Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 49

Thread: 10 Problems with American Education & How to Fix Them

  1. #1

    10 Problems with American Education & How to Fix Them

    This is an article I'm currently working on. I'd appreciate any suggestions or constructive criticism.

    1. Too Much Emphasis on Literary Analysis, Not Enough Career Research and Analysis

    The typical four-year high school English curriculum consists almost entirely of analyzing fictional literature as a means by which to improve reading comprehension, improve writing ability and develop analytical thinking ability. While reading and analyzing narrative fiction is a critical part of a well-rounded education, it is overemphasized. Furthermore, this overemphasis within the high school English curriculum has failed to achieve its primary goal: inspiring a love of fine literature in its students. This particular issue will be addressed in a later section, but back to the matter at hand.

    I would replace the standard fiction-focused syllabus of a college bound or honors freshman English class with a Career Research and Analysis class in which students improve their reading comprehension, improve their writing ability and develop analytical thinking ability while learning about different career fields and job opportunities.

    Different career fields and job opportunities that students could study include:

    1. Engineering: Project Engineer, Civil Engineer, Structural Engineer, Environmental Engineer, Biomedical Engineer
    2. Health Care: Physician, Nurse, Physical Therapist, Physician Assistant
    3. Technology Sector: Software Architect, Systems Engineer, Software Engineer, IT Analyst
    4. Business Administration: Entrepreneur, CEO, CIO, CMO
    5. Finance & Accounting: Accountant, Actuary, Financial Adviser
    6. Psychology: Counselor, Psychiatrist, Forensic Psychologist, Cognitive Neuroscientist
    7. Natural Sciences: Biologist, Chemist, Physicist, Botanist, Virologist, Forensic Scientist
    8. Social Sciences: Anthropologist, Economist, Sociologist, Lawyer

    Over the course of six months, students would take tests and write essays regarding a variety of different career fields, job opportunities and educational pathways. The class would also include inviting guest speakers from every different career field to discuss their experiences in the industry, what is necessary to succeed in their industry, what it is like working in the industry and what level of education is necessary to get different types of jobs in said industry. These guest speakers — most of whom would be students' parents — would be asked to have a few talking points prepared for their presentation. Naturally, this presentation would then be followed by a question and answer period. The teacher would also incorporate some of the guest speaker's points into the next test. Ideally, at least one guest speaker would be brought in every other week and there would be at least one from every different career field.

    After 6 months of career and analysis, the class would begin 2 months of college research and analysis. Students would research different colleges, would compare and contrast them in their essays, learn about their different admission requirements and visit a few different local colleges. Former students who are now attending college, as well as a few professors, would be brought in as guest speakers.

    As a result of taking this course, students will be able to conduct the rest of their high school career with a sense of purpose. They will also have three more years to conduct further independent research, to reflect on their interests and to arrive at a final decision before they choose what college to attend and what subject they will major in. Similarly, I would like to see colleges replace most first semester freshman English courses with a Career Research and Analysis course.

    2. Students Are Not Asked to Study Current Events

    The typical High School Social Studies curriculum consists entirely of studying history. The question arises; why aren't students studying, analyzing and discussing both historical events and current events during their social studies classes? The whole point of studying history is that we apply it's lessons to contemporary issues. Otherwise, we are doomed to repeat our past mistakes. However, high school students — and even the overwhelming majority of college students — are NEVER asked to compare and contrast current events with past events, current political issues with past political issues, current economic conditions with past economic conditions, current wars with past wars and so on. In other words, while the purpose of studying history is that we applies its lessons to contemporary issues, students are not being asked to do this; they are simply made to memorize and then regurgitate historical facts without ever putting them to practical use.

    "Practical application is the only mordant which will set things in the memory. Study without it is gymnastics, and not work, which alone will get intellectual bread." - James Russel Lowell

    Why do many students find history boring? Well, what causes something to be boring? Among other things, irrelevancy. Unless students are able to relate historical wisdom to something that can affect their lives in the world today, history is entirely irrelevant. It may contain a few interesting stories but without application, historical knowledge is nothing more than trivia.

    "Whatever study tends neither directly nor indirectly to make us better men and citizens is at best but a specious and ingenious sort of idleness; and the knowledge we acquire by it only a creditable kind of ignorance, nothing more." - 1st Viscount Bolingbroke, Henry St. John

    Students should never be asked to study history without simultaneously spending an equal amount of time studying and researching the modern world. Aspects of the modern world that students should be asked to research MUST include multiple opposing viewpoints regarding contemporary politics at the local, state and federal level. Otherwise, how are we to expect them to be informed voters by the time they turn eighteen? Students should also be asked to study opposing viewpoints regarding modern U.S. economic conditions, global economic conditions, public policy issues, foreign cultures, foreign governments, terrorism, national security and so on.

