Blog of the Week: The Educational System is near useless..

[Technodeath]

some schools offer business courses such as my public school, i did both the Small Business Management courses throughout year 11 and 12. i learnt quite a lot and do intend to open my own business at one point in my life

 

[El Nino]

K-12 public education in the U.S. is very spotty and inconsistent between schools. Some of my teachers flat out refused to help students or answer questions. They gave up on a lot of my classmates because they figured we were idiots who weren't going to college anyway. They expanded the range of what was considered a C, and they eliminated the D and F grades entirely. So they graduated a lot of people and figured they were doing us all a favor, since we were just too stupid to make it on a normal grading scale.

In a way, they were right. We were all beyond the point of reform by then. Too many years of similar treatment at similar institutions. But at least we could earn a decent living with the diploma they threw at us to get us out of their faces.

Of course, those trying for higher education were set up to fail. That's what happens when you enroll in community college and the courses there require you to know things you didn't learn in high school because the teacher gave you a passing grade in algebra even though you failed all the tests.

In comparison, other people I've met all seem to remember taking algebra in middle school. They were confused, when I told them this story, why algebra was being taught in high school.

Susa's OP could have been worded better, as he admitted. "Education" may still have value, but the "system" (at least from my corner of the U.S.) is broke as h*ll.

Edit:

Who uses Google to fill in the gaping holes in their education?

Me. Like, five minutes ago. And every single day when I have spare time.

 

[LordoftheMorning]

Thinking and reasoning critically.. I disagree with. I think a lot harder when a problem is presented to me that I do not know the answer to. I'll think about it for long periods of times, think of it in multiple ways. If unable to figure it out, I can find the answer. I then think about what I was doing wrong and why I hadn't reached that conclusion.

Most people lack the motivation, or even care to put that much work into it. Why? They were brought up with people spoon feeding them answers. <_<

Do you have any justification for that claim? You cannot simply assume that without being spoon-fed answers, people will gain motivation. That is a hypothesis contrary to fact, in other words, it's a fallacy because you have no way of knowing what you claim because it deviates from reality. Do you think that your average completely uneducated person would have the motivation to teach himself to reason without any encouragement or supervision? Do you think think that this person would even know where to begin? How is he supposed to know what reason is?

You know to consider a problem on multiple angles because you have been presented with seemingly unsolvable problems in the past that have been solved using a method you haven't considered before. These incidents are stored in your memory, telling you that when you are confronted with a complex problem, you must look for something, and it helps you figure out what it is that you must look for. Without a regimented time and place where you can practice this, this logical structure will never be constructed, resulting in the inability to "think" as it were.

Don't get me wrong. I'm a stickler for personal responsibility, but there has to be something or someone to plant that seed, and it can prove to be a difficult seed to plant, and one that can take time.

 

[Frown]

Knowing stuff without having to look it up seems very convenient to me.

 

[$BONE$]

I feel that the idea of education has been warped in such a way that, your background and immediate influence (of such things) ultimately plays its influence on you choose to look it. Education to me isn't a localized idea of how it is, moreover its a generalization of how things are. I like to look at it as, that; the apple may fall from the tree, but are you there to catch it? I'd like the believe that the person who catches the apple is the one who eats it, however the fact that the apple falls from the tree is just a simple fact. The person who eats the apple doesn't necessarily think about it either. Its how he realizes oh wow, the apple falls from the tree; now I can take advantage of this and eat a ****ing apple. The tree doesn't do anything, you can put it together yourself. You can only realize and your teach yourself ultimately. However, there are people out there who just eat the apple because they're hungry, don't think much about it (lethargy, much?). On a bigger scale, education itself has become commercialized (like everything) and is a tool to make money. Americans are too late to be ticked. It doesn't take 4 years in college to attain an education, it takes 4 years in college to attain credentials and that's it really in a nutshell. I'm highly in favor of places where people can come together for the sake of higher education, but that's not what our educational system is turning into. Its generally become a place where mediocre people, get mediocre degrees and live mediocre, safe lives. Its the same people who eat the apple because they're hungry, they don't care about WHY it falls. They just want to eat. This is the target audience: young (vulnerable) people. That's fine with me though, because I know those are the same people who go to McDonalds every day and have a heart attack there way, have to go to Starbucks to try the newest drink(so hooked!) and always have to get the newest it does everything gadget (otherwise girls wont **** you). This is what the system is catered to and unfortunately, you can search all you want on google. Learn everything you can, but it wont mean anything unless you make it mean something. Seldom do I post outside of my home thread, but this is a great topic. I'm an autodidact freak.

