and start again at the beginning of September. Scottish state schools finish at the end of June and start again in mid August, a period of around six or seven weeks. They usually get around two to three weeks at Christmas and Easter and up to a week off at each half term.
Some private (public) schools have very long holidays, as much as three months in the Summer and nearly a month at Christmas and Easter but they have school on Saturday mornings and only a long weekend for half term.
I feel a little guilty to hear about your lack of holidays. Most people that I know take at least five or six weeks a year, they don't always go away, sometimes they just have a break at home or with family. A few people that I know take four or five foreign holidays a year and hardly anyone I know takes less than one. How do we cope when we go back to work? You just expect to cover for people when they are away so that they will cover for you. In many offices, at any one time one or two people are away. I have never met anyone in the UK who has not taken a holiday in the last two years, they would be regarded as a little strange and probably be sent for counselling, funny how different our cultures are, isn't it?
Bye for now
jo
|
|
|
#3511
11/01/2001 11:28 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 6,296
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 6,296 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981 |
>This will mean our elementary school children may have to go to school as early as 7:00 a.m. We have a limited number of school buses for a school system of over 50 schools, so we have to transport children in shifts.
Little children are probably better in the early mornings than older children but I feel sorry for all the parents to have to get them ready so early, especially those with pre-school children too.
Because people expect to take their own children to school in the main, that would be less of an issue here. There are some school buses in rural areas but I lived in lots of different places and there has never been one available for my children.
>to help students who need to repeat courses
I am not aware of any summer classes offered by schools here. Are they free or do parents have to pay?
We don't have a system where people repeat classes, you get one chance to do a school year, then move on. If a child fails at GCSE (England)/Standard Grade(Scotland) at 15/16, then they might have to re-sit but I'm not aware of any classes being offered by schools over the summer. There may be private colleges offering crash courses.
Most of summer provision is by the voluntary or private sector and is leisure/sport related, not academic. We don't have a history of residential summer camps although there are lots of activities available for those who live in or near cities or major towns. There are summer holiday companies specialising in activity holidays for children and the usual scout or guide camps for those involved.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 6,296
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 6,296 |
|
|
|
#3514
11/02/2001 10:29 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981 |
Warning - long post >Our school year is 180 days for students; 200, for teachers. Students are in school for six and a half hours, Monday through Friday. I’ve looked up the official information. The current system in UK state schools is based on three equal terms of thirteen weeks, with a half term break, usually a week, although some have just a few days, some have two weeks in the middle of each term, it varies by Local Authority and on the timing of the easter break. Apparently the minimum number of days is 190, (so only two weeks longer) with a few more days for teachers. It looks like the debate about switching to a five or six term school year has some of the same issues in the UK and USA if this Uk government website is anything to go by: http://www.dfee.gov.uk/teacher/data/issues/data/5terms05.htm>Your own system sounds very different from ours. Do you move students on to the next level even when they have not some footing in the one they just completed? And how high is your drop-out rate? I don’t really understand the concept of “moving up to the next level”. Maybe a teacher would view it differently. The year group is based on age, not level of achievement, you move to the next year with your year group. At junior schools there tend to be different groups sitting at different tables within the class working on different levels. Once they have finished one part of the work, they move on to the next, in a continuum. There may be a maths book designed for, say seven year olds. If their particular group hasn’t finished the book by the end of the year, they carry on with it at the start of the next. If they finish the book before the end of the year, they either start the next one or find another book at a similar level. Subjects like history and geography are taught in blocks on a project by project basis, any given project eg the rainforest, contains strands of different subjects, once the project is finished, they move on, in the state primary schools that my children have attended there is no test. There is testing at seven and eleven but I have not yet worked out the contribution it makes to education. It was treated in a very low key way, more as a personal diagnostic test, at the Scottish school that my children attended but seems to be taken quite seriously in England, more for the positioning of school in a published “league table” than for the good of any individual child. My daughter has only just started secondary school and is in one set for maths (there are eight sets), another for language and another “teaching set” for other subjects. I suppose that the higher groups get further in the course of the year. They can move up or down sets during the year. There are tests to check progress but no subjects are “passed” or “failed” until they take public examinations at the age of 15 or 16. They just move into the next year. After two or three years at school, they chose subjects to study for their exams. They usually have to take english language, maths and one foreign language and choose from the usual range of subjects like biology, physics, chemistry, geography, history, english literature, modern languages, ancient languages, art, music etc. The subjects are not divided into courses like university subjects (eg restoration drama or organic chemistry) but the exam at the end of the course will relate to a published syllabus. Some subjects now include assessed course work but I have not yet had any direct experience. Some schools have more adventurous options available depending on resources and whether it is considered to be an academic school. The results are published in "league tables", with results reflecting parental income of the catchments area (but then, I am a cynic) rather than anything very useful. What do you mean by “drop out rate”? Do you mean at 16? You have to go to school until you are 16, you can’t drop out before that without having been excluded for some serious reason. In the schools that I have had most dealings with, most pupils stay on to do “A” levels and then go on to university at 17 or 18, sometimes after a “gap” year. I know that in reality, a huge number of children leave at 16. You can leave with four “A” levels or just with one GCSE. I was going to say, “it is up to the pupil” but I suppose that that is unfair and depends on a huge number of environmental factors as well as ability and commitment. There are an increasing number of alternatives to the traditional school system, some areas have sixth form colleges where “A” levels are studies. There are Colleges of Further Education that provide vocational courses as well as traditional subjects. There are an increasing number of newer qualifications like NVQs and GNVQs that were invented since I went to school and my children are still too young for me to have to know about. You don’t “graduate” from school, you just leave with whatever exam results you have picked up along the way. "A" levels and "highers" are graded from A-E(I think), different university courses will ask for different grades eg an English course may ask for three Bs at A level, one of them being English, only three "A" levels are usually studied, rather than five "highers" in Scotland, so the system is different. English Universities offer mainly three year full time degrees, Scottish mainly four years, Medicine is usually five years in England. Architecture is either five or six. Other long courses include dentistry, veterinary science. Some degrees, eg engineering are taken over longer periods with time spent in industry. Modern languages are usually a year longer to allow a year abroad. Teaching can be taken as a degree or as a one year post graduate course. This British Council site gives the “official line” on the education system in the UK http://www.britishcouncil.org/education/eduinfosh/eduin_index.htm
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981 |
Here are a few current UK Education stories for anyone who is interested in the differences between the different systems:: OK, hands up all of you who are currently struggling with GCSE coursework. Thank you. Now, those of you who are still at school put your hands down. Hmm! As I thought, rather a lot of parents still with their hands in the air. A discussion of the inclusion of course work in the current GCSE syllabus and the “help” given by parents: http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/education/features/mike_baker/newsid_1634000/1634426.stmJust walking into the exam halls was enough to send a shiver of recollected tension down my spine - and it is many years since I last sat an examination in earnest. Such is the power of those deep-lurking memories. …
For the first time a higher proportion of young people graduate from university in the UK (35.6%) than graduate from the USA (33.2%). This may be partly due to the shorter length of undergraduate degree courses in the UK, but the main factor is the much higher drop-out rate in the US.http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/education/features/mike_baker/newsid_1391000/1391120.stmThis summer, as in past years, schools in England and Wales are already having to accommodate and supervise around five and a half million GCSE exam entries and a further 700,000 A level entries. Now, on top of this, they must also oversee some three-quarters of a million AS-level entries. …
Contrast this to the United States where, although state-wide testing is on the increase, there are no nation-wide examinations at 14, 16, 17 and 18 as we now have. Discussion of the introduction of a new layer of exams (AS level) in the UK. http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/education/newsid_1364000/1364907.stm
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981 |
Re: Exams or not
Someone will have to explain to me how the US system works, it looks like Australia and New Zealand operate similarly (or maybe not, I don't know). I know about the European Baccalaureate exams which are considered here to offer a broader academic base than our own system.
What I don't understand is the stuff about credit classes and grades. There was some discussion earlier where Shanks mentioned the problem of not getting on with a particular teacher. Are all grades down to the class teacher or is there any external validation? Is it all down to course work or are there end of year exams as well? How many subjects are students studying at the ages of: 16, 17 and 18? How do universities select pupils if there are no examinations? Could your future be affected by a bad relationship with one teacher?
A couple of links would do - I can't find anything general enough or PM me if you don't want to post.
