This is how backwards education in California is.

[a completely inoffensive name]

In my sophomore year of high school (grade 10) I had to take a somewhat recently implemented standardized test called the CAHSEE. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_High_School_Exit_Exam Its full name is the California High School Exit Exam.

Now can someone please tell me how it is a smart idea to make the test to pass high school require only a freshman's level of education?

[pevergreen]

We have a sort of similar test.

The QCS (Queensland Core Skills test) is 4 exams over two days, near the end of year 12. It factors into your OP (Overall Position) you get when you graduate and it only requires knowledge that you would have on completion of Year 10.

:shrug:

[a completely inoffensive name]

We have a sort of similar test.

The QCS (Queensland Core Skills test) is 4 exams over two days, near the end of year 12. It factors into your OP (Overall Position) you get when you graduate and it only requires knowledge that you would have on completion of Year 10.

:shrug:

Doesn't tests like that weaken the incentive to learn anything after the test besides the bare minimum? In order to pass high school if you only need to know 9 grades of knowledge, then what is to stop someone from simply figuring out that all you have to do is take it easy and skim by with C's for the rest of the grades until graduation. If the point to improve the actual knowledge of the students by saying, "pass this or you don't graduate". Then shouldn't we put the test at the end of your last year and make it so that you need to know 12 grades of knowledge comprehensively?

[pevergreen]

Because the university system here isnt the same as America.

We are in direct competition with other students from our school in each subject. If you get an A, thats great. But if everyone else got an A as well, you might as well all have gotten a C. You need to do better than the others, because you need a good OP to get into the course you want.

Want to be a doctor? You need an OP 1. That means you basically have to top the class for every subject (class meaning everyone that does the subject in your school) and hope your school gets a good ranking from the QCS.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Because the university system here isnt the same as America.

We are in direct competition with other students from our school in each subject. If you get an A, thats great. But if everyone else got an A as well, you might as well all have gotten a C. You need to do better than the others, because you need a good OP to get into the course you want.

Want to be a doctor? You need an OP 1. That means you basically have to top the class for every subject (class meaning everyone that does the subject in your school) and hope your school gets a good ranking from the QCS.

That actually sounds like a good system. What are the downsides to it?

[miotas]

We have a ranking system here in NSW too called the UAI(Universities Admission Index) and there are two main possible downsides. 1)If you score very highly in your school work, but everyone in the class scores as highly or higher, then your rank wont be as high as your school work might suggest or 2) if everyone in your class does poorly, then it could bring down your overall ranking in the state.

[pevergreen]

Thats 0-100 yeah miotas? Same as VIC?

The QLD OP system has a few disadvantages. You could be the smartest person on earth, but if your school gets ranked badly due to QCS (which ranks the schools by the students total scores, so if a lot of people do bad on the QCS, the school means less and you get a lower OP) you could still end up with a bad OP.

The system is confusing, and barely anyone understands it. Its also, for this part, only used by the admissions group (QTAC - Queensland Tertiary Admissions Centre). If you want to study anywhere outside this state, or at an institution that doesnt go through QTAC, you have to convert. If I wanted to go to america to study, they wouldn't understand what I meant when I said I got an OP x. Actually 'graduating' high school and obtaining the new QCE (Queensland Certificate of Education, basically says you passed high school) can be harder than getting an OP.

I technically don't have a QCE, so I can't say I finished high school. Because I failed semester 3 of Math B (middle line), the first two semesters (which I did pass) didn't count, so instead of 20 passed semesters, I only have 19.

Tell me how that last bit makes any bloody sense.

[naut]

I like NSW's system, it's a good system.


1)If you score very highly in your school work, but everyone in the class scores as highly or higher, then your rank wont be as high as your school work might suggest
They factor the internal part against the external part as well. If you did very well in school and so did your class, but did poorly in the exams themselves they realise your internal testing was possibly too easy and they lower your rank accordingly. On the flip-side if you and your class do averagely to poorly internally but do well in the actual exams they realise you were likely internally tested too hard and raise your rank accordingly. This happened in my history class, we all did largely averagely and where very stressed for the actual exam, but when the results came out we all got 80s for it.


2) if everyone in your class does poorly, then it could bring down your overall ranking in the state.
This really is a myth, I've never seen this occur once except in old wives tales. They compare your results with your class yes, but they factor in more things than just that. My software class did poorly, I was the only one getting good marks, I still got a band 6 - 90%.

[HoreTore]

I have never cared about grades in my life, and I probably never will. The system is so flawed it's basically meaningless.

[rory_20_uk]

I do not know what the exams are supposed to quantify any more.

There are for example maths exams that are as far as possible based on aptitude rather than knowledge but these are often merely quizzes, not standard exams.

I certainly know that in my Physics paper I wrote learnt the answers without any understanding of what I was writing. Does that prove I'm any good at Physics or prepared to put the work in?

Increasingly I hear that people require grades in subjects - but it has nothing to do with the subject per se, more that to get a high mark requires a decent amount of work and to get high marks in a spread of subjects again generally indicates the ability to apply oneself rather than an interest in a narrow field.

I'm a pragmatist and I need to jump through the lovely little hoops and even stomach such phrases as "matrix environment", "self starter" and the rest as talking the talk is part and parcel of getting the job. Thinking it's all a pile of drivel isn't going to win brownie points.

~:smoking:

[Greyblades]

I just dont understand why governments force kids to go through really important exams that can colour their entire future when they're 15 and the kindest description anyone can give them is a Hormone Riddled Mess.

[gaelic cowboy]

@ Rory the ability to slip the maximun amount of TLA's (three letter acyrnoms) into a sentence at works is a highly sought after skill.