    Some ideas for compare/contrast papers that students could write include:

    The Iraq War and the Vietnam War
    The War on Terror and the Cold War
    The United States and the Roman Republic
    The Great Recession and the Great Depression
    President Obama and any former President
    One's current Governor and any former Governor
    The Advent of Wireless Electricity and the Advent of Wireless Internet

    3. Students are Not Studying Opposing Viewpoints

    As it stands today, there does not seem to be a single high school, college or university in the world that asks students to study opposing viewpoints on both contemporary and historical issues as an integral part of their social studies programs. Rather, students are asked to simply regurgitate the biases of their textbooks, teachers and professors. This would be a perfect system for people living under a monarchy, in which citizens are to simply do as they are told, but as we live in a democracy, this makes absolutely no sense. Having students simply regurgitate what they are told not only biases students towards a rigid political ideology (whether conservative or liberal), but it is inherently boring and fails to prepare students for the real world.

    "The only way in which a human being can make some approach to knowing the whole of a subject is by hearing what can be said about it be persons of every variety of opinion and studying all modes in which it can be looked at by ever character of mind. No wise man has ever acquired his wisdom in any mode but this." - John Stuart Mill

    "Difference of opinion leads to inquiry, and inquiry to truth." - Thomas Jefferson

    I am not suggesting that we should get rid of tests altogether in social studies programs or that students should not be asked to prove their ability to recall what they have studied. However, I do suggest that testing should be scaled back a bit in favor of asking students to write research papers, and take part in discussions, in which they provide an analysis of historical and/or contemporary subject matter and cite historical evidence to bolster their arguments. In this way, students will actually retain more historical knowledge because they will be using it for a purpose. Furthermore, they will actually be thinking about what their reading and forming their own evidence-based viewpoint.

    And while there are historical facts we can all agree on, every history textbook is, to some extent, biased. Beginning in high school, students should be made fully aware of this, be able to identify their textbooks' point of view and be introduced to opposing viewpoints regarding contentious issues in both U.S. History and World History. Again, the Opposing Viewpoints series provides us with a good starting point. Opposing Viewpoints in American History Volumes I and II as well Opposing Viewpoints in World History I and II should both be utilized as part of every social studies curriculum. However, students should not be restricted to only considering the arguments presented by the editors of the Opposing Viewpoints series; it is merely a good foundation and starting point for further research and analysis.

    "In our media-intensive culture it is not difficult to find differing opinions. Thousands of newspapers and magazines and dozens of radio and television talk shows resound with differing points of view. The difficulty lies in deciding which opinion to agree with and which 'experts' seem the most credible. The more inundated we become with differing opinions and claims, the more essential it is to hone critical reading and thinking skills to evaluate these ideas. Opposing Viewpoints books address this problem by directly by presenting stimulating debates that can be used to enhance and teach these skills. The varied opinions contained in each book examine many difference aspects of a single issue. While examining these conveniently editing opposing viewpoints, readers can develop critical thinking skills such as the ability to compare and contrast authors' credibility, facts, argumentation styles, use of persuasive techniques, and other stylistic tools. In short, the Opposing Viewpoints Series is an ideal way to attain the higher-level thinking and reading skills so essential in a culture of diverse and contradictory opinions." - Mitchell Young

    High school and college students should routinely study and evaluate opposing viewpoints throughout all of their social studies and social science courses.

    4. Students are Not Studying Public Policy

    Every high school and college in America should have a required course regarding opposing viewpoints on public policy. Rather than studying a textbook, students could be provided with books from the opposing viewpoints series, videos of formal debates and similar resources so that they could dedicate their time to studying, researching, writing about and discussing the issues that every American should have an informed opinion about. For example:

    1. The Middle East
    2. The War on Terrorism
    3. Gun Control
    4. Welfare
    5. Health Care
    6. Genetic Engineering
    7. Global Warming
    8. Civil Liberties
    9. Abortion
    10. Criminal Justice
    11. Government Spending
    12. Global Resources

    A course on public policy could be incorporated into any college curriculum. As part of a high school curriculum, I would make it the area of study in a Junior English Class. Thus:

    Freshman English: Career Research and Analysis
    Sophomore English: Literary Analysis
    Junior English: Public Policy
    Senior: Elective