 

[Jin Kazama]

"I got my internet degree" doesn't work as well when applying for a job than say "I got my doctor's degree at fancy school #1".

Indeed, school is a ******* after 9th grade. They just teach you stuff that you never need in an average life. But you're best of doing it, because if you DO need money (for some STRANGE reason) you'd best find a job that pays you enough to get by. Which usually requires some educational degree.

Stay in school, kids.

 

[Melomaniacal]

Most people lack the motivation, or even care to put that much work into it. Why? They were brought up with people spoon feeding them answers. <_<

I lol'd.
I don't know what school you go to, but I wish I was spoon fed answers. Maybe then I would have a better grade in calculus.

That's all I'll say since my last posts were ignored anyway.

 

[mzink*]

One of the schools I went to actually experimented with different types of teaching. One of the types was strictly computer based. Never a teacher in the room except to make sure everybody showed up in the morning. Every lesson was online for us to read, and then practice or study and then test on. We could complete the lessons at our own pace. It was usually to teach how to do a certain task, or solve a certain problem.

The average trend was that a good majority of the class's comprehension would go up, but at the same time for some of the class it ended up going down drastically. I guess it is different for everyone, some people NEED that interaction in order to learn. When the teachers talked to us about it, the students that struggled said that it was a lot harder for them to learn how to execute something just by reading off of a computer and they were pretty distressed by it. They were kids that worked hard, not lazy or anything. Usually the ones that got really good grades WITH a teacher in the room, so they were a bit panicked when they weren't achieving the same thing I guess.

So I guess I'm just sayin, when it comes to whether or not you need that human interaction to learn, everybody is probably different. Everybody's learning abilities and strategies are different.

 

[Teran]

It's because there's too much bureaucracy and crappy discipline.

Schools can get sued for pretty much anything, probably even giving a child a stern look. Kids do pretty much what the **** they want in class, there's no respect for teachers.

I should know, I'm fresh out of school and we didn't care about teachers at all. They couldn't really enforce discipline properly because of all the red tape around everything. Schools are generally far more lenient now that children apparently deserve more rights. The only teachers we'd learn from were the ones that natually commanded respect, or the ones that didn't care much for being harsh in discipline.

Bottomline is, the education system sucks because it's all cushioned and easy, as well as not challenging kids' brains. Give 'em discipline, make the curriculum challenging, and make sure they do all the work.

There's your solution, it really isn't very difficult. If they are intellectually incapable after a certain point, that's what apprenticeships and other equally important qualifications are for. Society needs bricklayers and stuff too, after all.

 

[Melomaniacal]

I must go to some weird-*** school, because it's so drastically different then what everyone here is describing.

I may have had one teacher who was incapable of controlling the class, and even then we got the work done with no real issues. Pretty much everyone gives the teachers the respect they deserve. Yeah, our teachers aren't beating kids for punishment, but our discipline program seems to be working fine. I've never even heard of a lawsuit over any of that.

As for school not being challenging, I don't know anyone who isn't at least a little challenged by our AP program. The very few (I'm talking under 5 that I can think of) who weren't challenged by it, were bused to colleges courses. If we can't find you a challenge, then someone needs to give you a ****ing PhD.

 

[Teran]

Punishments are generally softer these days. Kids get away with not doing homework, don't get detained for ****ing around all the time etc.