"Did you get the pm done on NL402 yet and just touching base with you on the sem results on svg401 it was green to green earlier, availability is good across the board now lets walk and talk about the focal results on cww1 drones on in an incomprehensible technobabble"

[HoreTore]

I just dont understand why governments force kids to go through really important exams that can colour their entire future when they're 15 and the kindest description anyone can give them is a Hormone Riddled Mess.

really important?

What employer gives a damn about the grades you had when you were 15? I still haven't shown my graduation papers from the 13th grade to anyone but colleges, no employer will give a crap about them.

[Greyblades]

I'm sorry, I though you needed those grades earned when you were 15 to be able to start on the next grades, I must be mistaken.

[HoreTore]

At 15 we are given grades that is a summary of what has happened during the entire year, not a single exam.

It's actually only at university level that we only have exams as our grade.

Anyway, passing the exam is of course important, my point was that the difference between an A and a C is pretty much irrelevant to the rest of the world.

Life doesn't end at 15 no matter how poor your exams are. Things sort themselves out eventually. No need to go all emo...

[Greyblades]

I was thinking of our GCSE's. I'm going to sound so ignorant but I had assumed that Norway had a similar system. And I know that life doesnt end if you fail them I just know from personal experience that it's just a right pain trying to correct the error when you know if you had actually taken it seriously you could have saved a year of your life retaking them.

[HoreTore]

There is absolutely no equivalent to such a test in Norway. Fortunately.

A four-page test cannot know better than a teacher who has followed a student over several years what the studens level is in a given field. I's simply impoossible, and you have delusional politicans and school administrators I would check regularly for drug abuse.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Can someone also tell me why every test that determines "aptitude" has to consist of "here is a bunch of numbers, know a formula to turn them into the number we want." Why is there never any open ended questions that determine your thought process and problem solving skills like, "You have a container of unknown volume and a hose with an unknown flow rate. Describe how you might determine the volume of the unknown container given the parameters."

[Greyblades]

Presumably because it would take alot of time just to figure out if the students answer will work.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Becuase you will get answers like this: look up the make, model and serial number. Then look up the technical specs of the container on the manufacturer's website.
While perfectly valid an approach in the real world, it's not really useful for a test in your Math skills because you completely side-stepped all Mathematics there.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Becuase you will get answers like this: look up the make, model and serial number. Then look up the technical specs of the container on the manufacturer's website.
While perfectly valid an approach in the real world, it's not really useful for a test in your Math skills because you completely side-stepped all Mathematics there.

I wasn't thinking it would be a rigorous mathematical question, it would just be a question to see if you could even have an idea on how you might solve the problem without all the numbers given to you.

[HoreTore]

Well, a problem can be diagnostic without it being a "problem solver"-question. Ie. the problem 0.4x0.3 will not show whether the student understands anything, while the problem 0.4x0.2 will show it.

About formulas. A big problem with maths today is that students are given a bunch of formulas, explained what they're for and then set to learn them by heart(like rory studied physics). Let's say you've accomplished that, what is it you've really accomplished?

Nothing more than a 24-page booklet can tell you. In other words, you have just wasted years of education.

What students should learn is why those formulas are the way it is. Why the relation between percentage and desimalnumbers has to be the way it is, why you calculate area the way you do. Really, if you understand that the area of a rectangle is side x side, I don't see why you should have much problems with any other figures.

For example.

[HoreTore]

Presumably because it would take alot of time just to figure out if the students answer will work.

You never had open problems in your maths classes? Oh, and give us some credit, it ain't that hard to follow a students chain of thoughts and figure out if he's correct or not....

[Greyblades]

Open questions? I've had questions replaced by theoretical situations, "train leaves at bristol at 12:00 bound for london with an average speed of 50mph" etc (although funnily enough I never got an actual one involving a train, most being find the area of a patch of grass in a garden and such) but not one of those. Maybe it was in the second year of A levels; I didnt get that far due to depression.

[Moros]

Well, a problem can be diagnostic without it being a "problem solver"-question. Ie. the problem 0.4x0.3 will not show whether the student understands anything, while the problem 0.4x0.2 will show it.

When I want to see if someone can do a little practical mathematical thinking I usually ask them to calculate a simple square root. For exampl what is the square root of 2025? People who can do more than just use a calculator all go like well that has to end with 5 then. Hmmm...it's between 1600 and 2500, so if it is a natural number it should be 45. But it's scaring how few people come up with that easy solution. Some panic already by hearing the square root and a number higher than 100 in the same sentence.:no:

It's quite sad if I look back to see how little I learned in high school, that I either didn't know already or was completely useless. Sadly I don't have the feeling I'm getting much smarter at college either. Well not from the classes I take. Thank god for it's library!

[drone]

Now can someone please tell me how it is a smart idea to make the test to pass high school require only a freshman's level of education?
I don't think you are being tested to see if you can graduate, this is just a side effect. My guess is that it is the school that is being tested.

[a completely inoffensive name]

I don't think you are being tested to see if you can graduate, this is just a side effect. My guess is that it is the school that is being tested.

Nope, that has already been the goal of the extensive series of tests called "Star" testing which everyone from 6th-11th grade have to partake in.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standardized_Testing_and_Reporting

[HoreTore]

Nope, that has already been the goal of the extensive series of tests called "Star" testing which everyone from 6th-11th grade have to partake in.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standardized_Testing_and_Reporting

Gawd I hate that stuff sooooo much.....

ACIN, I suggest you ask your principal how stupid your teacher is, when a 5-hour test is more able to deteermine your level of understanding than the teacher who has followed you for the entire year, or more....