    5. Art Classes are Suppressing Students' Creativity with Rigid Curricula

    One would think that in an art class, you would be able to dedicate your time to creative self-expression. If a student wants to learn how to paint portraits in art class, he or she could find a few books on the subject, agree on a set of projects with the teacher and then proceed to begin learning and perfecting his or her art work. If one week you feel like learning how to draw cars, you could pick up a book on it in the library and immediately start drawing cars. If you feel like painting a wedding scene, you can paint a wedding scene. If you want to paint something that represents the effect that your father's passing away had on you, you could spend some time figuring out how to represent it in a painting and then proceed to do so. But not so fast! In an art class you have to draw, paint, sculpt or graphically design what the teacher tells you to. If he or she wants everyone to draw flowers, you are all drawing flowers. If the teacher wants everyone painting landscapes this week, you are spending your week painting landscapes.

    But why? What successful artist spends their time drawing, painting, graphically designing or sculpting things they do not want to? What is art without passion? A complete waste of time. In art classes, every student should have a self-directed curriculum based upon their areas of interest, their passions and their personal objectives. If a student wants to draw comic books, for God's sake, let him draw comic books! Then grade him based solely upon whether his artistic ability is steadily improving over time. In such a class setting, the art teacher could dedicate their time helping students decide on what their projects will be from week-to-week, providing specific feedback on completed projects and giving help to students who specifically ask for it. Furthermore, students would be able to teach each other how to draw certain things or how to draw with a certain style. In this way, the students' self-directed learning would also have a very positive and rewarding social aspect. I mean honestly, who wouldn't have enjoyed teaching their high school or college crush how to paint or draw something?

    6. Students are Not Developing a Practical Life Philosophy

    Every high school student should graduate with a comprehensive life philosophy, ideally one based on continually improving themselves and the world around them, and have the practical knowledge necessary to lead a successful life. A life philosophy course would be an interdisciplinary course that would address such questions as:

    1. What is my ideal lifestyle?
    2. What are my ambitions, my dreams and my goals?
    3. What are my values?
    4. How does one overcome social conflict?
    5. How does one have a successful marriage?
    6. What are my ethical principles?
    7. How can I continually improve both myself and the world around me?

    When students address the questions, sources would include their own personal experiences, self-improvement literature, positive psychology, relationship psychology, the field of ethics, sociology and so on.

    For example, students might choose to read the 7 Habits by Stephen Covey:

    The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, first published in 1989, is a self-help book written by Stephen R. Covey. It has sold more than 25 million copies in 38 languages since first publication, which was marked by the release of a 15th anniversary edition in 2004. Covey presents an approach to being effective in attaining goals by aligning oneself to what he calls "true north" principles of a character ethic that he presents as universal and timeless.

    Each chapter is dedicated to one of the habits, which are represented by the following imperatives:

    Habit 1: Be Proactive
    Take initiative in life by realizing that your decisions (and how they align with life's principles) are the primary determining factor for effectiveness in your life. Take responsibility for your choices and the subsequent consequences that follow.

    Habit 2: Begin with the End in Mind
    Self-discover and clarify your deeply important character values and life goals. Envision the ideal characteristics for each of your various roles and relationships in life.

    Habit 3: Put First Things First
    Plan, prioritize, and execute your week's tasks based on importance rather than urgency. Evaluate whether your efforts exemplify your desired character values, propel you toward goals, and enrich the roles and relationships that were elaborated in Habit 2.

    Habit 4: Think Win-Win
    Genuinely strive for mutually beneficial solutions or agreements in your relationships. Value and respect people by understanding a "win" for all is ultimately a better long-term resolution than if only one person in the situation had gotten his way.

    Habit 5: Seek First to Understand, Then to be Understood
    Use empathetic listening to be genuinely influenced by a person, which compels them to reciprocate the listening and take an open mind to being influenced by you. This creates an atmosphere of caring, respect, and positive problem solving.

    Habit 6: Synergize
    Combine the strengths of people through positive teamwork, so as to achieve goals no one person could have done alone. Get the best performance out of a group of people through encouraging meaningful contribution, and modeling inspirational and supportive leadership.

    Habit 7: Sharpen the Saw
    Balance and renew your resources, energy, and health to create a sustainable, long-term, effective lifestyle.
    7. Education Majors are Not Learning From the Most Successful Teachers

    If you want to learn how to be great at doing something, what is the first thing you do? I would say it is to find a few people that are well-known for being absolutely amazing at doing it and rigorously study their methods and ideas. This applies whether we're talking about playing a particular sport, running a business, playing music, practicing medicine, performing surgery, parenting and yes, teaching. However, very few, if any education majors are asked to study the methods and ideas of the the best teachers in recent history; teachers like Marva Collins, Dr. Lorraine Monroe, Rafe Esquith and Jaime Escalante. All of these teachers have received widespread acclaim for their their ability to take under-performing students from impoverished and crime-ridden areas and transform them into lifelong honors students who go on to become highly successful doctors, engineers, civil rights lawyers, business owners, professors, teachers and so on.


