edumication fael

[BruceVC]

 

Can I be honest with you guys in the USA, I would be much concerned about the large numbers of adults in the USA  who reject certain social, economic and political realities  and instead embrace the world of alternative facts and post-truth 

The ones who don't agree with you you mean.

 

WOD !!! Stop being cheeky....

 

I dont expect people to agree with me, I am not right all the time and Im surprised you would think this?

 

I am only right 95-98 % of the time 

[Wrath of Dagon]

That is upside down.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Jesus christ ben if you're going to mention Marx every third word can you bother to read him first?

[Amentep]

am understanding your pov as you say you work for an open-enrollment system, yes? but CSU? is only 9% of graduating seniors who is guaranteed spots at UC, and they had to open UC merced to keep close to being able to match that goal. CSU has therefore necessarily been taking a higher performing group o' students.

 

use csu chico as random.  would be unfair to use cal poly.

 

http://www.csuchico.edu/admissions/want-to-apply/freshmen/eligibility.shtml

 

http://www.collegedata.com/cs/data/college/college_pg01_tmpl.jhtml?schoolId=1083

 

average freshman were getting b/b+ in high school coursework which is seeming near required to be college prep.  nevertheless, the kids is unprepared.  this is not a case o' returning adults who ain't been to school in years or folks deciding 'tween working as a security guard or going to a community college as amentep is likely to see frequent.  

 

am thinking educators writing this off as a kinda business as usual fail is as disturbing as is the numbers. 

 

"Sonja Brookins Santelises, chief executive officer of Baltimore City Public Schools, is well aware of the gap between the knowledge needed to earn a diploma in the district and what college professors expect students to be able to do on day one. She served as chief academic officer for the district before going to the D.C.-based think tank Education Trust in 2013, where she studied this issue nationally. She returned to the Baltimore school district in the summer of 2016.

 

"It’s “more like a chasm,” she said. “We’ve had too low a standard for too long.”

 

"The district is working to increase dual-enrollment opportunities, through which high school students can enroll in college courses, as well as increase general exposure to higher education, Santelises said. It’s also trying to equip schools with the tools to deal with trauma in students’ lives and to better support teachers in raising standards to challenge students more in high school.

 

"“If we’ve been giving kids worksheets with simplistic answers for years and then get upset when they can’t write a five-paragraph essay or recognize subject-verb agreement, that’s not the kids,” she said. “That’s us.”"

 

am glad some folks in education recognize a problem.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

I worked for a strictly open enrollment institution, now I work at a mixed tier one depending on which college you're applying for admissions to.  Even the pickiest of the pickiest in the state system though have developmental students (typically offered a special admissions at those elite schools due to some non-academic talent - musician, singer, athlete, artist, etc.).  I'm not aware of our system using guaranteed % for state HS grads like you've described California's using.

 

I'll also add that the general cycle here for the past decade is someone points out the number of students going to remediation -> HS points out pressure from state and national to meet set graduation rates and national score goals and how that means they spend more time preparing students for the tests (SAT/ACT/End of Year) than college -> legislature puts more laws to increase reliance on national test scores to prove HS are teaching to college standard and graduation rates to increase

[HoonDing]

It's clear that President Bannon needs not an intellectual but a violent, terrible youth in the coming race wars.

[Wrath of Dagon]

 

That is upside down.

Do you know the difference between Breitbart and Marx? One is an propaganda outlet, the other an acclaimed, well respected and highly influential sociologist.

 

Na, but seriously... why don't you give me an brief overview over your theory of the world? And back it up with acclaimed studies or maybe social scientists?

 

Just read the US Constitution, it's not that long. As for back up, compare US to North Korea.

[Tigranes]

"America: At least it's better than North Korea!"

[Wrath of Dagon]

It's better than everything, but North Korea is the clearest illustration of Marxism in action

[Deadly_Nightshade]

It's better than everything...

I guess that depends on your criteria. While in an ideal world the US would be awesome the current implementation has much to be desired.

[Guard Dog]

Get the Federal Government out of education. Once upon a time the individual states designed their curricula around what the State Universities expected incoming freshmen to know. In those day the US education system was much better. One of the best in the world. Now the federal government was made a bloody mess of it (as if they could do anything else) and we never break into the top 10.

[Tigranes]

Get the Federal Government out of education. Once upon a time the individual states designed their curricula around what the State Universities expected incoming freshmen to know. In those day the US education system was much better. One of the best in the world. Now the federal government was made a bloody mess of it (as if they could do anything else) and we never break into the top 10.

 

As a foreigner, I'm genuinely curious (and ignorant): what makes state government so much better than the federal in these cases, such that so many commentators will often say "give it to the states and they'll just do it better"? Is it a general statement about scale, and governing as locally as possible? Is there a proven track record of states handling education or other issues far better, and if so, is that an efficiency question or is that about states tending to take different solutions?