[Fisherking]

Gawd I hate that stuff sooooo much.....

ACIN, I suggest you ask your principal how stupid your teacher is, when a 5-hour test is more able to deteermine your level of understanding than the teacher who has followed you for the entire year, or more....

Asking such a question of a teacher would violate the union contract and require that you pay them more.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Gawd I hate that stuff sooooo much.....

ACIN, I suggest you ask your principal how stupid your teacher is, when a 5-hour test is more able to deteermine your level of understanding than the teacher who has followed you for the entire year, or more....

Well I am in uni now, so I can't do that. However, I have met and talked to the principle at the time I was there in passing. He was a good man and to be honest, the situation is out of his control, the state or federal government mandates the standardized tests. So it wouldn't do any good to complain to him.


Asking such a question of a teacher would violate the union contract and require that you pay them more.

I hope you are being facetious because quite honestly, the teachers union, while a major problem, do more good than bad in the system. People blame teachers for everything wrong with their child and try to **** on all of them by cutting all of their pay and benefits. The teachers get too much flak. The only problem with the teachers union is that they are too defensive to get rid of tenure which is the only legitimate problem regarding how teachers operated.

I used to hate teachers, until I started talking to them. Then I realize many of them are incredible people who need to be given more support, many were incredible people that are now hollowed out by the eroding nature of the system on teachers, and the remaining 20% are just terrible teachers.

EDIT: If you want to cut money from someones paycheck, cut it from the upper bureaucracy, or in fact just eliminate the upper bureaucracy by a good portion. The system of education seems to be a decentralized program at its heart and yet we have numerous entanglements from the state and federal levels coming down in on the individual schools them selves.

Then take that money you save, and reinvest it into the system by paying for new teachers and principles for new schools so overcrowding is cut down, which is one of the main problems of the school system and yet no one wants to acknowledge it. Why? Because there is only one solution to solving the 35-40 kids a class crisis, and that is to pay for more schools and teachers. And everyone is too selfish to do that.

[HoreTore]

Asking such a question of a teacher would violate the union contract and require that you pay them more.

Nonsense.

Also, as ACIN noted, the teacher would agree.

[Fisherking]

Nonsense.

Also, as ACIN noted, the teacher would agree.

You think so huh?

Ever taught in a US school?

Each state is different but additional work without compensation is a no-no.

Not only that but Education Departments are Bureaucracies and would much rather spend money on outside information than what they can get in-house. They place little value on what individual teachers may think.

edit:

ACIN if you can figure out how to get rid of Bureaucracies in any or all levels of government, your my man.

Most of the time it is not a matter of fixing a known problem. It is about preserving the institution and justifying ones existence. There is also the matter of spending all the money in the budget so you get as much or more next year.

With Education in particular the politics are too much a part of what gets taught.

Teachers’ Unions depend on the state. Some are better than others but they turn into bureaucracies themselves.

Oddly enough, graduates of high schools in the late 19th and early 20th centuries seemed to have had a deeper and richer education than those of today.

It would seem we are not doing something right.

[Moros]

So? You guys are the sporty type of people. Leave the thinking to Europe and Asia, hmm kay? ~;p

[Lord Winter]

Oddly enough, graduates of high schools in the late 19th and early 20th centuries seemed to have had a deeper and richer education than those of today.

It would seem we are not doing something right.

I highly doubt that. Do you have a source?

[Strike For The South]

I highly doubt that. Do you have a source?

+1 that is a myth and has no credible source other than an oft e-mailed test from topeka circa 1890


The real problem is America is begining to align with China persuing the train of thought that test scores are all that matter. Many of peers don't read outside of class and don't know how to think critically because a devation from the syllabus means the deduction of a letter grade

Innovation and critical thinking skills > regurgitation and book knoweledge

[Fisherking]

Actually I saw it as an article in a periodical in the 1980s.
It went into some depth on the conclusions. It was general subject knowledge naturally as they lacked computer grading or national tests in those days.
no credible source in this case means pre internet.
Sorry guys...I guess I come from the stone age.

[a completely inoffensive name]

You think so huh?

Ever taught in a US school?

Each state is different but additional work without compensation is a no-no.

Not only that but Education Departments are Bureaucracies and would much rather spend money on outside information than what they can get in-house. They place little value on what individual teachers may think.

edit:

ACIN if you can figure out how to get rid of Bureaucracies in any or all levels of government, your my man.

Most of the time it is not a matter of fixing a known problem. It is about preserving the institution and justifying ones existence. There is also the matter of spending all the money in the budget so you get as much or more next year.

With Education in particular the politics are too much a part of what gets taught.

Teachers’ Unions depend on the state. Some are better than others but they turn into bureaucracies themselves.

Oddly enough, graduates of high schools in the late 19th and early 20th centuries seemed to have had a deeper and richer education than those of today.

It would seem we are not doing something right.

From my research the average principle makes around $60,000-$100,000. It is a bureaucratic management job for the most part, cut the salary in half. Take that money, hire a new principle.

Get rid of management of the actual property. Privatize the actual upkeep and maintenance of the buildings to third party contractors. Institute forced competition by making 5 year contracts with whoever can offer upkeep/cleaning according to code and health standards (high school bathrooms are just disgusting and it doesn't have to be that way) at the lowest price. Failure will cause in termination of contract. After 5 year contract is fulfilled, new round of bidding for the next 5 year contract begins. Companies would love this because it is essentially a guarantee of 5 years of profit for the company.

Take the money you save, add more capital from the actual budget and build another school. The distribution of kids in a single school goes from 2,500 to a more manageable 1,250, overcrowding is prevented and everything is good.