    If you wish to see some of these teachers in action, go to Youtube and type in these keywords:

    1. Jaime Escalante
    2. Dr. Lorraine Monroe 60 minutes
    3. 2. Marva Collins 60 minutes

    What do all these teachers have in common? For one, they were more than just teachers! They were also leaders and marketers. As leaders, they totally and completely believed in every student's ability to succeed despite their surroundings and they communicated this belief to their students in sincere, charismatic and inspiring ways. Even though school officials, parents, other teachers and even some students tried to convince them otherwise, these teachers were unfazed and continued to communicate this belief to the point that it became a self-fulfilling prophecy. As marketers, these teachers were all able to sell what they were teaching before they taught it. The overwhelming majority of teachers give absolutely no thought to how to effectively communicate the value of what they are teaching to their students. Thus, we are currently a nation great at marketing cell phones, Big Macs and alcoholic beverages but terrible at marketing the value of studying to our students. This is just one of the many important lessons that we can learn from some of the most successful teachers in recent history.

    So if education majors aren't learning from the proven methods of the most successful teachers in recent history, what are the learning? For the most part, they are being taught a series of unproven theories and cheap gimmicks with absolutely no real-world results to back them up. For example, there is a recent theory that student should not be asked to memorize facts at all but rather should only be taught how to be "critical thinkers" . However, they fail to take into consideration that if you don not know what the facts are then you cannot separate them from opinions and then think critically about those opinions. For example, if a student does not learn about the agreed-upon facts of the Vietnam War, how can or she possibly decide whether it was an ill-advised war that needlessly cost tens of thousands of young Americans their lives or a strategic military action necessary to combat the spread of communism?

    8. Students are Not Studying Recent Developments in Science, Technology and Medicine

    What is the purpose of high school science courses? Is it so that the small-percentage of students that go on to pursue careers involving the application of physics, chemistry or biology can get a head start on their studies? That would be quite a tremendous waste of time and energy for the rest of students now would it not? I would say the purpose of the high school science curriculum should be that every student is better able to understand the implications of recent developments in science, technology and medicine. Progress in these closely-related areas is radically transforming the nature of everyone's existence; thus studying them is fascinating and inherently valuable regardless of what career path one chooses.

    However, high school students — and indeed, the overwhelming majority of college students — are rarely, if ever, asked to study recent developments in science and technology. Furthermore, very few, if any students are asked to regularly apply what they've learned in their textbooks to understanding recent developments in science and technology. I would dedicate the entire first month of a high school course in biology to just studying recent developments in science, technology and medicine that are directly related to biology. After peaking their interest in the subject of biology, I would regularly ask students to apply what they're learning in their textbook to better understand recent news articles regarding an advancement in science, technology and/or medicine. Some new stories I might cover include:

    Lab-Made Organ Implanted For First Time - CNN
    New Hope May Lie In Lab-Created Heart - CNN
    Cancer Patient Gets World’s First Artificial Trachea - Time
    Scientists Look to Cure HIV With Gene Therapy - Fox News
    Programmable DNA Scissors Found for Bacterial Immune System - Science Daily

    9. Students Are Not Being Encouraged to Pursue Any Level of Self-Education

    10. Students are Not Being Provided With the Chance to Study Math at Their Own Pace
    Last edited by BenjaminRosenzweig; 06-30-2012 at 08:46 AM.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Privatize education and allow them to put school online. This would dramatically improve costs, value, free up time for students, and allow students to graduate sooner.

  4. #3
    Cut the superfluous required courses and have the student focus more on his field of study. This would cut the amount of time required in college as well as the cost of those courses not required for the field of study being focused on. Of course the colleges would object as they like the money they make on the superfluous courses that have little to do with the students field of study. Those instructors teaching those courses would also object as many of them would lose their jobs.

  5. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.3D View Post
    Cut the superfluous required courses and have the student focus more on his field of study. This would cut the amount of time required in college as well as the cost of those courses not required for the field of study being focused on. Of course the colleges would object as they like the money they make on the superfluous courses that have little to do with the students field of study. Those instructors teaching those courses would also object as many of them would lose their jobs.
    I agree. Additionally, if you do go to 4 years of college, you should have 3-4 majors. Not one major and bunch of random classes.