Children are treated like they have the emotional and physical frailty of glass.

 

[Frown]

The parents will be mad and sue the teachers for whatever.

 

[Melomaniacal]

Punishments are generally softer these days. Kids get away with not doing homework, don't get detained for ****ing around all the time etc.

Children are treated like they have the emotional and physical frailty of glass.

Softer then what days? When they used to beat kids? I would hope so, that is wrong on so many levels.

Not doing homework means you get a bad grade. You get a bad enough grade, you either go to summer school or you get held back a year. Or, if you don't get a bad grade, you obviously were doing something right and you deserve to move on. Sounds fine to me. As for kids who don't stop ****ing around, they don't really exist here, because they never leave in school suspension/detention.

I seriously must go to a really abnormal school.

 

[thegreatkazoo]

Punishments are generally softer these days. Kids get away with not doing homework, don't get detained for ****ing around all the time etc.

Children are treated like they have the emotional and physical frailty of glass.

Wow, it seems that you & I have more in common than I originally thought!

Being from one of the least educated states (and probably counties) in the States, I can relate to this first hand.

 

[¯\_S.(ツ).L.I.D._/¯]

Softer then what days? When they used to beat kids? I would hope so, that is wrong on so many levels.

Why is that? How is it drastically different from parents who hit their kids?

Corporal punishment keeps kids in line. Detentions and other **** like that can only do so much.

 

[Melomaniacal]

Why is that? How is it drastically different from parents who hit their kids?

Corporal punishment keeps kids in line. Detentions and other **** like that can only do so much.

When did I say it's okay for parents to hit their kids?
I think it's wrong to try to teach anyone anything by beating them. All that does is teach our children that violence solves all our problems.

 

[GreenKirby]

Softer then what days? When they used to beat kids? I would hope so, that is wrong on so many levels.

LOL @ you thinking that a spanking across the fanny is somehow a beating.

 

[Melomaniacal]

LOL @ you thinking that a spanking across the fanny is somehow a beating.

LOL @ you not getting what I'm saying.

Clearly I'm exaggerating.

I'm really surprised at how many people are defending this.
You know what? I should just go to you, and beat you with a belt until you understand. That'll teach you.

 

[Teran]

Softer then what days? When they used to beat kids? I would hope so, that is wrong on so many levels.

No, I mean you know, actually punishing them and using those detention slips they have in their drawers.

Detention is an amazing punishment, there's nothing worse than wasting a teenager's time. Well actually, if you're a good teacher you shouldn't need detentions, but of course, some kids might overstep and then whazzam.

Also, there are other novel punishments such as making the kids scrape all the gaps between the paving stones in the school's courtyard with toothbrushes.

Then there's doing the teacher's photocopying for his next week of classes.

You get the idea, actually punishing kids, and showing them that school isn't just a place to mess around.

 

[¯\_S.(ツ).L.I.D._/¯]

When did I say it's okay for parents to hit their kids?
I think it's wrong to try to teach anyone anything by beating them. All that does is teach our children that violence solves all our problems.

I didn't say you did, I was just saying that parents hit their kids all the time, and it really isn't much different.

Hitting kids in moderation will keep them in line. I'm not saying something like out of ****ing Good Will Hunting when he's talking to the one therapist/professor guy.

 

[Melomaniacal]

No, I mean you know, actually punishing them and using those detention slips they have in their drawers.

Detention is an amazing punishment, there's nothing worse than wasting a teenager's time. Well actually, if you're a good teacher you shouldn't need detentions, but of course, some kids might overstep and then whazzam.

Also, there are other novel punishments such as making the kids scrape all the gaps between the paving stones in the school's courtyard with toothbrushes.

Then there's doing the teacher's photocopying for his next week of classes.

You get the idea, actually punishing kids, and showing them that school isn't just a place to mess around.

