The single biggest problem with the education system.

[JackRT]

I spent almost 40 years teaching math and physics in Canadian public high schools. If I were asked "what was the single greatest problem?" my answer would be simple ---- lack of parental involvement and guidance in the lives of their children. With very few exceptions I found my teaching colleagues to be well educated, well motivated, highly dedicated and concerned teachers.

 

[Blade]

I aim 58.. and my did would say then.. all they do now is just push the kids through. Me? it was MATH.. MATH is what goofs it all up haha...yet

 

[usexpat97]

I spent almost 40 years teaching math and physics in Canadian public high schools. If I were asked "what was the single greatest problem?" my answer would be simple ---- lack of parental involvement and guidance in the lives of their children. With very few exceptions I found my teaching colleagues to be well educated, well motivated, highly dedicated and concerned teachers.

Helicopter parents are not without their issues. Especially in well-to-do schools.

 

[Bumble Bee]

I really struggle with the standardized testing. I had a group of kids in my class (I teach private kindergarten, and this year was our pilot year) who ended up having to go into a special program for "extra help" in the school district (they were attending private school half time and public half time due to the district schedule this year). They were not allowed to revert back to their normal schedule until they tested out. The thing was, the kids knew the information. They were starting kindergarten at a 1st grade reading level, but did not test fast enough on the standardized tests. When I was teaching in other schools, we had to spend time teaching the kids how to take the tests- time that could have been spent learning actual lesson content instead. Teaching to the test takes away the focus on understanding the content.

 

[zephcom]

I really struggle with the standardized testing. I had a group of kids in my class (I teach private kindergarten, and this year was our pilot year) who ended up having to go into a special program for "extra help" in the school district (they were attending private school half time and public half time due to the district schedule this year). They were not allowed to revert back to their normal schedule until they tested out. The thing was, the kids knew the information. They were starting kindergarten at a 1st grade reading level, but did not test fast enough on the standardized tests. When I was teaching in other schools, we had to spend time teaching the kids how to take the tests- time that could have been spent learning actual lesson content instead. Teaching to the test takes away the focus on understanding the content.

I think that much of the problem with education is that most of the system (and, quite frankly, nearly everyone else) thinks that children can be educated by some form of 'assembly line' process. By 'assembly line' I mean the idea that every child can be taught by the same method. Over my lifetime just about every method has been tried and some children learn and some don't.

Take me, for instance. I can learn just about anything...if I can read about it. I learn practically nothing listening to a lecture. I can understand the inner functioning of nearly any machine if I can get my hands on the maintenance manual. Send me to a 'training session' and I won't know any more about it than before I went.

But there are other people who learn absolutely the opposite of me. They pick up information orally and just nothing works with the written word.

I understand completely that schools systems like to keep the 'social' aspect of school as homogeneous as possible so that the children don't feel 'excluded'. But, IMMHO, if one wants children to actually learn something in school, they should be taught by the method which best suits their ability to learn.

 

[JackRT]

We also forget the motivation factor. Many years ago I walked into a grade 10 math class on the first day. There was a 30 year old man sitting in the back. He had left school after grade 9 and now wanted to complete high school. He was VERY serious. I promised him 3-5 minutes daily individual attention in class. By the end of the year the class had finished grade 10 math. He had completed grades 10, 11 and 12.

 

[zephcom]

We also forget the motivation factor. Many years ago I walked into a grade 10 math class on the first day. There was a 30 year old man sitting in the back. He had left school after grade 9 and now wanted to complete high school. He was VERY serious. I promised him 3-5 minutes daily individual attention in class. By the end of the year the class had finished grade 10 math. He had completed grades 10, 11 and 12.

I think the bottom line here is that educating children is not the same as manufacturing widgets. Every child is an individual and no one system of education will work with all of them. There may be 6 major ways of educating children...there may 25 ways...or there many as many ways as there are children.

The real task of American education...if it is to ever be successful...is to learn how each child can best absorb and retain information and use that technique to teach them what they need to know.

It will no doubt be more costly and time consuming than just putting them in classrooms and pretending we are making widgets.

 

[timothyu]

So when did the system get broken?

 

[zephcom]

So when did the system get broken?

Do you mean when did the system get broken 'this time'? I think it gets broken most often when society starts limiting the education budget. What is weird is that often when the budgets get limited, the same people who are doing the limiting pile more requirements onto education.

Properly educating children will never be cheap. It is a lot like buying a new car. You get what you pay for. If you pay top wages, you get high quality teachers. If you pay cheap wages you get lousy teachers. If you buy modern teaching tools, you get modern teaching. If you maintain your buildings you have a better atmosphere to inspire learning.

IMMHO, the system gets broken every time the grownups start thinking that the 'best' way to improve education is to cut their budget.

 

[timothyu]

Did this happen 50-60 years ago?

 

[zephcom]

Did this happen 50-60 years ago?

Off the top of my head, I would say back in the eighties. When I was in school in the Fifties and early Sixties, America was still pumping lots of money into education because of Russia's space program.

Then we caught up with and surpassed Russia and the government decided to cut off the money to education. After all, we had 'won' that battle.