  6. #5
    How about you don't know what is best for school education, and in fact no one does. The best thing to do would be to privatize it all and let schools run themselves. They'd develop the ways to fix their own problems way better than anyone else could.

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by tttppp View Post
    Privatize education and allow them to put school online. This would dramatically improve costs, value, free up time for students, and allow students to graduate sooner.
    There are already private schools and they are allowed to "put school online". I support school vouchers but I'm trying to address the curriculum.

  8. #7
    How about you don't know what is best for school education, and in fact no one does. The best thing to do would be to privatize it all and let schools run themselves. They'd develop the ways to fix their own problems way better than anyone else could.
    I don't disagree with you but if you were sending your child to a private high school, what type of curriculum would you choose? Would you choose a school that only teaches a Libertarian world view or would you like him or her to study opposing viewpoints as an integral part of their social studies and social sciences courses? Would you want him or her to study current events in social studies courses? Would you want him or her to study recent developments in science, technology and medicine?

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.3D View Post
    Cut the superfluous required courses and have the student focus more on his field of study. This would cut the amount of time required in college as well as the cost of those courses not required for the field of study being focused on. Of course the colleges would object as they like the money they make on the superfluous courses that have little to do with the students field of study. Those instructors teaching those courses would also object as many of them would lose their jobs.
    Okay, but if you were sending your child to a private high school would you want him or her to take a course in Career Research and Analysis? And would you like him or her to study opposing viewpoints on public policy? Would you want him or her to take any courses on literature?



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by BenjaminRosenzweig View Post
    This is an article I'm currently working on. I'd appreciate any suggestions or constructive criticism.
    There is a lot of overlap from one point to the next. By my reading you actually have 5-6 points to your argument rather than 10. As you say this is an article you are writing, my first question would be: who are you writing this article for?
    "When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him." —Jonathan Swift

  12. #10
    There is a lot of overlap from one point to the next. By my reading you actually have 5-6 points to your argument rather than 10.
    You think it holds the reader's hand a little to tightly from one point to the next?

    Haven't I identified 10 specific problems?

    1. Too Much Emphasis on Literary Analysis, Not Enough Career Research and Analysis
    2. Students Are Not Asked to Study Current Events
    3. Students are Not Studying Opposing Viewpoints
    4. Students are Not Studying Public Policy
    5. Art Classes are Suppressing Students' Creativity with Rigid Curricula
    6. Students are Not Developing a Practical Life Philosophy
    7. Education Majors are Not Learning From the Most Successful Teachers
    8. Students are Not Studying Recent Developments in Science, Technology and Medicine
    9. Students Are Not Being Encouraged to Pursue Any Level of Self-Education
    10. Students are Not Being Provided With the Chance to Study Math at Their Own Pace

    I think you're right that point 2 and point 8 are basically the same point. However, in point 2 I'm addressing the incorporation of current events into social studies. I suppose I should change point 2 to "Students are Not Asked to Study Current Events in Social Studies".

    Also, when discussing the first problem, I think I might be using the term "job opportunity" incorrectly but I'm not sure. Perhaps I should use the term "specific careers" but that sounds clunky and not as appealing.

    As you say this is an article you are writing, my first question would be: who are you writing this article for?
    Good question, I have no idea who might be willing to publish it. I thought I might send it to a few education professors and see if one might be willing to work with me on the article to get it published somewhere. I think I might also use it as the foundation for a future book proposal and perhaps later as the basis for a proposal to make changes to the curriculum of a private school.

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by BenjaminRosenzweig View Post
    There are already private schools and they are allowed to "put school online". I support school vouchers but I'm trying to address the curriculum.
    The only private schools I know of today still operate basically the same as public schools. There are some online colleges, but they follow the same bull$#@! rules as regular colleges, so whats the point of having them at all?

  14. #12
    As far as pre-college schools are concerned, I would change the format and have them operate more like colleges. Stop treating kids like babies and forcing them to be watched 24/7. Have them go to school 2 days a week, and demand they study the rest of the week, like they would in college. If you treat people like kids, they'll act like kids. If you treat them like adults, they'll act like adults.

  15. #13
    One of my aunts started as an early childhood educator (pre-k through grade 3), went on to be in charge of all of the early childhood schools in Hartford, then later Bridgeport. She's run charities involved with education, advised Connecticut lawmakers on education laws, taught teachers at both public and private universities in two states, run an education department at one university, and been hired to evaluate schools all over the country as well as schools in other countries. And I'm short-changing her resume. My point is, she's been involved with every aspect of education over the last 40 years, at least at the pre-k through grade 3 level.