Well then, like I said, I must go to some weird-*** school, because those slips are handed out like hotcakes (exaggeration, but kids don't get away with dumb **** here). Hell, I will get a detention for being late to class (depending on the teacher, that can be by a matter of seconds) twice.

I guess I'm wrong for assuming other schools were similar.

 

[thegreatkazoo]

LOL @ you not getting what I'm saying.

Clearly I'm exaggerating.

I'm really surprised at how many people are defending this.
You know what? I should just go to you, and beat you with a belt until you understand. That'll teach you.

I have been beat with a belt. Get @ me.

In all seriousness: The concept of a kid getting hit with a stick or a belt is a pretty good one. I can personally say that by getting hit, it quickly let me learn what is or isn't the right thing to do.

 

[Melomaniacal]

I have been beat with a belt. Get @ me.

In all seriousness: The concept of a kid getting hit with a stick or a belt is a pretty good one. I can personally say that by getting hit, it quickly let me learn what is or isn't the right thing to do.

I just think there are better ways to go about teaching children without having to use violence. Like I said, that will just bring everyone to believe that violence is the best way to go about teaching lessons. I think that's wrong.

 

[mountain_tiger]

The way they portray the British education system really annoys me. See, everytime the GCSE/A Level results are published, they always go up each year and people say 'Lolol those exams are so easy. A ******** monkey could pass them'. I really hate it when that happens. See, I'm currently doing A Levels myself, and I find parts of them quite hard, and it makes me feel like I'm an idiot since everyone is saying that they're so simple. Maybe they have gotten easier in the past few years, I don't know. But you can't pass them without any effort unless you're very clever. And top universities like Oxford are demanding 10 A*s at GCSE and will probably start demanding 2 A*s and an A at A Level; getting grades like that is not easy at all...

 

[¯\_S.(ツ).L.I.D._/¯]

I remember there was a thread in the PG when I was a tempy that was about parents beating kids and it didn't really get anywhere. I feel that that's what this is going to turn into.

 

[Melomaniacal]

I remember there was a thread in the PG when I was a tempy that was about parents beating kids and it didn't really get anywhere. I feel that that's what this is going to turn into.

I was actually just thinking "this argument is going to go nowhere."

I think both sides have good arguments. I agree that a spanking is effective, I just think it's the wrong kind of effective. I think there are better ways to teach things.
So really, this argument won't go anywhere. I understand the other side of it, I would hope you understand my side. So let's just agree to disagree?

 

[¯\_S.(ツ).L.I.D._/¯]

Yeah, this is going absolutely nowhere. I see what you're saying, though.

 

[Teran]

I just think there are better ways to go about teaching children without having to use violence. Like I said, that will just bring everyone to believe that violence is the best way to go about teaching lessons. I think that's wrong.

A smack isn't really brutal violence.
Still, I do agree that teachers shouldn't be allowed to smack kids, that should only be done by parents, because usually a kid will know their parent still loves them, but that they've just stepped out of line.

 

[Melomaniacal]

A smack isn't really brutal violence.
Still, I do agree that teachers shouldn't be allowed to smack kids, that should only be done by parents, because usually a kid will know their parent still loves them, but that they've just stepped out of line.

No, it's not brutal violence. It just acts as conditioning. If I'm constantly hit every time I do something wrong, I'm eventually going to believe that's the best way (or only way, in more extreme cases) to teach.

 

[Teran]

Well, usually you get hit when you do something extremely wrong.

By scaling your punishments, you have a better way of teaching a child the degree to which they've done something wrong.

Good thing my mum's studied child psychology. XD

 

[Melomaniacal]

Well, usually you get hit when you do something extremely wrong.

By scaling your punishments, you have a better way of teaching a child the degree to which they've done something wrong.

Good thing my mum's studied child psychology. XD

I'm just going to go back on what I said before and say... let's just agree to disagree.
This will go nowhere.

 

[Teran]

Nobody ever agrees with me, it's okay.

 

[thegreatkazoo]

I agree with you this time, Teran.

