Liberals did not destroy the American school system.

[HoreTore]

I love how the people who whine about liberals ruining education never backs their claims of how things should be with actual research and science.

But that may be because no research supports most conservatives view of education. The authoritarian school system is dead and buried - and I hope it will never return.

I might have more to say after I've read this thread, but right now there's a footie game on....

[Centurion1]

I love how the people who whine about liberals ruining education never backs their claims of how things should be with actual research and science.

But that may be because no research supports most conservatives view of education. The authoritarian school system is dead and buried - and I hope it will never return.

I might have more to say after I've read this thread, but right now there's a footie game on....

oh wait it is all over asia. and in Europe your school system is more authoritarian than American education.

[HoreTore]

oh wait it is all over asia. and in Europe your school system is more authoritarian than American education.

Yes, and that might be the reason why Europe is lagging behind the US when it comes to inventions.

The US has, since Dewey, lead the way on education. The Cape Cod convention staked out a new course, the one we are on now, because they realized that the american education system pre-1950 quite frankly sucked. The education system we have now wasn't made by hippies, it was made by old men, most of them scientists i maths, physics, chemistry, etc as well as education(though curiously, those schooled in eucation was actually a minority).

As a treat, I'll list the four main influences of modern education for you:
- John Dewey
- Jean Piaget
- Jerome Bruner(who led the cape cod convention)
- Lev Vygotsky

2 yanks, one frenchie and a russkie. All four of them belonging to the first half of the 20th century. No hippies.

The reasons why traditional authority in classrooms, if I may call it that, has been dismantled is overwhelming evidence that the following things further education:
- learning by doing, not transfer of knowledge
- learning through social interaction between peers
- student ownership of its own education. This has long ago been implemented in the corporate world, by the way(mowt commonly through stock options).
- evaluation FOR learning, not OF learning.

[HoreTore]

Damn it! One can never remember everything, eh? I forgot Thordike and his law of effect and Skinner's work which built on that, of course....

That would be the 1910's to 1930-ish....

Obviously influenced by the social radicals of the 60's and 70's!!!

[Lemur]

Not to be too mushy-feely, but is this subject really a conservative/liberal one? Some schools in the USA are very good. Many are not. I think everyone can agree that non-educational spending by districts is a joke, and should be slashed.

Honestly, I expect there's more agreement than disagreement amongst the Orgahs on this topic. Far more interested in looking at models that work than pointing the partisan finger of blame (which is kinda a dead-end conversation, although an amusing one).

I'd like to know why Finland is doing so well, for example.

[HoreTore]

If I may allow myself to be bold, Lemur, I'll point at the two largest obstacles in the US system as I see it:

1. The school board system where parents have a say.
2. The constant evaluation OF learning.

None of these two are as far as I know part of the left/right divide, so honestly, I don't believe this is a partisan issue.

I also believe it is a myth that the education system is "broken" or any of the other terms people like to fling at it. I actually believe it is moving forward nicely. But then again, I am an optimist by nature....

To expand on the points above:

Number one is because it gives plenty of people who have no idea what they're talking direct power. There is no other field than education where the incompetent have such power over the incompetent. Democracy gives us better solutions, but only when we make larger, strategic and more general decisions, not through micro-management. For example, we can all chip in on whether or not to invade Iraq, but can you imagine a situation where a board of civilians with no military training overseeing the orders of a captain in the field, and changing them when they feel like it? No, of course not, that would be ridiculous. Just as ridiculous as parents controlling the classrooms is.

Number two is evaluation OF learning instead of FOR learning. Almost every study that measures the effect of various things to increase learning, lists evaluation for learning as number one, usually with a big margin on number two. That it is what we should do is almost unquestionable.

[a completely inoffensive name]

If I may allow myself to be bold, Lemur, I'll point at the two largest obstacles in the US system as I see it:

1. The school board system where parents have a say.
2. The constant evaluation OF learning.

None of these two are as far as I know part of the left/right divide, so honestly, I don't believe this is a partisan issue.

I also believe it is a myth that the education system is "broken" or any of the other terms people like to fling at it. I actually believe it is moving forward nicely. But then again, I am an optimist by nature....

To expand on the points above:

Number one is because it gives plenty of people who have no idea what they're talking direct power. There is no other field than education where the incompetent have such power over the incompetent. Democracy gives us better solutions, but only when we make larger, strategic and more general decisions, not through micro-management. For example, we can all chip in on whether or not to invade Iraq, but can you imagine a situation where a board of civilians with no military training overseeing the orders of a captain in the field, and changing them when they feel like it? No, of course not, that would be ridiculous. Just as ridiculous as parents controlling the classrooms is.

Number two is evaluation OF learning instead of FOR learning. Almost every study that measures the effect of various things to increase learning, lists evaluation for learning as number one, usually with a big margin on number two. That it is what we should do is almost unquestionable.

Still need to get rid of tenure otherwise you still have crappy teachers that just suck, and teaching to a test needs to stop as well. The latter especially is hurting education more than anything else.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Not to be too mushy-feely, but is this subject really a conservative/liberal one? Some schools in the USA are very good. Many are not. I think everyone can agree that non-educational spending by districts is a joke, and should be slashed.

Honestly, I expect there's more agreement than disagreement amongst the Orgahs on this topic. Far more interested in looking at models that work than pointing the partisan finger of blame (which is kinda a dead-end conversation, although an amusing one).

I'd like to know why Finland is doing so well, for example.

The thread title came from PJ and Cent claiming that america's schools are broken because of leftist uptopia building in my gay marriage thread.

[Centurion1]

The thread title came from PJ and Cent claiming that america's schools are broken because of leftist uptopia building in my gay marriage thread.

I blame dit on a plethora of things and what i view as leftist social experimenting is but a tiny fraction of the larger problem. as i stated parents being given power over theirs childrens educations is what has contributed most to breaking the system.

i will respond in greater length later.

[Centurion1]

Yes, and that might be the reason why Europe is lagging behind the US when it comes to inventions.

The US has, since Dewey, lead the way on education. The Cape Cod convention staked out a new course, the one we are on now, because they realized that the american education system pre-1950 quite frankly sucked. The education system we have now wasn't made by hippies, it was made by old men, most of them scientists i maths, physics, chemistry, etc as well as education(though curiously, those schooled in eucation was actually a minority).

As a treat, I'll list the four main influences of modern education for you:
- John Dewey
- Jean Piaget
- Jerome Bruner(who led the cape cod convention)
- Lev Vygotsky

2 yanks, one frenchie and a russkie. All four of them belonging to the first half of the 20th century. No hippies.

The reasons why traditional authority in classrooms, if I may call it that, has been dismantled is overwhelming evidence that the following things further education:
- learning by doing, not transfer of knowledge
- learning through social interaction between peers
- student ownership of its own education. This has long ago been implemented in the corporate world, by the way(mowt commonly through stock options).
- evaluation FOR learning, not OF learning.

authoritative laerning has nothing to do with political parties nor is it what the conservative american party advocates so your point is moot.

[HoreTore]

authoritative laerning has nothing to do with political parties nor is it what the conservative american party advocates so your point is moot.

You need to put your reading glasses on.

I specifically made the point that this had nothing to do with partisan politics.

@ACIN:

"Teaching for the test" is a symptom of evaulation of learning.

[Centurion1]

You need to put your reading glasses on.

I specifically made the point that this had nothing to do with partisan politics.

@ACIN:

"Teaching for the test" is a symptom of evaulation of learning.

so why address my point? i simply said that authoritative education policies are common throughout the world.