    A few months ago I had a conversation with her about the costs of education (these aren't exact quotes, I'm going from memory). It went more or less like this:

    Me: It said in the paper that the average teacher's salary was $66,500, and that 42% of teachers were paid $80,000 or more. So if a teacher makes $80,000 and there are 20 students in the class, that's $4,000 each. You could rent a classroom for 10 months for about $10,000 - $500 each. You could buy five brand new textbooks at $100 each for another $500 per student, every year. You could buy a new computer every year for $400 per student. Let's say there's another $500 per student in miscellaneous stuff - desks, erasers, and whatnot. Actually, just round that up to $1,100 in miscellaneous stuff, in case I missed anything. That's $6,500 per student.

    Her: Yeah, that's about what it used to cost to set up a classroom when I was in Bridgeport.

    Me: So if it costs $6,500 to start a classroom, why does the state spend $14,000 per student every year? I would think it would be lower, especially since they're reusing textbooks and desks.

    Her: The difference is mostly transportation and special education, which private schools don't deal with. Special Ed, in particular. When I first started all the special ed kids in a school were segregated and kept in one room. It was cost efficient, but they weren't socially integrated very well. The law now requires them to be integrated in regular classrooms so that they can interact with regular kids. A small school might have just one child with special education needs, but if that child has three problems, the school needs to have three special education teachers, plus the regular teacher, all of whom make $80,000. Most special ed kids are clustered in cities. They move to cities because that's where the hospitals are. But that's why education costs in cities are always so much higher than in towns.


    It went on for a while. Eventually I made the pitch that we were still using a 16th century model of education (gathering kids in classrooms), even though technological advancements over the last 15 years has made it obsolete. The Connecticut Constitution guarantees everyone a "free" education, but it doesn't say how that has to be carried out. The state could buy every student in Connecticut a computer and an internet connection for $500/year, and set them up with web sites like Khan Academy, Wikipedia, and some history web sites or whatever, and save billions of dollars and take a huge step towards eliminating property taxes (which is what got me thinking about this in the first place).

    I think it was the idea of eliminating property taxes that got her. She's not yet fully on board with radical changes to the education model, but she did start including Khan Academy into her lesson plan at one of the universities she teaches, giving future teachers ideas on how to use it to cut costs.

  16. #14
    I think, to a large extent, the curriculum depends on the level of the students. I can remember covering major current events in school, like the fall of the Berlin Wall when I was in Junior High. My senior year of high school I had three math classes - Probability and Statistics, Trigonometry, and Pre-Calculus. And my pre-calc class finished the entire agenda in less than half the year, so we started doing Calc 1, which we also finished, and ended up doing Calc 2. I can still kind of remember spinning equations around the x or y axis, taking a slice of them, and finding the volume. I didn't even have to do that in college.

    On the other hand, I've been told that the only reason every high school in the country teaches John Steinbeck is because his books are short.
    Last edited by enoch150; 06-26-2012 at 10:07 PM.

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by enoch150 View Post
    One of my aunts started as an early childhood educator (pre-k through grade 3), went on to be in charge of all of the early childhood schools in Hartford, then later Bridgeport. She's run charities involved with education, advised Connecticut lawmakers on education laws, taught teachers at both public and private universities in two states, run an education department at one university, and been hired to evaluate schools all over the country as well as schools in other countries. And I'm short-changing her resume. My point is, she's been involved with every aspect of education over the last 40 years, at least at the pre-k through grade 3 level.

    A few months ago I had a conversation with her about the costs of education (these aren't exact quotes, I'm going from memory). It went more or less like this:

    Me: It said in the paper that the average teacher's salary was $66,500, and that 42% of teachers were paid $80,000 or more. So if a teacher makes $80,000 and there are 20 students in the class, that's $4,000 each. You could rent a classroom for 10 months for about $10,000 - $500 each. You could buy five brand new textbooks at $100 each for another $500 per student, every year. You could buy a new computer every year for $400 per student. Let's say there's another $500 per student in miscellaneous stuff - desks, erasers, and whatnot. Actually, just round that up to $1,100 in miscellaneous stuff, in case I missed anything. That's $6,500 per student.

    Her: Yeah, that's about what it used to cost to set up a classroom when I was in Bridgeport.

    Me: So if it costs $6,500 to start a classroom, why does the state spend $14,000 per student every year? I would think it would be lower, especially since they're reusing textbooks and desks.

    Her: The difference is mostly transportation and special education, which private schools don't deal with. Special Ed, in particular. When I first started all the special ed kids in a school were segregated and kept in one room. It was cost efficient, but they weren't socially integrated very well. The law now requires them to be integrated in regular classrooms so that they can interact with regular kids. A small school might have just one child with special education needs, but if that child has three problems, the school needs to have three special education teachers, plus the regular teacher, all of whom make $80,000. Most special ed kids are clustered in cities. They move to cities because that's where the hospitals are. But that's why education costs in cities are always so much higher than in towns.


    It went on for a while. Eventually I made the pitch that we were still using a 16th century model of education (gathering kids in classrooms), even though technological advancements over the last 15 years has made it obsolete. The Connecticut Constitution guarantees everyone a "free" education, but it doesn't say how that has to be carried out. The state could buy every student in Connecticut a computer and an internet connection for $500/year, and set them up with web sites like Khan Academy, Wikipedia, and some history web sites or whatever, and save billions of dollars and take a huge step towards eliminating property taxes (which is what got me thinking about this in the first place).

    I think it was the idea of eliminating property taxes that got her. She's not yet fully on board with radical changes to the education model, but she did start including Khan Academy into her lesson plan at one of the universities she teaches, giving future teachers ideas on how to use it to cut costs.
    Connecticut really guarantees every student a free education? What law is this?

  18. #16
    Eagles' Wings
    Member

    All ten points are excellent! Has to happen at home, whether home educated or just hanging out with parents/adult mentors.

    Keep up the good work and send updates as you fill this in.



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by tttppp View Post
    Connecticut really guarantees every student a free education? What law is this?
    Article 8, Section 1 of the Connecticut Constitution. http://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/Content/co...nstitution.pdf

    I suppose I could have worded it better. Connecticut guarantees every student the option of a "free" education. There is still an option to pay for it by going to a private school.

    For a little while in the early to mid 1800's it actually was free, paid by the interest income from the school fund (mentioned in Article 8, Section 4). Students had to buy books, but that was pretty much it. In the late 1790's Connecticut sold some land out west - Ohio, maybe - and invested the money. I tried finding out what happened to it once, but I couldn't get past the early 1900's. I figured it must have gone bankrupt. From what I remember, it was invested in bank stocks and mortgages.
    Last edited by enoch150; 06-27-2012 at 03:04 AM.

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by enoch150 View Post
    Article 8, Section 1 of the Connecticut Constitution. http://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/Content/co...nstitution.pdf

    I suppose I could have worded it better. Connecticut guarantees every student the option of a "free" education. There is still an option to pay for it by going to a private school.

    For a little while in the early to mid 1800's it actually was free, paid by the interest income from the school fund (mentioned in Article 8, Section 4). Students had to buy books, but that was pretty much it. In the late 1790's Connecticut sold some land out west - Ohio, maybe - and invested the money. I tried finding out what happened to it once, but I couldn't get past the early 1900's. I figured it must have gone bankrupt. From what I remember, it was invested in bank stocks and mortgages.
    How can this be legal? Are they aware that there is no such thing as something for free? Everything has costs. Lets say you decide to eliminate all local taxes. There'd be no money for free education to take place.

    Does that mean every town must have free education, or just in the state? It just states that the state should have free education. It doesn't state the locations.

  22. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by BenjaminRosenzweig View Post
    I don't disagree with you but if you were sending your child to a private high school, what type of curriculum would you choose? Would you choose a school that only teaches a Libertarian world view or would you like him or her to study opposing viewpoints as an integral part of their social studies and social sciences courses? Would you want him or her to study current events in social studies courses? Would you want him or her to study recent developments in science, technology and medicine?
    Privatize the schools and then you'll get more power over what your child learns since the schools will have to have great methods and teach what you want in order to get your support. No one learning model will be applicable or useful for all schools.

  23. #20
    What would be wrong with just letting people learn at their own pace in their own interests?

  24. #21
    1 through 10 are great solutions, but the people who enjoy directing the public school system can not possibly begin to employ any of them. It would mean the removal of their state backed privilege. It would require a complete free market in education, good luck getting that past the teachers unions.

    ! through 10 are precisely what an individual must do once he escapes the public school system.

    Great points none the less...

  25. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Travlyr View Post
    What would be wrong with just letting people learn at their own pace in their own interests?
    technically nothing. But our overlords have adopted the Prussian model, so that's the way it must be.
    Quote Originally Posted by Torchbearer
    what works can never be discussed online. there is only one language the government understands, and until the people start speaking it by the magazine full... things will remain the same.
    Hear/buy my music here "government is the enemy of liberty"-RP Support me on Patreon here Ephesians 6:12

  26. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by heavenlyboy34 View Post
    technically nothing. But our overlords have adopted the Prussian model, so that's the way it must be.
    Right. But why should a grown man or woman be in "trouble" (jail time) for letting their children learn the world through induction and deduction?