Don't be so hard on yourself!

 

[Melomaniacal]

Nobody ever agrees with me, it's okay.

Similarly, I have a problem with letting people agree with me (in a way). Which is something I was actually going to write a blog about.

 

[Firus]

Nobody ever agrees with me, it's okay.

Actually, I tend to agree with you about 90% of the time.

Spoiler

Heh, I just realized how ironic it is that I'm disagreeing with you that nobody ever agrees with you by saying that I actually agree with you a lot.

 

[Sucumbio]

Link to original post: [drupal=2577]The Educational System is near useless..[/drupal]

For anyone who knows me, they'd expect this to be about something else. But guess what? It's not about that.

I've come to the realization that the internet, for the most part, completely eliminates the need for most of the educational system.

I ask, what is the difference between having 50 states memorized - and being able to find a list of all 50 states and read it aloud?

Why is it important I know what something is from memory, that I will most likely never need to know in my life - if I can just Google it and find the answer? The education system was created the way it is, far before any amount of information could literally be at your fingertips. So is it thus, that it is outdated? We have the internet on cell phones, laptops, and computers. You can search for anything you'd need to know, and with the simple skill of being able to research a little (mostly to tell fact from fiction) you could find your answer.

Why is it we must memorize the information, when we can have it stored and being able to be called at any time that we would need it?

Public School is set up in a specific way, and to teach 2 valuable things.
1.) How to be a proper contributing member of society.
2.) How to behave in a social environment.

K-6 is a given. It's your ABCs your 123's all the basic knowledge you'll ever -really- need to get a job, keep that job, and not act psycho when in public. You learn enough about the basics of knowledge (history, geopraphy, maths, literature, grammar) so if ever confronted by someone or something that demands a piece of that knowledge, you aren't having to tell them, "yeah! I know that, just let me LOG ON first." >< That's just outright gay. The internet isn't meant to replace learning, or even fundamental memorization. It's there as a quick version of this other thing that everyone used before it, the library!

SO yeah, after 7th grade, you do start getting into advanced things. Algebra. Geometry. World Civ. US Gov. Writers of the 1800s british and american. Bio, chem, physics...

Now all these "subjects" are released bit at a time, year after year, in an effort to... stoke the flame of interest within a percentage of the public school kids, so they will in turn seek out a career in one of these areas of expertise, by means of "higher" education, or college.

The public school structure is actually heavily entwined with the very Private "higher education" structure, which is ironic. But, as they say, if you at least graduate high school, you can look forward to a decent life, either by working, or continuing your... memorizations.

Now someone in your shoes was rare only 20 years ago, but now with the internet, very common. The ? "what's the point of going to school" is hard enough to answer without there really being a viable alternative, the internet.

So for those out there that think the Internet is interchangeable with middle school/high school I have only this to say. Good luck with that.

Why? You'll need it! Not everyone's THAT smart, only smart enough to realize that school may not be necessary. Only the truly brilliant can afford to not train their brain day in and day with seemingly useless tasks and memorizations.

Not to mention the internet is never 100% accurate, and often times far less accurate than what you will find in a classroom. Only specialized classes will fall under 'well it may be more accurate to go on wikipedia for this, cause this teacher has NO CLUE!' ...

Stay in school, everyone. It's your young way of doing your part to keep America the way it is. Quit school and use the internet from now on for all your knowledge building/seeking, and you'll be at the mercy of a far greater evil than the American Public School System (of which I am soon to be a member ), that is... the Internet.

Oh yeah and there's one other obvious non-educational reason for staying in school. Where else you gonna go? The Public School system is also designed to be a GIANT DAY CARE for America's youth. While you're in your day cares, why not be learning something too. Just keep in mind the more you try, the better it works out for you in the long run, and if you're really so smart you know all that stuff already, or are so privileged you can access the internet whenever and wherever you like, then please do make your try at the game of Life, but you'll regret not having the HS Diploma, cause it looks just too darn good on a resume for it to not be there.

 

[Oracle]

The internet can't replace schooling because there is a world outside of the internet. There are activities like being social where you can't have the internet with you.

In addition, school measures aptitude for a success, which is why grades are so important to finding jobs. It also trains you to memorize things, so when you have a job that actually requires that, you'll be used to it.

 

[SuSa]

I love the connection between school and social life that people make.

My only "social" aspect I get in school is... singing in choir?

I sit by myself in the morning, outside my class. I go into class - I read my book for 2 hours, don't even bother listening to the teacher.
I go to snack, I buy my food. I go to my next class, eat, and read for 2 more hours.
I go to lunch, buy my food, go to my next class. Eat. Might take a break from reading and just put my head down on a desk and sleep for 2 hours.
I then walk home.

School is only related to socializing because "it forces you to be around other people". Do you actually have to deal with them? Not really. At most, you only need to deal with your teachers. So long as you're passing your class, even that is minimal.



Yes, because the internet is a greater evil then the APSS.

Now someone in your shoes was rare only 20 years ago, but now with the internet, very common. The ? "what's the point of going to school" is hard enough to answer without there really being a viable alternative, the internet.

My point is, ever think the way they did it 20 years ago has become outdated?

We outdate our own technologies every 2 to 3 years. If you go into a technology related class for 4 years, by the time you are in your 3rd year, your first year is outdated. By the time you are in your last year, your 2nd year was outdated.

The internet isn't meant to replace learning, or even fundamental memorization. It's there as a quick version of this other thing that everyone used before it, the library!

And what do many people, including myself, go to the library for?

To learn on our own! To use our own time, and our own focus - to learn.

(The rest go for the enjoyment of reading a book, or often times the public access to the internet at a library. Which is becoming more and more common.)

 

[Wavedash Master]

And what do many people, including myself, go to the library for?

To learn on our own! To use our own time, and our own focus - to learn.

(The rest go for the enjoyment of reading a book, or often times the public access to the internet at a library. Which is becoming more and more common.)

For some people, it's hard to directly teach ourselves. These type of people might need teachers in order to teach themselves. Frankly, some people just can't teach themselves by just sitting down and reading a book. Basically, this choice may seem a little outdated to you, but going to school might be a method people might prefer.

 

[Melomaniacal]

Maybe I'll get a response this time.

I love the connection between school and social life that people make.

My only "social" aspect I get in school is... singing in choir?

I sit by myself in the morning, outside my class. I go into class - I read my book for 2 hours, don't even bother listening to the teacher.
I go to snack, I buy my food. I go to my next class, eat, and read for 2 more hours.
I go to lunch, buy my food, go to my next class. Eat. Might take a break from reading and just put my head down on a desk and sleep for 2 hours.
I then walk home.

School is only related to socializing because "it forces you to be around other people". Do you actually have to deal with them? Not really. At most, you only need to deal with your teachers. So long as you're passing your class, even that is minimal.

Well of course it's hard to have the social aspect when you are anti-social. By this logic, a party isn't social because I can go to one and sit in a corner and read. In fact, nothing is social. I can just read books and never interact with anyone, ever. Life is not social. There is no such thing as social.

BTW - your school has snack time? SUPER JEALOUS! (Not sarcasm. I'm starving by lunch)

And what do many people, including myself, go to the library for?

To learn on our own! To use our own time, and our own focus - to learn.

(The rest go for the enjoyment of reading a book, or often times the public access to the internet at a library. Which is becoming more and more common.)

Okay, I have a question.

Suppose you are really interested in physics. You want to grow up and go somewhere in the field of physics. That is your passion. You want to learn more about physics. Let's suppose you had three options: the internet, a library, or a man who knows everything about physics (you can ask this man any question about anything relative to physics, and he can give you an answer. Or you can just have him teach you everything he knows). How do you chose to learn? Do you chose to go off on the internet and teach yourself, find a bunch of physics books, or interact and learn from a professional?