Jo
|
|
|
#3517
11/05/2001 12:48 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 6,296
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 6,296 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,773
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,773 |
Someone will have to explain to me how the US system worksIn a nutshell, and based on Michigan's requirements: The academic year begins in late August and goes through early June. Breaks are frequent, and include Thanksgiving and the day after, two weeks around Christmas and New Year's Day, a week in early spring, and various odd days and half days off. It is rare for the local school system to have two full, uninterrupted weeks at a stretch, because of time given to the teachers for training conferences, parent conferences and such. Through it all, the school must afford 180 days of instruction in the year. Schooling begins at age five with Kindergarten, a half-day session primarily geared toward teaching the children to follow instructions, take turns and such. There is a limited amount of academic instruction, so that most children know the alphabet, counting up to 20 or so, and can write their own names and a few other words. Full-time school days start in 1st grade. The public school system offers instruction from grade 1 to grade 12. The exact allocation of grades among school buildings depends upon fluctuations in student population, but generally, elementary school goes to grade 6, junior high (or middle school) encompasses grades 7 and 8, and high school includes grades 9 through 12. In elementary school, a student is assigned to a particular classroom taught by a single teacher. That class and teacher cover all the different academic disciplines for the entire year -- reading, spelling, penmanship, science, art, arithmetic -- except for subjects like gym or music which require special equipment. In junior high, the students go from classroom to classroom, according to a class schedule, and they have a different instructor for each subject. A typical junior high schedule might include: English, math, history, science, gym and home ec or shop. There are very few electives available in junior high. In high school, the schedules become more differentiated, as students pursue courses suitable to their aptitudes and interests. To obtain a high school diploma, a student must satisfactorily complete minimum numbers of courses in English, science, math, history, government, gym, and so on, as designated by the local board of education. Students pursuing college prep tracks will take foreign languages, advanced science and mathematics and such, while students pursuing vocational tracks will take shop, bookkeeping, word processing, and such. At each grade level, student grading depends largely on the teacher of the pertinent classroom or course. Usually, the grading depends upon both classwork (participation in class, homework, special projects) and examinations (some teachers quiz every week, some give only midterms and finals), but final examinations are usually a significant part of the final grade for a course. A student who cannot obtain a satisfactory grade in a course cannot get credit for it, and if he needs it to advance to the next grade level or to obtain his diploma, he must repeat the course or grade level. On top of this layer of grading is the recently imposed state testing system, which now tests all students in the state on core subjects (math, science, English) at several points (I think something like: 3rd grade, 7th grade, and 12th grade). The results of the tests affect the funding and autonomy of the schools; schools with poor results are subject to state takeover. And, students who place highly enough receive special state endorsements on their diplomas. School attendance is mandatory until age 16, which for most students is grade 10 or 11. After graduation from high school, many students continue to college or a training school. There are hundreds in the US, both public and private, but all require substantial payments of tuition by the students. For a standard academic college bachelor's degree, four years of study is required. Postgraduate study is required for certain professions. Physicians must attend medical school for four years; lawyers must attend law school for three years. A list of requirements for a diploma from the local school district, through the adult education program, is here: http://scnc.erps.k12.mi.us/~kingst/adult.htm#gradCredit Requirements: 2000 Graduation Requirements
English 4 cr.
Math 2 cr.
Science 2 cr.
Social Studies 1 cr. (Economics/Political Science)
U.S. History 1 cr.
Government 1/2 cr.
Electives* 7 1/2 cr.
*Must include 1/2 credit of Word Processing, Introduction to Computers, or an equivalent course. This requirement may be waived for some students. Please see academic advisor for more information.Each credit represents one academic year of instruction at the high school level, so, one would need four years of English, two years of math, two years of science, one year of social studies, one year of US history, a half-year of government, a half-year of computer use, and 7 years of other. I believe that these requirements vary a bit from the standard requirements; I guess they decided that adults going back to school didn't really need the joy of gym class, stinky lockerrooms and public showers.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,204
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,204 |
Thanks for that masterly summation of your system. I had never really understood how it all worked before, and now I feel that I have at least a fair idea.
But one supplementary question, please.
students pursuing vocational tracks will take shop, bookkeeping, word processing, and such.
What is "shop" ??
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,773
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,773 |
Shop classes teach applied vocational skills. Common ones are: wood shop (build a birdhouse!), metal shop (build a tin birdhouse!), and machine shop (build the gizmo which cuts the metal to build the tin birdhouse!). Shop students acquire the knowledge and skills used in industrial manufacturing and repair, and to maintain farms and homes.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 428
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 428 |
What is "shop" ??How do you think Americans got to be such voracious consumers? We have classes in it! 
|
|
|
|
|