  27. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Travlyr View Post
    Right. But why should a grown man or woman be in "trouble" (jail time) for letting their children learn the world through induction and deduction?
    IMO, nothing. That method is preferable IMO. I'm an autodidact in many fields myself.
    Quote Originally Posted by Torchbearer
    what works can never be discussed online. there is only one language the government understands, and until the people start speaking it by the magazine full... things will remain the same.
    Hear/buy my music here "government is the enemy of liberty"-RP Support me on Patreon here Ephesians 6:12



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    I would like to see the kids learn survival skills. The public school only teaches kids to be dependent not independent.
    “The spirits of darkness are now among us. We have to be on guard so that we may realize what is happening when we encounter them and gain a real idea of where they are to be found. The most dangerous thing you can do in the immediate future will be to give yourself up unconsciously to the influences which are definitely present.” ~ Rudolf Steiner

  30. #26
    The problem I have with OP, is that what is right for an education for him, may not be what I value in an education. The issue I have with OP and many of the responses is that they are focused on the idea of schooling and not the idea of education. Schooling does not equal education. I believe in "school choice," but more so I believe in the freedom to homeschool, particularly the unschooling variety. Allowing people to learn to learn is far greater than any of the points 1-10 in my not so humble opinion.

  31. #27
    "I've never let my school interfere with my education."
    ~Mark Twain
    “The spirits of darkness are now among us. We have to be on guard so that we may realize what is happening when we encounter them and gain a real idea of where they are to be found. The most dangerous thing you can do in the immediate future will be to give yourself up unconsciously to the influences which are definitely present.” ~ Rudolf Steiner

  32. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by tttppp View Post
    The only private schools I know of today still operate basically the same as public schools. There are some online colleges, but they follow the same bull$#@! rules as regular colleges, so whats the point of having them at all?
    Private schools, as well as charter schools are far more likely to be to receptive to innovation. However, I'd like to promote innovation in both private schools and public (i.e. government-run) schools. In particular, I would like to persuade some public high school teachers and college professors to integrate opposing viewpoints into their social studies and social sciences courses such that students are no longer being indoctrinated with a rigid Liberal ideology.

    That being said, I don't want children to be indoctrinated with any political ideology, including Libertarianism. I believe if students genuinely compare and contrast different viewpoints, consider them equally and apply some critical thinking, most of them will favor Libertarianism. I for one used to be a Keith Olbermann and Bill Maher-loving Liberal until I stumbled across a copy of Myth, Lies and Downright Stupidity by John Stossel and couldn't find anyone that could debunk any of his claims or offer a logical counter-argument.

    And I've continued to keep my eye open for convincing counter-arguments to John Stossel's economic arguments and have yet to find them. However, some of his views on environmental and nutrition-related issues are more than questionable but I won't get into them here for fear of derailing the thread from the issue of educational innovation.

  33. #29
    "As far as pre-college schools are concerned, I would change the format and have them operate more like colleges. Stop treating kids like babies and forcing them to be watched 24/7. Have them go to school 2 days a week, and demand they study the rest of the week, like they would in college. If you treat people like kids, they'll act like kids. If you treat them like adults, they'll act like adults."

    This is also an idea that a private high school should try out. In some states this might be illegal so you would certainly have to look into that.

    If it was a boarding school, I would make sure the students didn't leave the campus at night unless the parents have stipulated otherwise.

    If I were to run a non-boarding school this way, I would allow students to visit the the school grounds seven days a week and it would be open from 6AM in the morning until midnight. However, just like a college, students would not need to be there when they don't have classes. This would probably only be suitable for a mature young adult; it would be up to both the parents and the school faculty whether the student was a suitable fit for the school. If the student is accepted, the parents would have to sign a contract in which they acknowledge that their child is NOT under our supervision when they are not in class. Otherwise, the school would be liable and it would be a lawsuit waiting to happen.

  34. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by donnay View Post
    "I've never let my school interfere with my education."
    ~Mark Twain
    I did really well in school, most of the time.
    Can someone help, what's this thread about?
    No one here wanted to be the Billionaire.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-30-2014, 09:35 AM
  2. Two Cheers for American Education
    By mikemarotta in forum Education Freedom
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-25-2013, 03:40 PM
  3. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-12-2012, 03:11 PM
  4. American Education Crisis is Near: Universal Education or Free
    By VoluntaryAmerican in forum Ron Paul Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-09-2011, 08:00 AM
  5. American Education Fails Because It Isn't Education
    By FrankRep in forum Education Freedom
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-13-2011, 04:17 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •