Invictus brought up a good point that half the work kids do in Primary Education (High School and Below) is pointless. As a student myself I feel that it is crucial that I communicate that pointless class lesson plans like learning about the hardships of white women at home during the Civil War instead of Actually learning about the leaders of our nation (divided). I had a textbook in 8th grade that had one section of a 10 section chapter on the war post- Antetiam. And I just wasted my day doing a project assigned in ENGLISH on Education in the 1930's so i could better understand To Kill a Mockingbird?!?!?
Anyway what do you feal about our teachers who can't teach without a book or without a computer? And share your experiences with the education system. And for those outside the US share the problems or triumphs of your education system.
GO!

fail vamos! you ruined it it looks stupid now

Pre write man, pre write:p

I plan on one day becoming a teacher, so this thread is somewhat interesting to me. Sometimes, it is useful for students to look into the ideas and trivialities of past events, even when they seem irrelevant. It adds a personal attachment to the events that they are learning about. I suppose it is there in the hopes that someone can relate to the situations they are about to read about (in your case).

All that useless garble has a place and sets up how the US became a economic power. I took from it (as a whole) that the 30's sucked, the World War's industrialized the States and turned a lower class into a strong middle class, which was the bridge to today's economy (yes, a very simplified version I know).

The US wasn't always influential. I think the purpose (of the text) is to show the kids that it wasn't very long ago at all that the majority of the people struggled. However, I don't think the teachers understand the purpose or how to relate it.

Wasn't WWI the beginning of the U.S' influence on world affairs, and its rise to power?

That's what I was told.

I'm still trying to understand the usefulness of.... if I am standing 30 ft from a tower... and the angle of elevation is 30 degrees... how high is the tower? ummmm, who cares?

No, that's different. You need math. You need history too. You just don't need irrelevant history like denis' project on education in the 30s. Maybe if it were part of a wider discussion about the effect of the New Deal on America it would be useful, but a project on the history of school is hardly an important topic. that time could be spent on actually having the kids understand world events, but instead it's used for just the sort of boring nonsense that makes kids hate history.

Kids hate history? Nonsense!

Speaking as a university teacher I think the problem in our education system today is the structure rather than the content. Most high schools simply train students to write exams rather than provide the base education that they should. The problem is that they have to do this to meet statistical quotas. Education for the sake of education is a dead idea in our brave new world.

I love history what are you talking about! but the problem is is if you have a better general intelligence than any of your teachers

I want to see what my new GR will be?

denis, you could always quit school and get a GED. Although I think you might have some difficulty with the writing portion. Maybe homeschooling is a more reasonable approach.

Public education is meant to make as many well-rounded individuals as possible. If your history education is limited to military conflicts, then you should appreciate the chance to research different elements of America's past. Don't be so narrow-minded to think that just because you're asked to write about a vague, arguably boring, topic that it is a poor one. If you're overqualified to do the project, then show the teacher that. Don't try to gauge how useful completing an assignment will be to your future based on the prompt.

Also, SunZi makes a great point about the structure of the system. That State governments still provide funding based on score results is unsettling. Teachers will often be directed to teach to the test rather than teach to educate. Their options are often this: stick to the established syllabus or find a new job.

oops wrong thread sorry!

I've been hearing about how 'teaching for tests' is a bad idea for as long as i can remember.

My opinion is that in a rapidly advancing world our education model is the weak link that has evolved very little over the last 50 years, and not of particular benefit when it has. Yes, it is absolutely important to study things like white homemakers in the civil war, or to kill a mockingbird, etc. There are at least a million other subjects that are of *at least* equal importance however that will never be taught or even implied to exist or be of importance in any way.

The world we live in today requires an ever-focused specialization in order to advance in many fields and industries, and as a global society in its entirety. By teaching obscure and narrow subjects we're consuming a large amount of time in schools and producing nearly nothing in the overall blueprint of a student's potential education. I believe we'd be much better off breaking students into specialty groups earlier in life. The fact is, many students are not good at math - and they don't have to be. They still need to understand it, but they don't have to be great at it. Many students aren't good at english, and they don't have to be. They still need to understand it, but they don't have to be great at it. Etc etc etc. What's most important is that students start to narrow their focus sooner in life than their 6th declared major change during their 5th year in college - but also that they still learn broader concepts and histories. But I think we'd be much better off in an open forum for that, and it would capture individual's attention more as well, spark passion. Basically - sit students down with an encyclopedia for an hour each day and let them learn about whatever the heck they want to learn about - it's all important! The teacher could oversee, guide, and encourage discussion with other students - taking particular care to encourage discussion with students in other focused areas (ie.. if student A is good at math and science, they should spend a lot of time discussing things with student B who's good at art and english. So that they can appreciate different viewpoints, and insure that they stay connected to the overall mesh of society instead of becoming mad scientists or the next Hitler.) We're curious by nature, and the education system as it is seems to mostly just hamper that curiousity rather than foster it and give it a strong environment to thrive in.