Since Reagan, funding education has become something we 'have to do' rather than we 'need to do better than anyone'. Other things became more important than education so it started going down hill.

 

[timothyu]

Off the top of my head, I would say back in the eighties.

Is it hard to make things work again by going back to when it did? I worked in the school system. The budgets increased but the money to the teachers, staff and buildings stayed the same. As usual those at the top bloated. Same as the hospital system. So the fix seems to be not just a return to those times but to the power the underlings once had to keep the parasites from taking it all. Schools and hospitals shouldn't have the same excuse the elites do in saying give us more money so we can create jobs, but never do.

 

[zephcom]

Is it hard to make things work again by going back to when it did? I worked in the school system. The budgets increased but the money to the teachers, staff and buildings stayed the same. As usual those at the top bloated. Same as the hospital system. So the fix seems to be not just a return to those times but to the power the underlings once had to keep the parasites from taking it all. Schools and hospitals shouldn't have the same excuse the elites do in saying give us more money so we can create jobs, but never do.

You can't go back. You can only go forward. It has something to do with time and physics.

M'Lady was a teacher beginning the early Seventies. It was a time when teachers could innovate and do things differently. One day the principal and the superintendent walked into her classroom. The superintendent looked around and asked where the teacher was. The principal looked around and pointed. He said, "I think that is her under the table with that student."

Thirty years later, she walked into the house and said, "I put in for retirement today." I said, "Should we talk about that?". She said, "No."

It is a different world now. What worked then doesn't work today. But that shouldn't mean we quit trying. But there is still a glow in her eyes when some grownup comes up to her and thanks her for being their teacher.

I sometimes wonder if people today no longer have a vision of the future. There is no reason to educate children if parents can't see a future for the children.

 

[timothyu]

You can't go back. You can only go forward. It has something to do with time and physics.

Possibly, but there was a time when things worked because less was more.

 

[jayem]

There is no requirement to learn anything. The only requirement is to show up for class.

I remember one (of several) Army instructor who addressed my 'Surveying' class. Except for the sergeant stripes on his sleeves he was dressed in rumpled green fatigues like the rest of us. He was jovial as he introduced himself with bit of self-effacing humor, a crazy right eye that looked off to the side added to his decidedly unserious introduction.

Then he turned to his desk and retrieved some surveying study material, holding it up for all to see. Upon turning around his demeanor had changed to deadly seriousness as he proclaimed to us, "Gentlemen...you will learn this stuff."

And learn it we did.

What you're descibing is trade school. Students must have a specific knowledge base in order to perform a job. That model still exists. The traditional degreed learned professions like medicine and law are taught essentially the same way. (Medical and law schools are really just glorified trade schools.) But broadly based general education is a different animal. It includes subjects like literature and history. Which are inherently more subjective and are taught by a different didactic.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

What you're descibing is trade school. Students must have a specific knowledge base in order to perform a job. That model still exists. The traditional degreed learned professions like medicine and law are taught essentially the same way. (Medical and law schools are really just glorified trade schools.) But broadly based general education is a different animal. It includes subjects like literature and history. Which are inherently more subjective and are taught by a different didactic.

I don't see a conflict between the two teaching methods, although teachers make either one 'brain teasers'.

At the end of the day school is suppose to prepare us to be productive workers.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I spent almost 40 years teaching math and physics in Canadian public high schools. If I were asked "what was the single greatest problem?" my answer would be simple ---- lack of parental involvement and guidance in the lives of their children. With very few exceptions I found my teaching colleagues to be well educated, well motivated, highly dedicated and concerned teachers.

The school system must be more involved with kids whose parents aren't, otherwise it's waste of time for both. It is said "Don't speak the obvious", but it is clear that these kids need to know that the teachers know what they know about their situation.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I really struggle with the standardized testing. I had a group of kids in my class (I teach private kindergarten, and this year was our pilot year) who ended up having to go into a special program for "extra help" in the school district (they were attending private school half time and public half time due to the district schedule this year). They were not allowed to revert back to their normal schedule until they tested out. The thing was, the kids knew the information. They were starting kindergarten at a 1st grade reading level, but did not test fast enough on the standardized tests. When I was teaching in other schools, we had to spend time teaching the kids how to take the tests- time that could have been spent learning actual lesson content instead. Teaching to the test takes away the focus on understanding the content.

Aren't the tests based on the information in the courses? Is there some sort of 'gotcha' in the tests that the kids must be told about?

 

[JackRT]

Aren't the tests based on the information in the courses? Is there some sort of 'gotcha' in the tests that the kids must be told about?

There is a strategy to writing tests, particularly major tests. I made sure that my students were well aware of them and also study techniques.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I think the bottom line here is that educating children is not the same as manufacturing widgets. Every child is an individual and no one system of education will work with all of them. There may be 6 major ways of educating children...there may 25 ways...or there many as many ways as there are children.

The real task of American education...if it is to ever be successful...is to learn how each child can best absorb and retain information and use that technique to teach them what they need to know.

It will no doubt be more costly and time consuming than just putting them in classrooms and pretending we are making widgets.

Perhaps the real problem is unmotivated teachers.