Message boards :
Politics :
Parents role in Education ?
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 . . . 19 · Next
Author | Message |
---|---|
Dena Wiltsie Send message Joined: 19 Apr 01 Posts: 1628 Credit: 24,230,968 RAC: 26 |
For those who think teachers would never use our children for political purposes Link |
bobby Send message Joined: 22 Mar 02 Posts: 2866 Credit: 17,789,109 RAC: 3 |
How about this for a fine how d'ya do, you couldn't make it up if you tried. You might well notice, as I did, that at no stage were parents being involved. Anyone care to postulate why? Now I know for absolute sure that the UK educational system has totally lost the plot ..... Parental involvement is not mentioned in the article. Parents are mentioned once (in relation to pupils' attendance) in the Ofsted inspector's letter. I have no idea why the inspector did not make more references to parents, I am not sure whether such references are common in such reports (there are none in the full report from 2010), and see no reason to speculate reasons for the absence of further references. It seems to me that the inspector is generally positive about the school's attempts at improving the behavior of its pupils, and it seems to be having positive results: ofsted wrote: The school’s behaviour management strategy is showing signs of impact. The task remains challenging, which is reflected in over thirty eight exclusions last year but school leaders are making inroads in improving the atmosphere and ethos in and out of the classroom. The volume of incidents and dangerous occurrences has reduced significantly. Pupils endorse this, and say they feel safer. Perhaps this is a case of the plot being found rather than lost. I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ... |
bobby Send message Joined: 22 Mar 02 Posts: 2866 Credit: 17,789,109 RAC: 3 |
The Education sector should be pressing that point home, to parents and Government, until then education is reactive not proactive, so in my view they have lost the plot! What's the evidence that the Eduction sector is not pressing the point home? I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ... |
John Clark Send message Joined: 29 Sep 99 Posts: 16515 Credit: 4,418,829 RAC: 0 |
I agree with your view Chris. Back in the 1950s the solution to unruly behaviour was brief and worked effectively. It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues |
bobby Send message Joined: 22 Mar 02 Posts: 2866 Credit: 17,789,109 RAC: 3 |
I agree with your view Chris. "Why should children not be given the same protection from assault that adults expect?" Further, what is the data (plural of anecdote <> data) that shows the 1950s "solution" as being effective? Here's a start: The research to date also indicates that physical punishment does not promote long-term, internalized compliance. Most (85 percent) of the studies included in a meta-analysis found physical punishment to be associated with less moral internalization of norms for appropriate behavior and long-term compliance. Similarly, the more children receive physical punishment, the more defiant they are and the less likely they are to empathize with others. If inappropriate and defiant behavior are your intended outcomes, then I agree, the 1950s solution was effective. I do not believe these outcomes to be positive. I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ... |
John Clark Send message Joined: 29 Sep 99 Posts: 16515 Credit: 4,418,829 RAC: 0 |
The old ways of education and control were shown to be effective in the general pupil population, and the result was higher achievement in examination results which were much more searching than current offerings. It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues |
bobby Send message Joined: 22 Mar 02 Posts: 2866 Credit: 17,789,109 RAC: 3 |
"Why should children not be given the same protection from assault that adults expect?" It seems the lesson of "the plural of anecdote is not data" refuses to sink in. Your personal experience, and that of mine or John's may not be indicative for the population in general. Cane's, slippers and rules were still in use while I was at school, however my own experiences (whether the same or different) would be further anecdotes, and not a useful basis for discussion given that data on the subject has been systematically collected and reviewed. Physical punishment (of any type) would be inconceivable as a method of behavior correction in a typical work environment, adults would rightly object and take matters to the police, why should it be different for children? "Because it happened to me and did me no harm" is not the best justification of its continued use, all the more so when the data shows it has adverse effects in general. I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ... |
John Clark Send message Joined: 29 Sep 99 Posts: 16515 Credit: 4,418,829 RAC: 0 |
One of the old fashioned, and it doesn't hurt, methods I would be content to advocate in an extremely unruly class is - - choose 1 pupil, preferably a ring leader(backed by class nomination). Carefully draw a kukri, sharpened as the Gurkha do, and bleed the chosen pupil in to a large bowl (like a chicken). Get all the class to drink the contents of the bowl, and dispose of the body in the school furnace. It will help global warming. I doubt is any of the remaining class members would ever step out of line again. Problem solved for the rest of the school as well! Oh, the discipline would have been sanctioned by the local police chief .... It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues |
bobby Send message Joined: 22 Mar 02 Posts: 2866 Credit: 17,789,109 RAC: 3 |
It seems the lesson of "the plural of anecdote is not data" refuses to sink in. Your constant use of anecdotes to justify a position is frustrating and irrelevant when adopting the approach commonly referred to as "critical thinking". I have referred to critical thinking in the past, as I believe others here have. You might want to research it and find out how its application may be beneficial to a discussion of this nature. As for patronizing, the repeated references to how things were done in the 50s is not? If not, why not? not a useful basis for discussion given that data on the subject has been systematically collected and reviewed. The data I posted was from US based studies, I would imagine that they have likely escaped the worst excesses of the "Loony Left" (if indeed there are any such excesses pertinent to the topic at hand). However, if systematically collected data is not acceptable, what type of evidence would you suggest be used in defense of a position? Physical punishment (of any type) would be inconceivable as a method of behavior correction in a typical work environment, adults would rightly object and take matters to the police What part of "further anecdotes [are] not a useful basis for discussion" escaped you? It is my opinion that idle speculation is frequently the product an idle mind. My question, which also seems to have escaped you, is "Why should children not be given the same protection from assault that adults expect?". I believe that it is currently unanswered by you and John. Perhaps you might like to comment upon this item which recently was in the news. Using the fact free opinion of a Labour politician to support your case is no better than posting your own opinion. Indeed, it might even be worse, as it likely demonstrates a fallacious appeal to authority. I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ... |
bobby Send message Joined: 22 Mar 02 Posts: 2866 Credit: 17,789,109 RAC: 3 |
One of the old fashioned, and it doesn't hurt, methods I would be content to advocate in an extremely unruly class is - In a thread about parents in the classroom, that's about as close to a Godwin as we need to get, surely? I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ... |
John Clark Send message Joined: 29 Sep 99 Posts: 16515 Credit: 4,418,829 RAC: 0 |
Absolutely and utterly predictable. It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues |
bobby Send message Joined: 22 Mar 02 Posts: 2866 Credit: 17,789,109 RAC: 3 |
Absolutely and utterly predictable. That I find "jokes" about killing children distasteful? Glad I could oblige. Now how about answering the question I posed. I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ... |
Sarge Send message Joined: 25 Aug 99 Posts: 12273 Credit: 8,569,109 RAC: 79 |
what type of evidence would you suggest be used in defense of a position? As I watch this, Chris and John, what comes to mind is that the two of you and I initially did not get along, either. Yet I consider the two of you good friends here on the S@H forums, and though it's been a while, discussions on Skype calls were great, too. I also consider bobby a friend. Currently, if i am not busy, I am often tired and so do not post as much. But, I feel that, given time to respond, I might be able to bolster at least some of Bobby's points, or at least also help in providing wider perspective. I might also have some bits bolstering your side, as well. Could you gents call a truce for a bit, maybe give me 1 or 2 days for me to get work done, rest, re-read some posts and then give my anecdotes and knowledge? |
John Clark Send message Joined: 29 Sep 99 Posts: 16515 Credit: 4,418,829 RAC: 0 |
You are very welcome Sarge, and it's nice to see you around. It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues |
bobby Send message Joined: 22 Mar 02 Posts: 2866 Credit: 17,789,109 RAC: 3 |
Unless the rules are changed, anecdotes are not allowed. Good grief, if you were to ask me, you could not find a better example of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. "The plural of anecdotes <> data", does not, to my mind, mean that anecdotes are verboten, it means anecdotes are not a substitute for data. When we have data, use it, when we don't we are left with other means to assess the merits of an opinion. To my way of thinking good evidence beats opinion every time. If you have a better way to evaluate opinions, do as I have done and share it so that we might all be the wiser. FWIW, the evidence I posted on the outcomes of assaulting children was based on data from US based studies, I suspect that these are not as open to your dismissal ("product of the Loony Left") as you might like the a casual reader of this thread to believe. no more frustrating than your constant attempts to undermine anyones contribution. To challenge is not necessarily undermine. If an opinion can be supported with better evidence than is used in the challenge, the case for the opinion is strengthened. This seems to me to be a statement of the profoundly obvious, yet when I challenge some comments I am greeted with hand waving about judges and courts. You are clearly of a younger age group than me, and I would have thought you would have been grateful to learn of others experiences in a time when you weren't around, and things did work better. That might give you food for thought on how to change and improve the current situation. More idle speculation. You have no idea whether I am grateful to learn about the experiences of others, only whether I appear to be grateful to learn about the experiences posted to the threads here. I am sure you are well aware that appearances can be deceiving. Please do not assume I disagree with an opinion when I try to find evidence against it, as Socrates said "the highest form of Human Excellence is to question oneself and others" (an appeal to authority, that, to my mind, is not fallacious). I do not have a wide open mind, I generally try to protect mine from the collection of garbage. I'm confident that many others try to do the same. I expect that was aimed at me, and a poor attempt at a personal insult. It's my opinion, challenge it with a better one or, better still, facts, if you want me to modify it. You speculated about my motives for having an issue with assaulting children when I had specifically provided no grounds for doing so. Questioning a person's motives is commonly used as the basis of an ad hominem attack. The riposte was intentionally light, as ad hom. attacks are often intended to inflame. If I were to speculate, I'd suspect it's to this part of the exchange between us, as much as anything else, that lead Sarge to his request for a truce, and given his comments, I'll assume for now that you did not fully appreciate how your comments on motives could be interpreted. If you want to know what my motives are, please ask me, I'll tell you if I choose to, and then you can assess my response to establish whether it is plausible. Having said that, I will not share my motives for discussing the subject of assaulting children, nor will I request yours. I will ask you to refrain from more speculation on the subject of motives unless and until it becomes pertinent. I believe I have provided motives to challenge opinions at a general level, it is my hope that the generic motive will suffice for this specific. I actually wish I had some more free time to be idle, perhaps you could let me know at some point how you manage to do it, I'd be most grateful. Posts by Chris S > 14,000 Posts by Bobby < 1,000 You have been on the SETI fora a little over 11 years, I have been on them a little under 10. Does that help you understand how I manage my time? I'm most intrigued by your choice of avatar. But then again as Hank Hill regularly observes "That boy ain't right." The character's name is "Bobby", my name here is the same. Does that help solve the mystery? As for the quote, Hank may well have that as a catchphrase, for me the question is, is he right? After all, wikipedia has this assessment "Although at times Bobby is seen as odd by his parents and peers, he maintains a remarkable talent with people, particularly with girls, who find him cute and entertaining". The original title of this thread is "Parents in Classes" and as a University lecturer I would really welcome your input on that. I posted on that fairly early on and Sarge replied with some useful evidence. I referenced it again in a later post, that reference was ignored. Somebody else brought classroom discipline (they can't discipline kids because teachers would get sued for assault) and declining academic standards (Let's get back to the 3 R's) into the discussion. Are you requesting these topics cease to be discussed in this thread? a difference of opinion as to the way one should conduct themselves during an open discussion That appears to me to be a fairly accurate summation. You appear to believe it is acceptable conduct to condone the assault of children and have thus far provided 2 justifications ("it happened to me", and "the law permits it"), I have challenged you on this, and provided evidence that shows that the outcome of this supposedly acceptable conduct is not necessarily desirable. I have not restricted your rights to free speech ("no-one is allowed to have free speech" is so palpably false it's staggering you would state such a thing. If I have interfered with your right to free speech on the SETI fora, please document the circumstances. Moderators, if you are watching, please remind me when I have ever, at any time, on the SETI fora, "red-x"ed a post by somebody else, as I cannot recall having done such a thing). I have requested that you support your free speech with evidence, so that others in an open to all discussion can see the merits of your opinion. To date, you have failed to provide any such evidence. You continue to be free to exercise your right to free speech (as limited by the moderators, of which I am not, and have never been affiliated), just as I am free to challenge anything and everything you post until the cows come home, one of us tires of the exercise, or the moderators believe one of use falls foul of the rules. I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ... |
KWSN - MajorKong Send message Joined: 5 Jan 00 Posts: 2892 Credit: 1,499,890 RAC: 0 |
Bobby, This is not an ad-hom. attack on you, but I will admit to a moderate level of curiosity as to why you are using the phrase 'the assault of children'. Could you please discuss your reasoning? The context is the somewhat outdated practice (by school staff) of paddling (or otherwise physically punishing) children that misbehave at school. It is not allowed in most jurisdictions nowadays, though it still is in a very few, with explicit written parental permission. The term 'assault' has a rather specific legal definition, and in this context, does not really apply. If a teacher takes one of the rather wicked paddles that were used in days gone by, and strikes another teacher across the buttocks with it leaving bruises and welts, yes, THAT would be 'assault, causes bodily injury', which is in most circumstances only a class B misdemeanor in Texas. A few months jail, maximum, and a moderate fine. If that teacher does the same action, this time to one of the students (under 18, of course), that would be 'injury to a child', which is a felony (class 3, i think, maybe class 2..). Years of prison, and a rather large fine. Assault really isn't the correct term. In the context of parents, in almost every, if not every, jurisdiction in at least Texas if not the nation, an open-handed swat to the buttocks of a child is allowed as a form of punishment. But, if you use, for instance, one of those wicked, 'Black-eyed Susan' paddles on your child, leaving bruises and welts on your child's buttocks, guess what? Injury to a child. Felony time. In the context of punishment, it is not really possible to 'assault' a child. What is called 'assault' on an adult, is called something else on a child, and is a MUCH more serious of a crime (with the sole exception of the open-palmed swat to the buttocks in most jurisdictions). Would not a better term be 'corporal punishment'? Yes, it is a subject of much debate, and it has both supporters and people against it. So, would you please discuss why you specifically used the term 'assault'? And, I see you are still quoting me in your sig... :) https://youtu.be/iY57ErBkFFE #Texit Don't blame me, I voted for Johnson(L) in 2016. Truth is dangerous... especially when it challenges those in power. |
bobby Send message Joined: 22 Mar 02 Posts: 2866 Credit: 17,789,109 RAC: 3 |
Bobby, Sure thing. In UK common law, assault is simply a crime that causes a victim to fear violence, it does not require a physical attack. Again in the UK, parents are exempted from this under the laws provided by Chris, which is why I initially phrased the question as "Why should children not be given the same protection from assault that adults expect?". Physical contact that is not consented to is termed battery under UK common law. While assault and battery of children may be permitted under the law, I am interested in Chris's and indeed anyone else's reasons for supporting such laws. It seems to me that we have many laws to protect weaker sections of the population from abuses of stronger sections, yet for some of the weakest, we remove some protections. Given these definitions under UK common law (which are also used in many jurisdictions in the US), "assult" really is the correct term. BTW, the quote is taken from Dr Ben Goldacre's Bad Science book and blog on guardian.co.uk. I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ... |
KWSN - MajorKong Send message Joined: 5 Jan 00 Posts: 2892 Credit: 1,499,890 RAC: 0 |
Bobby, Bobby, Ahh.. I see where you are coming from now. You are using an older definition that was still in some use when I was a child. While our legal system in almost all states (IIRC, only Louisiana is different, it is based on Roman Law) is *based* on common law, it has been somewhat modified, and frequent modification continues. You appeal to the phrase 'same protection'. You do realize that this is a 2 edged sword? When it comes to what you term assault, the sole case where children have less protection is in cases of parents giving their children mild punishment for purposes of discipline. In ALL other cases, children have stronger protection than adults. Referring back to my example. If an adult strikes another adult (deliberately and without consent) on the buttocks with an old-style paddle they used to use in schools, and it causes bruises and welts, that is 'assault, causes bodily injury' which is a Class B misdemeanor (punishment is a maximum of 6 months in jail and a $2000 fine). The SAME action to a child (14 or under -- I was mistaken about it being under 18) (by a parent or not) is 'injury to a child', a first degree felony with a punishment of 5 to 99 years in prison and a $10000 fine. So, no. Children do not have the *SAME* protection against what you term assault as adults do. With the only exception being a parent punishing their child in such a way as it does not cause injury (for instance bruising -- pretty much only mild, open palm spanking to the buttocks is allowed), children enjoy GREATER protection. Why is the mild spanking of a child by its parent still allowed? Well, it is a matter of strong debate. But, society's attitudes are changing and the pendulum is still swinging away from physical punishment. I don't expect (unless there is a massive change in public opinion) the spanking exemption to survive more than another decade or two. Thank you for answering my question. Edit: I have used your signature phrase in conversation for over 40 years. I used the phrase in a reply to you a couple years ago or so. Shortly thereafter, you changed your signature to feature it. I had no idea that that person you mentioned was using it. Perhaps he got the phrase from me. :P |
bobby Send message Joined: 22 Mar 02 Posts: 2866 Credit: 17,789,109 RAC: 3 |
Bobby, The context in which I posed the question might help: Chris S wrote: and they can't discipline kids because teachers would get sued for assault. Bobby wrote: Why should children not be given the same protection from assault that adults expect? From there Chris introduced the question of "Spanking" and various other matters. You'll note in my reply to your question I observed that "we have many laws to protect weaker sections of the population from abuses of stronger sections", and I suspect it would be fairly trivial to make a good case for providing children with greater protections than adults. The context in which I asked my question was one where somebody appeared to be proposing that children in a particular setting should have fewer protections than adults. Given the context, I thought the protections enjoyed by adults a reasonable base line for the purposes of discussion. Again, given the context, it would be a mistake to interpret my question as supporting the removal of the greater protections that children may have in particular jurisdictions. I'm sure you are right about the life expectancy of the "parental spanking exemption", it seems clear to me that Chris and John believe this to be a mistake, indeed that it was a mistake to remove teachers from this exemption. I have questioned why they believe this. I'm still waiting for an answer. I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ... |
Sarge Send message Joined: 25 Aug 99 Posts: 12273 Credit: 8,569,109 RAC: 79 |
Apparently my need for rest was far greater than I thought. As I write this very long post, it occurs to me that most of what I am writing is not direct response to things Bobby has brought up. So, before I forget, I feel I must point out that if the same standard were applied to me, Bobby, I'd be in trouble: Bobby wrote Posts by Chris S > 14,000 As your sig says, "I think you'll find it is more complicated than that...". First, a database error a few years back resulted in several posters older posts disappearing. This may include some of your posts. My own post count could be 1000 higher than indicated. Also, back when I was posting on a daily basis, in the morning being involved in some of the discussions could be like a strong cup of coffee, sharpening my wit and getting ready for the day. Night time posts might have helped me wind down. So, just with these few points, I think we can see that gauging how anyone might manage their time and it's correlation to post counts is not as clear cut as you might expect. There are some different points being raised about parenting: their role in discipline and their role in education. I do not feel myself qualified to talk about the discipline issue much, as I am not a parent. Chris wrote: The school stated that no child of the age of 5 was in anger management classes, therefore as a Primary school, we are left to conclude that the age group concerned is from 6-11. Anger management classes are usually given as part of sentences at Youth Courts to unruly teenagers up to the age of 17, it is incredible that this should prove to be necessary with children of that age. I had a lot of anger in me building from, about, ages 5-8. For good reason. It started to well up again around age 17. Within that year, I made a choice to curb the negativity. All the while, I did well in my schooling, and Chris, you know how much further I took it. I will also point out that my father was the valedictorian of his high school in 1958. My first teaching position was at a community college, part time, which began as I was working on my Master's degree. Upon finishing, I taught there another 3.5 years. The last 1.5 years of that, I also taught full time at a private school for emotionally disturbed, or those deemed PINS (Person in Need of Supervision) by the court, teens. "Therapeutic restraints" were allowed to be used there (legally) when a student posed a danger to self, others or property. I met several of the parents, once or twice a year, and while some of them might have justifiably been labeled as not interested in their child's behavior or education, others were but were simply in over their heads. (Consider that some of those emotional disturbances might have been genetic. We know some things skip generations. Also, some of the parents were adoptive parents.) I think that's all I have to say at the moment about the discipline issue. On to education itself. One difficulty we will have in this discussion is talking about differing systems. That in the US versus that in the UK, as that is where the thread contributors have been posting from. The other is, to put a term to it, "belief in a golden age" (primarily espoused by Chris (one link to a comment along those lines) & John (another link to a comment along those lines), and I've seen a bit of it from MajorKong, as well). So, let me state right off that I do not believe there was a golden age, and attempt to defend why I believe that. On the other hand: Bobby wrote What to do about it? Well that's the question isn't it? Yes, Bobby, I agree with Chris (and John, and MajorKong) that educational systems are in a mess and that something needs to be done about it. MajorKong wrote You're correct about the education standards. The slipping started well before the 1970s, but got bad around then. I have seen, for instance, an 8th grade geography exam from about 100 years ago. Dayuuuummm! If you were speaking of Geology (Earth Science), this might be easier to follow. But Geography? Pardon a moment of being pedantic. From http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/geography: 1: a science that deals with the description, distribution, and interaction of the diverse physical, biological, and cultural features of the earth's surface To me, Geography is about locations. Memorizing shapes of states, or countries. Knowing their capitals. Knowing where these things are in relation to one another. Things that I and my classmates were expected to memorize in 5th grade. (Ages 10-11.) However, Geography tended to go hand-in-hand with History and Current Events. And it has been my long-held belief that the latter things about Geography can be memorized, as I did in 5th grade, and some of which I am still able to recapture.On the other side there are concepts. For someone my age, born in the late 60s, the two come togehter to help understand the problems the US faced in fighting in Vietnam. (Perhaps this is related to John's comment about "searching questions"?-http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=66639&nowrap=true#1187519.) BTW, Major, I had access to some of my Dad's textbooks from the 50s, and also picked up some old textbooks or pamphlets ranging from the late 1800s to 1950 or 1960. These, too, were found in used bookstores-one in Ithaca, NY, near Cornell University. For those not in the US, or not versed in the history of education, particularly "compulsory education" here, this might be worth a read. I believe education is something everyone should have access to. That does not mean everyone will benefit from it equally. I believe this to be part of democracy: "equality of oppotunity". Major, how many people had at least an 8th grade education 100 years ago? My grandmother on my father's side, born in 1920, never had to take Algebra. Neither did some of my peers in the 1980s. From my grandmother's time, in some ways, more has been expected of students. Or, more students have been expected to go further than they were in earlier decades. Or some combination of the two. The website I linked mentions the 1983 report "A Nation at Risk", attesting to declines in U.S. student achievement. That was determined, in part, by use of international comparison tests. The third such test, TIMSS for short (Third International Mathematics and Science Study, IIRC-some of you may wish to search for information on it), took place in 1996 and further underscored the decline of U.S. students' performance. Often at the top were students from Asian countries. But it goes back further. Say about 1958? http://www.education.com/reference/article/new-mathematics/ The impetus for the "new math" was the successful launch of Sputnik, the Soviet Earth-orbiting satellite, in 1957. In the United States, there was concern that we were so far behind the Soviet Union, our cold war foe, that our national security was in danger. In response, a spate of federal funds became available to improve the mathematics, science, and foreign language competence of our school children. University mathematicians saw the necessity of having some students understand the structural underpinnings of mathematics as the basis for their future work in mathematics. These mathematicians intended to "jump-start" young people who demonstrated a talent for mathematics and better prepare them for the rigors of university mathematics programs. Their strategy was to introduce topics into the school mathematics curriculum that aided the development of mathematical reasoning and proof. Society's Concerns with "New Math" Read more at the site or do your own searches. The point is, "New Math" was a response to realizing the U.S. was lagging behind in math, science and technology. Based on this (and it matches what I have learned elsewhere about it), Major, are you sure this is the math you were "exposed to"? Besides what is mentioned on the site I linked, New Math, where and when it was used, failed because attention was only paid to the structural underpinnings of the knowledge domain, and ignored how children learn mathematics and how teachers can teach it. Chris, who do you suppose leveled such charges? Besides practitioners, cognitive psychologists were also quite likely involved. Now, to "Educational Psychologists". As I initially prepared, as an undergrad, to teach at the secondary level (and, as mentioned towards the top of this post, I did get some experience doing), I had to take a course in Educational Psychology (after having had Psychology 101 and Child & Adolescent Psychology). I do not recall the ideas being attributed to them being in my textbook (which I believe I still own, but if so, it is unfortunately currently in storage in another state, as it has been for 2.5 years). Even if there was anything along those lines and I do not remember it, I can state with certainty there was a section of the book about "Educating the Gifted Child". I was using the book in 1989-1990. In my home state, New York, we used to have 4 levels. The highest was not available for all subjects. High Regents, Regents, Local, and Practical Local (or PSEN at other times-I do not recall what this meant). The first two were college track. Not all of them went on to college. I think 25% of my class, including me, immediately went on to college. But within 5 short years, working at the community college, I got to work with student with a variety of backgrounds and from a wide age range. I am sure not all of them had been in the High Regents and Regents classes, meaning that having been on some other track while in secondary precluded them from a college eduction later. Sometime during the 1990s, in New York State, the tracking began to be removed. I do not know why. As far as I know, this has pretty much happened across most or all of the country. Perhaps it did come from something on the left, but I would be surprised if it came from people with a background in education. Politicians that had no idea? Wouldn't doubt it. Others on the left? Possibly. Why do I say this? If it were "Loony Left Educational Psychologists" (Chris' characterization), why did my textbook have anything about "Educating the Gifted Child" at all in it? With the "No Child Left Behind Act", I believe our federal government has pandered to those that eliminated tracking, exacerbating the problems of a 'One size fits all' education, as Luigi called it (though he was describing the U.K. situation). The odd thing is, it was championed by George W. and Laura Bush, bringing the federal involvement in education to an even greater level, even though The Constitution leaves education to the State and localities. MajorKong wrote And the illiteracy problem... Kids these days are crippled in more than just reading and writing. They can't even make change without the cash register telling them how much it should be. If I owe $3.68, and I pay with a $5... I have to tell them that 'that is $1.32 in change'... Back in the day when I was in school (late 60s and the 70s), we were expected to be able to do such simple arithmetic in our heads, almost instantly. I think you have it backwards. People are more likely to have difficulty with mathematics than they are with literacy. Look at the history of when language, followed by writing, developed, versus the developlment of anything mathematical beyond counting. The latter is newer, and continues to be developed. Algebra is 400-600 years old! The Ancient Greeks and others only had glimmers of it. Speech and writing is, by any measure, thousands of years older. While in grad school, I heard (I believe from a Cognitive Psychology professor) that all human cultures have language, even those that in this ever-increasingly connected world that still remain fairly isolated. Such is not the case when it comes to mathematics. Guy wrote (in response to Luigi's point about "One-size-fits-all" education: Luigi, that would immediately be called institutionalized racism here in the U.S. (Guy, please note that I did see your follow up post and completely understand where you're coming from.) No longer being in secondary education, but of course seeing its effects for the last 21 or so years ... yet also knowing other factors involved (it's a bit more complicated), I have the academic freedom to not follow this "One-size-fits-all" educational approach. As I indicated to MajorKong in another thread recently, I am now in an area of the country where many of my students are Hispanic/Latino. I have also, over the years, had a number of Asians as students, students from Africa (and, for lack of a universally accepted term, African American students), the U,K., former Soviet bloc countries, etc ... . This experience bears out we cannot prejudge based on "race". I have seen all ranges of results from all groups. As I said above, what I do stand behind is "equality of opportunity". Bobby wrote: If you ask me, the divisive nature of this system was pointless, far better to let parents and their children decide at 14 what specialisms they should enter into than have a test at 11. As I think Bobby has indicated in this thread and others, he is originally from the U.K., but now living/working in the U.S. Bobby, I wonder if you would consider the tracking that took place in New York State, of which I am a product, was similarly divisive? If so, please consider the following: 1) all 4 tracks existed within the same school; 2) only those that opted to go in a "vocational" direction went, for part of the day, to another campus, and IIRC, such decisions were not made until 9th or 10th grade. Frankly, what some of you are saying about how the tracking worked in the U.K. before, with early decisions on life path (perhaps directions students' and their parents were pushed in?) and separate schools ... it sounds like what I believe I heard about Soviet schools! If so, WTH? Chris wrote Don't forget of course we also have Citizenship classes, a compulsory part of the national curriculum for 11 to 16 year-olds in England since 2002. Wasn't that something your parents used to teach you at home as a normal part of bringing you up? What is covered in these Citizenship classes? If it is anything like what I think it might be, then, no, I do not think parents teach these things at home. My father took us to places such as Boston, MA, Philadelphia, PA and Gettysburg, PA so we could see places where the Revolutionary and Civil Wars took place. Of course, we learned some things. As we did in Washington, D.C., at The Smithsonian and other sites. But in no way could these experiences or others be construed as equivalent to a "Citizenship" (or "Civics"?) class, and I do not think they be expected to be. Chris wrote: How did we get in this sorry mess? Easy. Too many modern day parents don't give a fig about their kids education, they bring them up until the age of 5, then hand them over to the State Education system, and then wash their hands of any further responsibility. As someone raised by a single parent, as well as some of the points I made about parents of the students I worked with at the private school in the mid-nineties, again, "I think you'll find it is more complicated than that ...". I will not go into the circumstances of being raised by a single parent in this open/public thread. Getting back to the very earliest posts ... . Chris wrote: ‘In the Far East, they regard every classroom as an open place. If a parent wants to come to observe a lesson, they think [that's] fantastic,’ he said. As indicated in an early response of mine, I agree with Chris that "[t]he average parent would not be able to assess a lesson in those ways without prior training". (And I was not responding to anything Chris brought up about discipline issues.) Bobby wrote As Sarge points out, there's often more than one approach to teaching, even in subjects such as mathematics, and a parent who has been taught one way may not be equipped to assist their child if s/he is being taught in a different way. Attending the classroom may help equip parents with useful tools as well as the child ... I did not initially see part of what Bobby was saying. Yes, "Attending the classroom may help equip parents with useful tools as well as the child". If the parent is willing to go in with an open mind. Again, the comparison to how things work in Asian countries is a difficult comparison to make. From what I have read of international comparison studies, Asian parents are likely already familiar with multiple methods to get something across, for one. Well, this has been a long response, and with all the different directions the discussion has been going, I didn't see a neat way to organize things in my responses. So, I'll stop for now. |
©2024 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.