I do not believe that anything that anyone can learn from is irrelevant, invictus.
Though i do think there's another issue at hand. We need to draw a line on what's relevant to move forward rather than try to focus everywhere at once.
I think History is a major part of what we need to know as Humans.

If we don't learn from History, we repeat the same mistakes, and moving forward becomes a moot point, or aspiration.

And Social History is what i'd call what Denis was referring to, and that you thought was irrelevant.... interesting... Social change and History have made some of the biggest changes, that make us what we are today.
That and WAR that is;)

@ onar The Spanish American War and later Teddy's Great White Fleet are what started the US on the path of world politics and power.

"Speaking as a university teacher I think the problem in our education system today is the structure rather than the content. Most high schools simply train students to write exams rather than provide the base education that they should. The problem is that they have to do this to meet statistical quotas. Education for the sake of education is a dead idea in our brave new world."

They are replacing here the traditional value of "knowledge" and replacing it with the teaching of "competance/ability". It's a complete disaster, and everyone knows it. Every high school teacher I've talked to says how it is failing our youth. I barely escaped this system, as it only affected my slightly in later post-secondary education.

Also, it depends a lot on curriculum and, especially, the teacher. There are many classes I would think I would have loved was it not for the teacher. Hell, in high school I told myself "Why are they teaching us geography, it's so pointless and I KNOW I'll NEVER study in geography later!" Look at me now, studying geography at university. XD

I'm sorry to say that this is not the first time the US education system was called into question. After Sputnik every one raced to start new programs for teaching kids. New math, and early age spelling without phenetics where some such attempts. The first was partialy succesful, but confused kids cought in the change. The secand was a total flop, but it was a number of years before it was given up.

DominiHJ You are correct I've had wide range of teachers. A few good teachers that where not caught up in some rigid teaching program can make all the difference. At the same time to many are just jerks, burned out, or have a mind set that there is only one correct way to teach.

I didn't say To kill a mocking bird was irrelevent or that woment in the civil war were either I mentioned that they should put more or equal emphasis on more important subjects. 1 section out of 10 on battles post Antetiam!!!!

If you think Civil War history is lame today you should have seen what it was like 40yrs ago.

how old are you?

50 plus

Oh why was it so bad?

All of it was sanatized. Good guy against bad. Dates, names, places with little in way of implication of the events. No shades of gray. All the drama of history lost. All from the white male point of history. Of course sometimes that is now carried to other extreme.

Being a 4th Grade teacher, I suppose I could add a bit to the discussion.

What a student is taught depends on a few factors. Curriculum is most times decided by people not directly in the classroom. Other people's priorities get in the way of what a particular class may need. So what a superior decides as important can get forced on a teacher. Past that, individual teachers may have particular interests that they feel should be taught. For instance, I might find it prudent to teach students the history and background of the Great War, whereas another teacher in the same grade might not share that enthusiasm and either quickly go through it (or skip it altogether). Also consider that not every student has similar motivating interests, learning styles, or educational goals. So it's tough to say that "all kids need to know X" when in reality it may not be necessary that every kid in the room knows X. IEP's (Individualized Education Plan) are a perfect example of this. I would argue that every student should have an IEP, regardless of learning ability. But that's another debate for another day.

All things being equal, the one thing that really grinds my gears about our educational system is the system itself. An old collegue put it best when he said, "our school system is trying to teach kids in the information age using industrial methods on an agrarian calander." Think about it. Summers off was the requirement of a time where the bulk of the student body was needed at their homes to FARM. The drop-off of learned material from the beginning to the end of summer is amazingly huge. I'm telling you that (at least at the elementary level) the entire 1st Quarter of every school year is 100% review. That wastes precious time to re-teach material that students have learned and then forgotten. Then, inadequate teachers (or those who just "phone it in") often fall back on teaching methods that they experienced when THEY were students, a process that can span generations. For example, learning the basic concept of multiplication is hard. When I was in school, I learned by memorizing facts with flash-cards assembly line style. When frustrated by newer methods, I feel the temptation to go back to what I did as a kid, despite knowing that that kind of learning is not the best practice. Never mind the fact that the information age we live in now focuses much more on how to find answers rather than immediate recall of answers.

*sigh* I apologize for the rant. Sometimes it's very tough to be a teacher.

I never thought it was. In this day and age more so than when I was a kid. Back than at least teachers did not have to watch their backs for fear of attacks from the kids, or laws suits from parents.

I have never thought that an elemantary school teacher could be anything more than anoying? no? that might me just my general fealing that because the textbook is right there you don't have to be of the highest intelligence to teach right? the hard part is teaching well and exciting t the same time...