Institute a bare minimum chain of command. Like I said, education is supposed to be decentralized at heart, which is why there are a million, bazillion individual school districts that operate independently with their own communities governing what goes on. I would need to see a full flow chart before I can get into specifics, but honestly, all the state should need is a education regulatory agency (AKA a department of education) to see if the state curriculum is being fulfilled. Same goes for the Federal level. You have principles who are held accountable to a superintendent for the district. That position should pretty much be the president and the school board should be the legislature. Chain of hierarchy should end there. No need for much district to state bureaucracy.

The failure of the union is solely in the resistance to any and all change. The only way to change it is to stop asking for stupid changes to the school set up. Things like "merit" pay and blatantly wanting to cut the perks of a teacher because you don't get those kinds of perks at your job are utterly worthless and only perpetuate the problem. We don't trust the union because they don't want to change the broken system. The union doesn't trust us because we keep pushing to change it for the worse.

The only good change that the union is preventing is the elimination of tenure. But you shouldn't get rid of tenure at this point because the power of the teacher shouldn't be lower than an individual parent. School boards across the country, capitulate to the wants of the few parents who spend the time to complain. These usually are the crazies, the overprotecting parents and the religious. Quite honestly, no parent should ever have the ability to successfully push for a book they disagree with, to be banned for everyone else kid.
Parents have too much power. If you want the union to eliminate tenure, you need to give some concessions to prove that you are increasing the relative power of the teacher in other ways. By instituting laws that allow teachers to implement the teaching materials they want to use without retribution and by restricting the ability of parents to change such reading materials (such as what books they are reading) the teacher is no longer held to the whims of the moronic parents. Lolita is not inappropriate for high school freshman, it is not even inappropriate for 7th and 8th graders, stop allowing the ******* parents to force teachers to never teach it.


Actually I saw it as an article in a periodical in the 1980s.
It went into some depth on the conclusions. It was general subject knowledge naturally as they lacked computer grading or national tests in those days.
no credible source in this case means pre internet.
Sorry guys...I guess I come from the stone age.

If you can remember the name of the periodical, google it. Maybe they have an archive you can search. Most publications (at least newspapers) have their entire archives online now.

[Lord Winter]

Coming in the same direction from ACIN's comments against parental control, is there any valid argument for not having a professional school board? All I see from lay school boards is a tendency to ignore truth and givein over to populist ideas in determining the curriculum what not. For example look at the whole Texas text book fiasco and the ID debate. Moving our schools away from this model would improve the quality of our schools immensely.

[Fisherking]

Coming in the same direction from ACIN's comments against parental control, is there any valid argument for not having a professional school board? All I see from lay school boards is a tendency to ignore truth and givein over to populist ideas in determining the curriculum what not. For example look at the whole Texas text book fiasco and the ID debate. Moving our schools away from this model would improve the quality of our schools immensely.

Not sure that is the best idea.

Without local board you don’t get local funding.

Most are unpaid positions. They make more noise then having any real impact in most places.

They give the community a voice. In most cases this is in theory because no one goes to the meetings. Most people would rather complain to others than actually to the authorities.

Having a legislator in charge of school boards will not stop them giving in to the crazies.

Why do the boards give in to bad ideas? Political pressure or perceived pressure.
The people running for the board might be also these people.

I think more community involvement from a wider range of individuals is important in getting the whole thing to work properly.


But more importantly it is not always the best to have only educators running the show any more than it is a good idea of having lawyers write the laws.

Textbooks are something else all together. You can find some big problems there who ever buys them.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Not sure that is the best idea.

Without local board you don’t get local funding.

Most are unpaid positions. They make more noise then having any real impact in most places.

They give the community a voice. In most cases this is in theory because no one goes to the meetings. Most people would rather complain to others than actually to the authorities.

Having a legislator in charge of school boards will not stop them giving in to the crazies.

Why do the boards give in to bad ideas? Political pressure or perceived pressure.
The people running for the board might be also these people.

I think more community involvement from a wider range of individuals is important in getting the whole thing to work properly.


But more importantly it is not always the best to have only educators running the show any more than it is a good idea of having lawyers write the laws.

Textbooks are something else all together. You can find some big problems there who ever buys them.

I agree completely with the bold statement, however the problem is that it is impossible to actually get parents motivated to participate. So you have to find another way. I suggest instituting a law that states that lobbying for a curriculum change or challenging a book (although we shouldn't allow that period) must require x amount of signatures before it can be lobbied to the school board. That way you still force the crazies to expose themselves and their ideas to the general public and increases the chances that a rational parent will step forward, counter lobby and say, "hey, I really don't want this over protecting parent to have his/her way when it comes to this book begin taught to my kids."

EDIT: The problem with textbooks is that the companies cater to only the boards of education which buy the most books. For the US the biggest buyers of textbooks are naturally the most populous states: California, Texas and New York. When Texas changed its curriculum, they didn't change the textbook, they simply changed what they wanted to teach, and the textbook companies then changed their next version of the book to suit the needs of one of their biggest customers.

[Fisherking]

ACIN:

You need a wider range of people than just the parents of school aged children to start with.

Getting the public at large to understand the importance of education and becoming involved is what you want.

In quite a few areas large employers have gotten involved, which is a start.

I don’t know that passing laws would help much. One of those people meeting with a board member and persuading them is all it takes to bypass such things and you can’t have them fallowed, nor would you want to.

Textbooks themselves are a problem. Many are just bad, most are biased one way or the other. But they are way overpriced and with frequent new editions, mainly for the money with few changes. Often they are not reviewed and taken on recommendation sight unseen. If they were not so expensive it would be better to allow course teaches to chose their own texts but it is a big money industry and you might find more corruption at various levels than you would even imagine.