[Wrath of Dagon]

You can name a communist state without cult of personality?

[Guard Dog]

 

Get the Federal Government out of education. Once upon a time the individual states designed their curricula around what the State Universities expected incoming freshmen to know. In those day the US education system was much better. One of the best in the world. Now the federal government was made a bloody mess of it (as if they could do anything else) and we never break into the top 10.

 

As a foreigner, I'm genuinely curious (and ignorant): what makes state government so much better than the federal in these cases, such that so many commentators will often say "give it to the states and they'll just do it better"? Is it a general statement about scale, and governing as locally as possible? Is there a proven track record of states handling education or other issues far better, and if so, is that an efficiency question or is that about states tending to take different solutions?

 

 

Ok, this is a bit complex because in the most un-libertarian fashion I do believe the Federal Government does have a role to play in education and not everything is has done has been a disaster. Although most of the recent things have been. The federal government is responsible for de-segregating schools, the national school lunch program, the act that created the Land Grant Colleges in the post-civil war US (I forget the name of the act) and the Special Education programs of the 1970's. These were all a big deal that helped. Prior to the 1830's (give or take, I'm going on memory here) most schools were community managed or parochial. Most children learned from their parents. Around the 1830s a Congressman named Mann began a reform program for "common" schools based on German education of the day. Basically students were taught the same thing all over the state. All the other states followed suit. This was when teaching actually became a profession. Now the students were being taught a curricula that the Universities and trade colleges ( they were called Agricultural and Mechanical colleges and many are still around) wanted incoming students to know. By the late 20th Century a fellow named Dewey (if you have ever used a card catalogue you know who he is) began writing textbooks that taught not just academics but life skills and they were quickly incorporated into state run schools. By the 1950s & 60's I think the US primary education system was the best in the world. And then it started to fall apart. In the '70's and 80's the Government began to get more involved in funding, curricula design, and the local school boards and state governments began to lose control. And then the federal government began to take funding collected by taxes in one state and distribute (or withhold if the schools did not comply with mandatory curricula) and the whole thing has become something of a mess.

 

That is a very brief summation of something big, complex, and sort of messy but I hope you get the idea.

[Tigranes]

Thanks. So in this case, your point is that state run schools have proven able to take on good ideas and stay on top of the latest education strategies, while federal involvement hasn't done much for actual teaching quality since it got hands dirty in the 70s? It's good to get the specific reasons, because they are certainly more substantial than a blanket wish for local government in any subject.

[Guard Dog]

Thanks. So in this case, your point is that state run schools have proven able to take on good ideas and stay on top of the latest education strategies, while federal involvement hasn't done much for actual teaching quality since it got hands dirty in the 70s? It's good to get the specific reasons, because they are certainly more substantial than a blanket wish for local government in any subject.

 

That plus the expansion of Federal Government control over what is or isn't taught in schools means a total loss of local and state control. If there is something your local government is doing that you don't like or want to see done better it is easy to reach out to the people who can make a change. If the Federal Government is doing something you don't like, tough luck. A recent example is the argument over whether Intelligent Design should have been taught alongside Evolution in Texas public schools. The voters of Texas who pay the taxes wanted it. the Federal Government said no. Whether you agree with ID or not, it's still up to the voters how live in the school districts to say what or how their children are taught IMO. That is lost once Big Brother is involved.

[Barothmuk]

 

"America: At least it's better than North Korea!"

It's better than everything

 

Haha

[Darkpriest]

It's fairly simple, really....

 

It's the fault of the parents - as they want their children not to be stressed out and be treated like special snowflakes

It's the fault of the edu system - it does not challenge the kids enough, as they could get stressed out

It's the fault of the PC bullcrap - we are all winners, we are all special etc. killing healthy competitiveness

It's the fault of the mass media - showing that you just need looks and be a spineless dumbass - there is no value in being smart, especially in the cultural circles suffering worst effects, like blacks and spanics - but any mention of that will get you labeled racist

and then it's the fault of politics, not giving two ****s about this, because stupid voters are easier to manipulate

 

As for edu being state funded - it does not work, state has too many expenses as is and high quality education institutes need extra inflow from private funding.

 

Sure, baseline education should be available to all, and should be good enough, that there is no such gaps between what you know at the end of High School and what the Univs want and expect from you, but Univ level should be based on scholarships and combination of state funding and private funding. State only institutes stop being good and productive, and the cadre just looks for lazy ways of pulling gov. money in most cases.

Edited February 1, 2017 by Darkpriest

[Darkpriest]

See how all of these are making financially. real paradise each one of them

[Darkpriest]

 

See how all of these are making financially. real paradise each one of them

India, Portugal, and kinda Bangladesh are doing pretty well... India is even the sixth largest economy in the world. For all of them, you have to consider the circumstances. They don't have quite the same history as Europe or America (except of course for Portugal), and they're all quite young nations.

 

 

yeah.... did you count GDP per capita for India, and been there? No thank you...

 

Portugal - recall the term PIGS of EU? how's the employment there? how's the growth?

 

Bangladesh - what is it good in? Please elaborate, cause doing well, can mean, "well i am not starving and have a running water, so I'm doing well"

[Barothmuk]

India and all these countries are socialist

I think KP is going to have an aneurysm.

[Meshugger]

Ben needs to read more Orwell, Vonnegut and Huxley and less of Adorno and Marx. Talk about living in the clouds of abstraction, yikes!

 

As for schools, it is just the sign of the times. Both parents are working, often overtime and has left the education, both didactically and morally, to the schools. When the kids are at home, it is the internet and TV who teaches them what is right of wrong, which nurtures anti-social behaviour. All while the irony is that the parents cannot even trust the teachers or schools to do the parenting job outsourced to them, so it becomes a negative feedback loop of distrust. Since no one trusts each other to know anything, knowledge and the curriculum suffers, quality is diminished, standards are lowered and in order to get a grip of it all, more money is poured in to build teaching centres instead of schools and the curriculum is centralized to people outside the local community, furthering the cycle of individuals who have no real connection to their fellow peers, parents or society.

 

So it is time we admit that we made a mistake and acknowledge that the smallest microcosmos of civilization is the family, not the individual, and welcome women back into the kitchen and as loving mothers of their family instead of having them running a fool's errand of them being necessary in the work force. Children will have a normal loving upbringing which instills basic trust for each other and the school no longer need to act as a surrogate parent. This trust will make sure that the school's administration have to take into account the wishes of families instead of individual whims. This in turn will be reflected on the political process, not only on education, as you now have to take account to the wishes of households and families and no one else. Within 2-3 generations, you will have grownups and children caring about themselves, their families, their extended families and their societies.

 

And that's how you save western civilization.

[Barothmuk]

And that's how you save western civilization.

By destroying it in favour of Shariah Law?

[Meshugger]

Ah, the usual stuff. Traditional family roles are oppressive systems manifested out of vacuum onto the poor prolitariat and not something that has emerged organically when people have freedom to choose themselves. Carry on, let's all be unique individuals fueled by narcissism and outsource any responsibility or accountabilty to the state or private enterprise where these values are throughly analyzed, automized and optimized to solutions benefitted to someone called "person".

 

Now that's how you build character.

[Barothmuk]

And true freedom is stripping the economic power of 50% of the population and forcing them to latch onto the first male they see to support themself. And of course all those women who don't want to be a decorative appendage of someone else are just brainwashed

(probably by (((((them)))))

 

 

Please, tell me more Muhammad.

[Meshugger]

And true freedom is stripping the economic power of 50% of the population and forcing them to latch onto the first male they see to support themself. And of course all those women who don't want to be a decorative appendage of someone else are just brainwashed

(probably by (((((them)))))

 

 

Please, tell me more Muhammad.

 

Ah, purchasing power being the sole purpose and meaning compared to having and living with a family, what a foundation of a thriving culture i would say. No, what i am pontificating is in welcoming the family unit once more to be that which is essential, the cornerstone of society. A radical idea i know, but i am dreamer.

 

After all, house wives doing nothing is very rare and only reserved for the very wealthy historically. When you lived out on the farm or had a small business in town, it was simply a family venture and everyone participated. But again, that's probably something vulgar nowadays compared to getting a six figures student loan in the humanities.

 

 

Ah, the usual stuff. Traditional family roles are oppressive systems manifested out of vacuum onto the poor prolitariat and not something that has emerged organically when people have freedom to choose themselves. Carry on, let's all be unique individuals fueled by narcissism and outsource any responsibility or accountabilty to the state or private enterprise where these values are throughly analyzed, automized and optimized to solutions benefitted to someone called "person".

 

Now that's how you build character.

Gender roles have little to do with the proletariat, but much to do with equality (or rather tre lack thereof).

 

Why do you account your own position that is based on nothing but tradition and conservatism to be right? It is laughable.

 

You failed to respond as to why your proposal helps the children. I do not consider forced gender roles to be particularly healthy for them.

 

 

Pure equality is an ideal, hierarchy is a fact.

 

You version of marxism is a thought experiment conjured for chits & giggles when you live in affluence while the nuclear family has been proven to work since civilizations started to occur, it's simply reality. It has happened in cultures who has had no communication with each other and will continue to happen in the future, just as your ideas of breaking them up are (just look at Sparta or Plato's republic). It is rather you who should bring a strong case on why break something that already works and replace it with something else.

 

Point being, the stronger the nuclear family, the better society and by extension the school system will be.