View Full Version : She’s going to college!
And she gets to vote in a year or two.
My wife was substituting in an 11th grade English class today. Since all of the Juniors must take English, one class-period a year is dedicated to college search and application instruction.
The class is in the Computer Science room and run by a Guidance Counselor. My wife just wandered around eavesdropping. :D
The computer search asked several questions such as possible majors, costs, extracurricular activities, etc. The results listed the colleges that fit the inquiry.
My wife overheard one girl say to her friend, “New England. Isn’t that another country?”
Pat
It's very sad,,
I get into deep discussions(read: heated arguments) with several friends that teach.
They are so against the Florida FCAT test,, don't think kids should be forced to learn any level of competence,, just let them pass,, so they needn't have to deal with them another year,, not passing stunts their social status & stigmatizes the child..
When I mention that New York has use the Regents test forever.. I get so much push back,, it embarrassing..
These are the same educators that refuse to learn how to use a PC,, as it "doesn't add" to the education process,, just hinders teaching flexability...
I truly believe the liberals have an agenda to dumb-up the world,, with the exception of the few that will rule(read: their kids)..
It's so much easer to lead when nobody else has a brain...
"Do you want to SUPER size your Happy Meal"
Thank God they can't out-source Mickey D's to India or Chine & Mexico,,
These people will always have a job opening and a place to spend their food stamps,, and vote for Barry........
:mad::rolleyes::eek::mad:
AND thank God we have a few,, like Richard that fight the good fight...
Well, you've managed to mention several important issues here, all of which can be long discussions. These include:
The fallacy--IMO--that we, as a nation, 'push' the idea that everyone should go and has the right to go to college versus the idea that the 'opportunity' to attend college is always there...IF...you're intellectually capable, motivated, and can figure out how to finance it.
The multitudinous issues involved with 'standardized' testing and developmentally appropriate educational practice...especially at the younger grades and with the data produced in the last decade regarding brain research and learning.
The many issues related to teacher education, competency, professionalism, and the need for on-going professional development.
A nearly pervasive point-of-view that technology can replace good teaching versus a more realistic approach whose data suggests that assistive technology can genuinely support and enhance good teaching.
Curricula which merely 'punch tickets'--e.g., mandating only one day per year for a college search--versus incorporating such tasks into a class's on-going and progressive content throughout the term of the course.
We can discuss these if you'd like...but it will take some time to do so as they are not simple matters and may not have definitive answers.
Richard's $.02 :munchin
Just to hark on what JJ_BPK stated. I am a history student here at the local university in North Florida, in one of my history courses there are alot of education majors. Just let me say one thing, I am worried for our future children, for these future teachers, truely are idiots. Granted there are a few who will do a good job, yet there are many who should not be teaching.
The cirriculum is too easy to become a teacher. Teachers should be paid more, and the the program at universities should be more selective into who they let in and who they graduate to teach our future leaders. Its just ridiclous the classes that education majors take and the projects they do. It really has to be the easiest major you can get!
ZonieDiver
10-31-2008, 08:06
Don't get me started... I just finished the second term in my evening school classes with our final exam last night. I was blessed with some pretty good students in my US History class, and some real challenges in my Economics class (though I must say, it was a very exciting time to discuss Econ).
The key to quality education is quality administrators. I have worked for and with some great ones. I currently work with some who are NOT so great. My first year as a teacher was almost my last. My principal was a dolt. His philosophy on discipline could be summed up as, "Boys will be boys." Fortunately, that year was also the first year of our new superintendent. The next year, we had a new admin team at the high school. (Which then was 3 administrators - now it would be 5 - NCLB is paperwork intensive!)
My new principal turned our high school around in ONE year. He changed the attitude and climate. He gave good teachers the chance to "do their thing" in the classroom. He took average teachers and helped them become good teachers. He gave the sub-par teachers a chance to grow and develop - or helped them find the door. He was not just and educator and administrator - he was a LEADER. (That is probably a large part of why Richard is a good administrator - he knows how to lead.)
My wife overheard one girl say to her friend, “New England. Isn’t that another country?”
Maybe the student was just being philosophical. :D
Never went to collage, did get a mighty nice GED though. Thats all I have needed to get along in this world. Never was much for fancy book learning, just read a lot of books on my own and listened to what my more expercinced friends had to say about things. Getting by just fine.
Blue
P.S. If you really need collage by all means go ;)
Well, you've managed to mention several important issues here, all of which can be long discussions. These include:
A nearly pervasive point-of-view that technology can replace good teaching versus a more realistic approach whose data suggests that assistive technology can genuinely support and enhance good teaching.
Richard's $.02 :munchin
Am I understanding correctly that your position is that technology can be a useful tool to good teachers but not a substitute for good teaching?
I ask because in the discussion of educational reform, I mention a professor at USC's School of Education. He has been savaged for arguing that the use of computers and other high tech tools do not automatically translate into a better learning environment. (The gist of his argument is that if motivated students fail to learn, teachers need to try other methods; if motivated students fail to learn, it is the fault of the teachers.)
This is exactly why I'm opposed to the idea that EVERYONE deserves to go to college. Not everyone needs it and, definitely, not everyone has the chops for it. having said that, college has become high school part 2- dumbed down for people just like her. I graduate in December at 34 yrs old and I have learned nothing that I couldn't have gotten from a stack of books from the book store.
There are exceptions, nursing degrees, engineering degrees, teaching certificates etc. But college today does not generally give any job skills beyond basic writing ability. It is a clearing house for political indoctrination, first and foremost.
So, to make a long comment longer... Yes, she will probably go to college. After college, with her liberal arts degree, she will probably still think that New England is another country. After that, she will be able to pursue her doctorate on the Obama plan and become a college professor. :rolleyes:
Longstreet
10-31-2008, 11:20
I am unsure why everyone is upset about the state of the US education system. Given it was not created by educators or even teachers, but rather American industrialists. Unknown to most people, the US school system was put togther by the likes of Andrew Carnegie, J.P. Morgan, John Rockerfeller and Henry Ford. While these men were extraordinary in their fields, one would hardly consider them specialists in the area of education. One would also wonder just how concerned they were with having a highly educated population too. Educated people ask too many questions and cannot be easily swayed.
Before the Undustrial Revolution school had three main purposes which was to 1. make good citizens 2. make good people and 3. allow student to find a skill that he/she was good at and become an expert at it. After 1890, a forth purpose was introduced which was to marginalize the previous three purposes and have students become servants of corporate and political management.
I will admit that I am not an American teacher, but I am qualified to teach in New York state as I went to Teacher's College in Buffalo. And trust me, Canada is not much better although we do not have anything like NCLB, but some of us wonder if that is only a matter of time.
Am I understanding correctly that your position is that technology can be a useful tool to good teachers but not a substitute for good teaching?
Yes. IMO we fail to fully understand the value of and give the proper recognition to those who successfully practice the 'art' of teaching...with or without assistive technology.
I ask because in the discussion of educational reform, I mention a professor at USC's School of Education. He has been savaged for arguing that the use of computers and other high tech tools do not automatically translate into a better learning environment. (The gist of his argument is that if motivated students fail to learn, teachers need to try other methods; if motivated students fail to learn, it is the fault of the teachers.)
I don't fully agree with that statement because a student may be motivated but may be incapable of grasping a particular subject or concept. For example, an Asperger Syndrome student with no overt signs of being such may fully comprehend the concrete concepts of accounting but fail to grasp the more theoretical concepts of higher levels of math or the nuanced concepts of poetry.
FWIW, I have found that teachers who genuinely practice the 'art' of teaching--by teaching in a way that is multi-sensory, cross-curricular, interesting, dynamic, and relevant--have few motivational or performance based failures.
However, in general, I am more-or-less in agreement with your professor's point-of-view.
Richard's $.02 :munchin
The multitudinous issues involved with 'standardized' testing and developmentally appropriate educational practice...especially at the younger grades and with the data produced in the last decade regarding brain research and learning.
(snip)
We can discuss these if you'd like...but it will take some time to do so as they are not simple matters and may not have definitive answers.
Richard's $.02 :munchin
Sir, if you are ever inclined to post something on the issue of standardized tests - especially the high-stakes variety - I would very much like to read your thoughts and insights.
I am unsure why everyone is upset about the state of the US education system. Given it was not created by educators or even teachers, but rather American industrialists. Unknown to most people, the US school system was put togther by the likes of Andrew Carnegie, J.P. Morgan, John Rockerfeller and Henry Ford. While these men were extraordinary in their fields, one would hardly consider them specialists in the area of education. One would also wonder just how concerned they were with having a highly educated population too. Educated people ask too many questions and cannot be easily swayed.
Before the Undustrial Revolution school had three main purposes which was to 1. make good citizens 2. make good people and 3. allow student to find a skill that he/she was good at and become an expert at it. After 1890, a forth purpose was introduced which was to marginalize the previous three purposes and have students become servants of corporate and political management.
I will admit that I am not an American teacher, but I am qualified to teach in New York state as I went to Teacher's College in Buffalo. And trust me, Canada is not much better although we do not have anything like NCLB, but some of us wonder if that is only a matter of time.
With all respect, what is your point? I dont see how the information you posted should stop me from being upset with our educational system.
Why am I upset? Because kids don't know their history, for one. If you don't know your history then you do not know your culture and when you don't share a culture, society breaks down. Is that not a good enough reason to be upset with our educational system? No one is advocating canada's system and I don't care who came up with the system, it is not producing leadership or innovation. It is a factory for making people feel good about themselves and when they get into the world and see that only their mother thinks they are special they will have to medicate to deal with the let down. But I digress..
It's very sad,,
I get into deep discussions(read: heated arguments) with several friends that teach.
They are so against the Florida FCAT test,, don't think kids should be forced to learn any level of competence,, just let them pass,, so they needn't have to deal with them another year,, not passing stunts their social status & stigmatizes the child..
When I mention that New York has use the Regents test forever.. I get so much push back,, it embarrassing..
These are the same educators that refuse to learn how to use a PC,, as it "doesn't add" to the education process,, just hinders teaching flexability...
I truly believe the liberals have an agenda to dumb-up the world,, with the exception of the few that will rule(read: their kids)..
It's so much easer to lead when nobody else has a brain...
Thank God they can't out-source Mickey D's to India or Chine & Mexico,,
These people will always have a job opening and a place to spend their food stamps,, and vote for Barry........
:mad::rolleyes::eek::mad:
AND thank God we have a few,, like Richard that fight the good fight...
Let me qualify my statements, so there is no mis-understanding.
Standardized Competency Tests: I think they are paramount in determining an individuals ability to advance in the education system. They are not meant to give everyone the warm fuzzies. Most people will know their standings before the test. By using multiple tests the educators can determine if the individual is absorbing the taught material,, and the individual can get an idea of their own future. If there is general failure across the specific class or school, then the onus is on the educators to improve the students standing.
My youngest is an prime example. She was enrolled in a state funded university lab school, where my wife worked. Each year all students were tested in the 3R's skills, plus any subject that they were testing a new curriculum, to determine if the course content met state requirements.
In the 2nd grade during a teacher-parent session, it was suggested that X may be a candidate for an LDA class as she was not advancing her reading skills.
We had her tested by the university to determine the appropriate PLAN. It was quickly determines that in 2nd grade she was operating at 3-4 grade math, and yes there was a visual acuity problem. If X was allowed to speak out-laud as she read she had 100% reading comp, if not comp fell to 25%. Don't ask me the why.. After a couple years of work with vision & vocal therapists, she when on to graduate college with a deg in engineering, with honors, 5yrs & four summers, 160 credit hrs. X is now in London on her 2nd international assignment as a systems designer.
I do not have a degree. During X's testing, I also ask to be tested. You are your parents genes. I also was found to an acuity problem that was never caught when I was young. To stroke my pride I joined MENSA. It didn't help my business opportunities, but I now understood why I always thought I was a little odd..
As to my comments about PC, I was referring to administrative usage, recording grades and general competence with a technology the our kids are experts with.
I will leave all discussions about the ability of technology ability to enhance a good teacher, as apposed to technology usurping the teachers basic responsibility..
I retired with 30 years as a systems designer for Big Blue. I know what a disaster poorly designed & implemented systems can do..
Longstreet
10-31-2008, 12:55
With all respect, what is your point? I dont see how the information you posted should stop me from being upset with our educational system.
Why am I upset? Because kids don't know their history, for one. If you don't know your history then you do not know your culture and when you don't share a culture, society breaks down. Is that not a good enough reason to be upset with our educational system? No one is advocating canada's system and I don't care who came up with the system, it is not producing leadership or innovation. It is a factory for making people feel good about themselves and when they get into the world and see that only their mother thinks they are special they will have to medicate to deal with the let down. But I digress..
Perhaps I did not word my response properly and if that is the case, my appologies. The point that I was trying to make is that I totaly agree with you that it is scary that students do not know their history or what would be considered basic knowledge. By pointing out the history of the US educational system, one is better able to understand the present state it is in. As you said yourself, if you do not know your history, how can a society survive? To put it simply, the educational system itself is flawed so therefore how can one expect that students will be educated properly?
I have a cartoon that I keep in my room that has two parents speaking with a teacher and the teacher says, "We provide your child's formative years a quiet, non-judgemental, non-competitive framework within which to grow. We also provide them with the names of a few therapists because once they graduate, they won't last two weeks in the real world." How true it is . . .
Never went to collage, did get a mighty nice GED though. Thats all I have needed to get along in this world. Never was much for fancy book learning, just read a lot of books on my own and listened to what my more expercinced friends had to say about things. Getting by just fine.
Blue
P.S. If you really need collage by all means go ;)
And that's the point--college isn't for everyone, isn't desired by everyone, and shouldn't be 'sold' as a 'right' to anyone. I grew up in a family in which my Dad told us education was important in our lives--but that gong to school did not give one everything they needed to know. He had two years of college and was a master carpenter because he loved working outside and building things. My brothers didn't go to college and made a living as successful ranchers, inventors, and leaders among the community.
Self-education is an important and often underestimated part of the learning process. Good teachers always begin teaching with a survey of their students to gauge their 'environmental imprint'--what knowledge and skills they already have and can bring into the learning process to enhance it for everyone.
As an SF Medic, my motto was "I read the book and saw the movie...I can do it." That philosophy still guides me today and is one I try to instill in my students and faculty.
Richard's $.02 :munchin
Longstreet
10-31-2008, 13:09
Standardized Competency Tests: I think they are paramount in determining an individuals ability to advance in the education system. They are not meant to give everyone the warm fuzzies. Most people will know their standings before the test. By using multiple tests the educators can determine if the individual is absorbing the taught material,, and the individual can get an idea of their own future. If there is general failure across the specific class or school, then the onus is on the educators to improve the students standing.
The problem with standardized tests is that they are well, standardized and I have yet to meet any standardized students. I agree that they are a tool that should be used, but they are NOT the only way to test a student's abilities and one should be careful when drawing conclusions from them. There are many factors that cannot be controled (situation at home, biochemistry, when was the last time he/she ate, language barriers, etc.).
Please understand I am not into giving 'warm fuzzies' and question the inability of my school system to fail students; however not all students perform well during tests (myself included) and so they are not a sure way to determine a student's abilities.
Longstreet
10-31-2008, 13:27
And that's the point--college isn't for everyone, isn't desired by everyone, and shouldn't be 'sold' as a 'right' to anyone. I grew up in a family in which my Dad told us education was important in our lives--but that gong to school did not give one everything they needed to know. He had two years of college and was a master carpenter because he loved working outside and building things. My brothers didn't go to college and made a living as successful ranchers, inventors, and leaders among the community.
Self-education is an important and often underestimated part of the learning process. Good teachers always begin teaching with a survey of their students to gauge their 'environmental imprint'--what knowledge and skills they already have and can bring into the learning process to enhance it for everyone.
As an SF Medic, my motto was "I read the book and saw the movie...I can do it." That philosophy still guides me today and is one I try to instill in my students and faculty.
Richard I could not agree with you more. Making use of the Multiple Intelligences is another way to promote better learning as it caters to different learning styles.
[I]...however not all students perform well during tests (myself included) and so they are not a sure way to determine a student's abilities.
Agree. I have seen students who test well but cannot use their knowledge in any meaningful way...and students who do not test well at all but achieve amazingly when given the chance to perform.
Fortunately, more colleges and universities realize this and are using a selection criteria based on tests (standardized and specialized; some even make that optional now), demonstrated performance (transcripts), portfolios of examples of a student's work, strength of faculty recommendations, extra-curriculars (especially those involved in something like Scouting who have demonstrated a determination to succeed by achieving the rank of Eagle Scout), and personal interviews.
When it comes to emphasizing so-called 'standardized' tests such as the SAT, read The Big Test: The Secret History of the American Meritocracy by Nicholas Lemann and let me know what you think.
Richard's $.02 :munchin
Longstreet
10-31-2008, 13:54
When it comes to emphasizing so-called 'standardized' tests such as the SAT, read The Big Test: The Secret History of the American Meritocracy by Nicholas Lemann and let me know what you think.
I think I have heard of that one and will look into it once I finish reading On Killing by Dave Grossman. Talk about contrast, eh?
Have you ever read The Underground History of American Education by John Gatto? When studying in the US I had a prof who introduced me to such educators as John Gatto and Neil Postman. It certainly changed the way I look at education.
longstreet,
Got it. Just didn't understand where you were coming from.
Longstreet
10-31-2008, 15:45
jw74, no worries. This is one of the problems with communicating via the Internet. It is sometimes difficult to fully understand where people are coming from. Take care.
(...)strength of faculty recommendations, extra-curriculars (especially those involved in something like Scouting who have demonstrated a determination to succeed by achieving the rank of Eagle Scout),(...)
My wife was reading this thread and had a comment on these two points.
At the high school she subs at, many of the faculty limit their recommendations to 20. And those are on a first-come-first-served basis.
As to extra-curricular actives, parents have gone overboard in getting their children involved in the whole catalog instead of letting the kids find their interests and, perhaps, passion.
Pat
frostfire
11-01-2008, 00:59
Just to hark on what JJ_BPK stated. I am a history student here at the local university in North Florida, in one of my history courses there are alot of education majors. Just let me say one thing, I am worried for our future children, for these future teachers, truely are idiots. Granted there are a few who will do a good job, yet there are many who should not be teaching.
The cirriculum is too easy to become a teacher. Teachers should be paid more, and the the program at universities should be more selective into who they let in and who they graduate to teach our future leaders. Its just ridiclous the classes that education majors take and the projects they do. It really has to be the easiest major you can get!
I echo this sentiment from a different angle. I've noticed how the education (and liberal arts) majors turn into an escape route. People flunking out of engineering, nursing, pre-med etc. change major to education. In some cases that I know personally, they failed not out of lack of ability/intelligence, but lack of focus and very very low stress tolerance. Hence, the switch to the "easy" majors. When future teachers consist of people who were not 110% committed into the profession, the kids will pay the price.
On a side note, this forum and meeting/working with many hardworking-productive members of the society in the country side have shown me that college education isn't everything. I'm very thankful of that perspective.
My wife was reading this thread and had a comment on these two points.
At the high school she subs at, many of the faculty limit their recommendations to 20. And those are on a first-come-first-served basis.
I've never done that...but will let a student know up front what kind of recommendation they will receive from me because I will not lie about their academic achievements and potential. There are many whom I tell should seek another faculty member to write a recommendation for them. I also will not write a 'blanket' recommendation or a recommendation for a student I do not know well, and--contrary to common practice among teachers--I give a copy of what I have written to the student; if I'm writing about you, I will tell you to your face what I have said and it is your choice to use it or not.
As to extra-curricular actives, parents have gone overboard in getting their children involved in the whole catalog instead of letting the kids find their interests and, perhaps, passion.
I have seen many who try to "pad" their children's academic resume's by doing this--it's called the 'over-commited child' syndrome--and colleges are definitely aware of it...much to the chagrin of those who try it. This is why I mentioned specifically the Eagle Scout achievement because it does take long term and dedicated commitment to achieve, and shows persistence...and colleges recognize that, too. We specifically counsel our students and families to avoid this 'over-commitment' tendency among high achieving families and advise them to commit to one or two extra-curriculars for which they have a sincere passion and reasonable talent. We also warn them of the tendency to let such activities interfere with their academics and the potential consequences on the college admissions process.
Pat
Richard's $.02 :munchin
Longstreet
11-01-2008, 07:09
My wife was reading this thread and had a comment on these two points.
At the high school she subs at, many of the faculty limit their recommendations to 20. And those are on a first-come-first-served basis.
I've never done that...but will let a student know up front what kind of recommendation they will receive from me because I will not lie about their academic achievements and potential. There are many whom I tell should seek another faculty member to write a recommendation for them. I also will not write a 'blanket' recommendation or a recommendation for a student I do not know well, and--contrary to common practice among teachers--I give a copy of what I have written to the student; if I'm writing about you, I will tell you to your face what I have said and it is your choice to use it or not.
That makes two of us. I may have to pass everyone and promote students to the next grade because of board rules, but I do not have to write letters of recommendation for any students who I do not feel are deserving. There have been many times that I too have had to tell students that if they want a letter of reference, they better speak with another teacher because when given the choice, I will not use my name and recommend someone who I feel is undeserving.
I've never done that...but will let a student know up front what kind of recommendation they will receive from me because I will not lie about their academic achievements and potential. There are many whom I tell should seek another faculty member to write a recommendation for them. I also will not write a 'blanket' recommendation or a recommendation for a student I do not know well, and--contrary to common practice among teachers--I give a copy of what I have written to the student; if I'm writing about you, I will tell you to your face what I have said and it is your choice to use it or not.
I have seen many who try to "pad" their children's academic resume's by doing this--it's called the 'over-commited child' syndrome--and colleges are definitely aware of it...much to the chagrin of those who try it. This is why I mentioned specifically the Eagle Scout achievement because it does take long term and dedicated commitment to achieve, and shows persistence...and colleges recognize that, too. We specifically counsel our students and families to avoid this 'over-commitment' tendency among high achieving families and advise them to commit to one or two extra-curriculars for which they have a sincere passion and reasonable talent. We also warn them of the tendency to let such activities interfere with their academics and the potential consequences on the college admissions process.
I agree on both points. My wife has already said she'd handle the recommendations pretty much as you have, if she gets a full time position.
Pat