[a completely inoffensive name]

ACIN:

You need a wider range of people than just the parents of school aged children to start with.

Getting the public at large to understand the importance of education and becoming involved is what you want.

In quite a few areas large employers have gotten involved, which is a start.

I don’t know that passing laws would help much. One of those people meeting with a board member and persuading them is all it takes to bypass such things and you can’t have them fallowed, nor would you want to.

Textbooks themselves are a problem. Many are just bad, most are biased one way or the other. But they are way overpriced and with frequent new editions, mainly for the money with few changes. Often they are not reviewed and taken on recommendation sight unseen. If they were not so expensive it would be better to allow course teaches to chose their own texts but it is a big money industry and you might find more corruption at various levels than you would even imagine.

It is quite apparent that the public who does not have children attending school do not really care about education period. They can have their say, but to get people involved who are not impacted by what the curriculum is, is near impossible. That is just the reality of the situation.

To get the public opinion of education shifted so that they understand the importance of education is to change the society of Americans. There has always been a large current of anti-intellectualism and the attitude of the self made man who didn't need fancy institutions or higher education to become a success. That solution is more impractical than the ones I am proposing in my opinion.

Depending on what the rules for the school board already are it doesn't necessarily follow that courting one particular member allows you to bypass county laws. If the law says get these signatures or they can't look at it, then that is the law. They could simply ask a member they have courted to propose it themselves, but this is an inherent flaw in the school board system period and there is nothing we can do to fix it. Most likely though, the same people asking for stupid changes and banning books are the kind of people too disconnected from reality to be the kind of person that will be able to network themselves in the county level politics. In the end, in order to stop such an action would be the removal of the school board itself, and you have already expressed a hesitation to doing such a thing. Besides, if the word gets out board member x is a pet to individual y, then x will (in theory) be voted out and someone else will come in and hopefully they will reverse the tainted policy.

I really have not experienced an issue of textbooks being biased, maybe I am not reading enough political science or history textbooks. But however, you pointed out that the textbook problem is bigger than the individual county can handle. I agree, but to be quite honest, there is nothing you can do about it. Two or three companies publish 90% of the textbooks and they have a tight control of that oligopoly. You can't do anything abou that except enforce federal anti trust laws to break it up. You must also have publishing companies be able to publish the same textbooks otherwise they are still the sole supplier of a book that thousands of teachers and students need. For the most part, I am not advocating a change in the textbooks that high schools use, because it really is a whole nother issue to tackle that should be taken separately from the problem of education reform.

However if you want a simple solution to the textbook price issue, this is the most realistic solution: Mandate that all textbooks be commercialized digitally as well in paper form. Once they are on the internet, the (insert adjective based on your view of piracy) truth is that the students will not tolerate buying such ridiculous high prices and will download all their textbooks illegally for free.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Textbooks themselves are a problem. Many are just bad, most are biased one way or the other. But they are way overpriced and with frequent new editions, mainly for the money with few changes. Often they are not reviewed and taken on recommendation sight unseen. If they were not so expensive it would be better to allow course teaches to chose their own texts but it is a big money industry and you might find more corruption at various levels than you would even imagine.

It's a typical publisher game, and not just limited to textbooks. The actual authors of the works don't really get all that much when you consider the total volume of sales. Software, music, movies, books are all priced not at their intrinsic value but at what the market will bear. If you want to have the textbooks priced at something closer to their intrinsic value, you have to move them out of the dynamics of the “free market”. Publishers want money, not the gratitude of parents. Parents have no choice but to cough up, so you see where all this is going.

It's not corruption, per se. It's the dynamics of letting the market decide on price.

[Fisherking]

Employers should be interested in the education of their future employees, wouldn’t you agree?

Anti-intellectualism is not a real problem. You have a few that will come out with the “those who can do & those who can’t teach” line but they are not the majority. Most people realize that those successful few got their education by determination and were self taught. A though proposition. Sometimes those who see themselves as intellectuals can be the bigger problem. Snobbishness is not an endearing trait and often that is how it is perceived.

Frequently, you find people have had bad experience with school and can’t let go of the issue. Most people just want their children to do well.

Laws will always be circumvented. Every issue coming before a school board can’t have a requirement of signatures or nothing will get done. Individual board members must be able to bring up issues and points for discussion and vote. That is what I was trying to point out.

As to textbooks, :laugh4:, I once saw an elementary mathematics text book that used examples and word problems based around the United Nations and a feminist agenda.:dizzy2:

That was a clear formula to set off the talk-radio crowd. Would you like to be the one answering the phones when Johnny or Jane got home with that book?

Authors who reveal their political views in some way in the text is one thing but when someone writes to influence political views at tax payers’ expense, it is quite different, don’t you think?

At the same time we can’t violate a persons rights to intellectual property by requiring it to be in the public domain.

It is clear that we are not doing everything right. Some how we need to figure out what other countries, like Finland are doing and see what can be incorporated.

Most of our failings are at the lower grade levels. American collages and Universities are still among the worlds best.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Employers should be interested in the education of their future employees, wouldn’t you agree?

Anti-intellectualism is not a real problem. You have a few that will come out with the “those who can do & those who can’t teach” line but they are not the majority. Most people realize that those successful few got their education by determination and were self taught. A though proposition. Sometimes those who see themselves as intellectuals can be the bigger problem. Snobbishness is not an endearing trait and often that is how it is perceived.

Frequently, you find people have had bad experience with school and can’t let go of the issue. Most people just want their children to do well.

Laws will always be circumvented. Every issue coming before a school board can’t have a requirement of signatures or nothing will get done. Individual board members must be able to bring up issues and points for discussion and vote. That is what I was trying to point out.

As to textbooks, :laugh4:, I once saw an elementary mathematics text book that used examples and word problems based around the United Nations and a feminist agenda.:dizzy2:

That was a clear formula to set off the talk-radio crowd. Would you like to be the one answering the phones when Johnny or Jane got home with that book?

Authors who reveal their political views in some way in the text is one thing but when someone writes to influence political views at tax payers’ expense, it is quite different, don’t you think?

At the same time we can’t violate a persons rights to intellectual property by requiring it to be in the public domain.

It is clear that we are not doing everything right. Some how we need to figure out what other countries, like Finland are doing and see what can be incorporated.

Most of our failings are at the lower grade levels. American collages and Universities are still among the worlds best.

Not really. Employers will pay for your Masters Degree if you agree to work for them, but I don't see any employer willing to pay for someones undergraduate (at least not on a large scale).

Anti-intellectualism may not be a problem but apathy certainly is. You have the public able to change the California Constitution of a whim and if there is one thing it has shown, it is that they do not care about education because most of them have no tie to the education system. To get everyone involved is just impossible, how are you going to do it anyway? You must present an incentive of some sort, which means legislation or using public funds. I simply disagree that the larger public has shown anything but contempt for the public education system because quite frankly if they didn't, then we would be having a much different discussion on this to begin with! It is always blame the teachers and the teachers union, don't bother to look at the inherent flaws of the system, which goes to show how much people's opinions are influenced by their bad experiences in the system.

Yes, most people want their children to do well. Aaaaand end of thought. Because that is how much thinking goes into the public education system nowadays besides, "what are those greedy teachers asking for now?". Everyone wants their child to do well, but all they do is drop them off, pick them up, ask how was it, child says "it was good" and the parent goes no further. If people cared, then we wouldn't be in this mess. The only reason why it has gotten this bad is precisely because no one cares enough to do something or learn beyond the talking points. Reform has been needed for 30+ years now and the only thing that we have gotten done is No Child Left Behind which has only made things worse imo.

That argument taken to its logical conclusion means we should not have laws at all. If all of them are going to be circumvented anyway, why bother? Just because the enforcement is not perfect doesn't mean it is worthless.

I never argued that every issue needs signature, nor did I say that school board members can't bring up topics on their own. You must have misinterpreted me. I said school board members can bring up their own topics. So I agree with you. I also said that signatures should only be needed if someone wants to change the curriculum or ban a book (AKA wants to dictate what everyone elses kids are learning). Although like I said earlier, I tihnk it should be illegal to ban a book period.

That's a shame about that math textbook, although I would need to see it for myself. Good thing there are a million different math textbooks all teaching the same material.

If you want to limit the impact of teaching a book that is biased then simply allow the individual school districts to be able to choose whatever textbook they want as long as it is deemed satisfactory in teaching the standards of the state and federal guidelines for the curriculum.

Ok, so there really is no other way than to cut the cost of books down. You get government to force the price of books down in however way you want it, or you let the free market continue to put the price point at where it currently stands. There really is no other options. The price of books imo, is just a red herring from the real problems that are causing kids to do poorly. Overpriced and biased books are not ruining education, so let us focus on the other more important aspects.

I agree we are not doing everything right, far from it. If you could highlight a few things from Finland you wish to see implemented here, that would be great.

Yes, the real problem is the K-12 grades. Universities and colleges are operating marvelously because they (until recently in California) are getting adequate funding and they are controlled and operated differently than K-12 schools. So it is quite apparent that the problem isn't that public funded school in general is a massively failed experiment, the problem lies within the constructs of the modern school district set up that all K-12 schools operate under. Which is what I am trying to get at here and propose solutions for.

[Fisherking]

I wish I remembered the name of the text book too...
I am not well versed on the ins and outs of the Finish school system. I know they have been leader in international comparisons for some time, though they dropped last year a bit. And I know they require children learn at least one musical instrument.

German schools however, are much different. After the primary grades parents and children decide their next step. One level is basically a trade school, one intermediate, and the last is collage prepatory. They have different year requirement and the only one that offers what you would consider a high school diploma is the latter. If marks fall below the expectable level a student changes to the next lower school. At least that is how it works at the top level. Graduation requirements are also of a higher standard than you find in US schools.
It doesn’t mean that the other schools educate to a lower standard but rather one with a different focus.
Those completing the mid level school system can attend university but have to meet further requirements.
That is a gross over simplification but a general idea.
It doesn’t eliminate, but dose reduce the peer pressure for bad grades.

While I have a bit of a libertarian bent I wouldn’t quite advocate the elimination of all laws. I am just unsure that this would have the intended effect.

Growing up, I attended both public and privet schools, though boarding schools are significantly different than I imagine privet schools of the ‘70 onward. We had class sizes of 12 to 16 and teachers of considerable experience and standing. That was when I grasped that knowledge was worth having and expanding.

Most schools can’t afford or can’t get that kind of faculty.

Finding good teachers has never been easy. Pay helps but it is not the only issue. At one point, it was argued that teacher pay should be kept low so you only attracted the dedicated. Class size is particularly important when you have inexperienced teachers. Most communities can’t afford the buildings or the salaries to have smaller class sizes and the overhead is far too great in most states to adequately fund what they have with today’s priorities.

Governments have the funds, it is more a matter of where they chose to spend them. That is a political issue that neither right nor left is willing to fix. Both will pay lip service to the problems and say the other side won’t go along, but it won’t get them as many votes as some other projects they have in mind.

[Moros]

I wish I remembered the name of the text book too...
I am not well versed on the ins and outs of the Finish school system. I know they have been leader in international comparisons for some time, though they dropped last year a bit. And I know they require children learn at least one musical instrument.

German schools however, are much different. After the primary grades parents and children decide their next step. One level is basically a trade school, one intermediate, and the last is collage prepatory. They have different year requirement and the only one that offers what you would consider a high school diploma is the latter. If marks fall below the expectable level a student changes to the next lower school. At least that is how it works at the top level. Graduation requirements are also of a higher standard than you find in US schools.
It doesn’t mean that the other schools educate to a lower standard but rather one with a different focus.
Those completing the mid level school system can attend university but have to meet further requirements.
That is a gross over simplification but a general idea.
It doesn’t eliminate, but dose reduce the peer pressure for bad grades.

While I have a bit of a libertarian bent I wouldn’t quite advocate the elimination of all laws. I am just unsure that this would have the intended effect.

Growing up, I attended both public and privet schools, though boarding schools are significantly different than I imagine privet schools of the ‘70 onward. We had class sizes of 12 to 16 and teachers of considerable experience and standing. That was when I grasped that knowledge was worth having and expanding.

Most schools can’t afford or can’t get that kind of faculty.

Finding good teachers has never been easy. Pay helps but it is not the only issue. At one point, it was argued that teacher pay should be kept low so you only attracted the dedicated. Class size is particularly important when you have inexperienced teachers. Most communities can’t afford the buildings or the salaries to have smaller class sizes and the overhead is far too great in most states to adequately fund what they have with today’s priorities.

Governments have the funds, it is more a matter of where they chose to spend them. That is a political issue that neither right nor left is willing to fix. Both will pay lip service to the problems and say the other side won’t go along, but it won’t get them as many votes as some other projects they have in mind.

Here in Belgium we've got a similar system, which I think works wonderfully. We also tend to get more than decent scores on those international education comparison tests. We've got ASO, TSO, BSO and BUSO type of schools. ASO focusses on people who will be going to study further after graduating (thus uni-prep). It has also a couple of different curriculae. You don't have that much liberty in choosing which courses you want to follow, but you can choose a package with a focus on either this or that. Some of those packages are considered more difficult and hence usuallly also encompasses the better learners or brighters kiddos. But those 'packages' also make sure that those who are good in languages, doesn't need to be necessarily champions in maths as well. TSO is more technical and is sometimes considered a step below. It really depends though as some of the packages here are on ASO level, but just with a focus on technical courses like electricity, mechanics,... but often still feature heavy maths. And can be a good prep for someone planning to study industrial engineering at college for example. Though it also has some packages that aren't that fit as a preparation for uni, but some of those do make a good craftsmen out of you. Next comes BSO wich is for people who don't learn that easily (or just don't learn) and plan to get working right after college. Lastly we have the Buso schools for those with serious learning problems, mental issues, less gifted or handicapped. (Well you also have those art schools and sport schools, but they are not important)
And I think it is a very good system. The packages make sure you have a decent basic knowledge and understand across a various amount of subjects. Without kids being forced to follow classes they don't like or are good at too much. It also bundles kids with the same ease or difficulty of learning together, which makes it easier to keep everyone interested and learning. Note kids are never forced to get to an 'easier' school or package, but can be advised to when not getting good grades or failing.

Over here teachers can fill in what they want to teach a lot by themselves, but they have to achieve certain things as well. This is good as well as that way you can adapt to your class. There's a focus on understanding as well, especially in the later years.

Actually I think this system is about the best. The only thing bad about it is that they want to change aspects of it every now and then. Usually for the worst.

Also I think it's ridiculous and sad that teachers in the US don't want to something extra after their hours. Though it sometimes gets silly over here, I can't believe the attitude of American teachers on this point. :no:

[Lord Winter]

Not sure that is the best idea.

Without local board you don’t get local funding.

Most are unpaid positions. They make more noise then having any real impact in most places.

They give the community a voice. In most cases this is in theory because no one goes to the meetings. Most people would rather complain to others than actually to the authorities.

Having a legislator in charge of school boards will not stop them giving in to the crazies.

Why do the boards give in to bad ideas? Political pressure or perceived pressure.
The people running for the board might be also these people.

I think more community involvement from a wider range of individuals is important in getting the whole thing to work properly.


But more importantly it is not always the best to have only educators running the show any more than it is a good idea of having lawyers write the laws.
s
Textbooks are something else all together. You can find some big problems there who ever buys them.

School boards do have a role in setting curriculum at both the local and state level. All I was suggesting is that the people who work in this area should have experience in the relative field. For example in the textbook debate wouldn't it make more sense to have someone with a history degree deciding on the history books then people who's experiences with history stop at high school.

As for teachers running the show, I said nothing of the sort. We should separate people with teaching skills and with management skills to ensure that we have the best possible qualified people in each position. What I say above is just an extension of this.

[Fisherking]

School boards do have a role in setting curriculum at both the local and state level. All I was suggesting is that the people who work in this area should have experience in the relative field. For example in the textbook debate wouldn't it make more sense to have someone with a history degree deciding on the history books then people who's experiences with history stop at high school.

As for teachers running the show, I said nothing of the sort. We should separate people with teaching skills and with management skills to ensure that we have the best possible qualified people in each position. What I say above is just an extension of this.

Sounds fine.

[a completely inoffensive name]

I wish I remembered the name of the text book too...
I am not well versed on the ins and outs of the Finish school system. I know they have been leader in international comparisons for some time, though they dropped last year a bit. And I know they require children learn at least one musical instrument.

German schools however, are much different. After the primary grades parents and children decide their next step. One level is basically a trade school, one intermediate, and the last is collage prepatory. They have different year requirement and the only one that offers what you would consider a high school diploma is the latter. If marks fall below the expectable level a student changes to the next lower school. At least that is how it works at the top level. Graduation requirements are also of a higher standard than you find in US schools.
It doesn’t mean that the other schools educate to a lower standard but rather one with a different focus.
Those completing the mid level school system can attend university but have to meet further requirements.
That is a gross over simplification but a general idea.
It doesn’t eliminate, but dose reduce the peer pressure for bad grades.

While I have a bit of a libertarian bent I wouldn’t quite advocate the elimination of all laws. I am just unsure that this would have the intended effect.

Growing up, I attended both public and privet schools, though boarding schools are significantly different than I imagine privet schools of the ‘70 onward. We had class sizes of 12 to 16 and teachers of considerable experience and standing. That was when I grasped that knowledge was worth having and expanding.

Most schools can’t afford or can’t get that kind of faculty.

Finding good teachers has never been easy. Pay helps but it is not the only issue. At one point, it was argued that teacher pay should be kept low so you only attracted the dedicated. Class size is particularly important when you have inexperienced teachers. Most communities can’t afford the buildings or the salaries to have smaller class sizes and the overhead is far too great in most states to adequately fund what they have with today’s priorities.

Governments have the funds, it is more a matter of where they chose to spend them. That is a political issue that neither right nor left is willing to fix. Both will pay lip service to the problems and say the other side won’t go along, but it won’t get them as many votes as some other projects they have in mind.

I thought that standardized tests determine the path for students in the German education program not the parents and children themselves.

One of the key things you highlighted was that your private schooling had classes of 12-16 which is nearly perfect class room sizes. You can't get there with public education however unless you pay out more money for additional schools to be built and teachers to be hired. The schools can afford whatever they want it all depends on how much the public wants to give them. Right now, they are not giving enough.

Teacher pay as it stands right now imo is already low enough to the point where you can argue we are trying out the philosophy that we are only getting the dedicated. I wouldn't change teacher salary. So from my understanding of what you are saying, we are in agreement there. That last sentence speaks the truth of what is exactly part of the problem, communities and states can't afford it. We need higher amounts of money going towards education, not to increase teacher salaries but to build more schools and hire more teachers. This is the simple fact that needs to be addressed and it isn't going to change any time soon however. The state is going to have to change its priorities to make education one of the more important causes again. If not, then this entire situation is doomed from the start and we will only see more decline. People however (like I have said many times already), do not care. They will not pay anymore than they have to. Which means you get complaints about more teachers being hired because they think that 35 is a perfectly acceptable amount of students per class, when it absolutely isn't.

Your last two sentences are completely true. But this is why I started this thread and why we are having this conversation. Because we don't want lip service any more and we are willing to fix it. People like us need to take charge of the debate if we want to see any sort of change to occur at all.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Also I think it's ridiculous and sad that teachers in the US don't want to something extra after their hours. Though it sometimes gets silly over here, I can't believe the attitude of American teachers on this point. :no:

The thing to remember about education in America is that no one respects teachers. And by that, I mean they don't get treated well as human beings. If a student fails, first thing a parent does is yell at the teacher (although this isn't the case most of the time, it happens a lot when you teach 4 classes with 35-40 kids each). When the public starts discussing the issues it always comes down to teacher salary. Even if it was a directed meeting towards a specific problem, someone always brings up the teachers as part of the problem, which cause resentment. Many teachers probably feel that the system and everyone in general is out to get them, which makes them unwilling to put in extra time for students since they won't get any perks or recognition for going beyond for others. Also, kids in America absolutely hate school from the time they are in 6th grade, and many act like ******** in class every single day, which is just rude for the teachers to go through all the time.

[Moros]

The thing to remember about education in America is that no one respects teachers. And by that, I mean they don't get treated well as human beings. If a student fails, first thing a parent does is yell at the teacher (although this isn't the case most of the time, it happens a lot when you teach 4 classes with 35-40 kids each). When the public starts discussing the issues it always comes down to teacher salary. Even if it was a directed meeting towards a specific problem, someone always brings up the teachers as part of the problem, which cause resentment. Many teachers probably feel that the system and everyone in general is out to get them, which makes them unwilling to put in extra time for students since they won't get any perks or recognition for going beyond for others. Also, kids in America absolutely hate school from the time they are in 6th grade, and many act like ******** in class every single day, which is just rude for the teachers to go through all the time.
Well that's a very wrong and unhealthy educational environment then. :no:

[a completely inoffensive name]

Well that's a very wrong and unhealthy educational environment then. :no:

Mhm, quoted for truth.

[a completely inoffensive name]

A Mathematician's Lament.

http://www.maa.org/devlin/LockhartsLament.pdf

[Moros]

A Mathematician's Lament.

http://www.maa.org/devlin/LockhartsLament.pdf

Long time since I read something like this. Thank you for such a great link. ~:bow:

[jabarto]

Well that's a very wrong and unhealthy educational environment then. :no:

I've noticed this a lot with my history classes. Last semester I was in a US history class and every single day I would look in any direction and see someone with their hands under their desk texting. At least twice in the semester the teacher had to publicly call out students for talking during class and I really got the impression that only I and maybe two other people actually wanted to be there.

That's part of why I like to talk to my teachers after class. It just seems that so few people like history and I like to brighten their day a bit with my barely contained interest for the subject. :beam: