Education Reform in America

[Okuser]

Education reform in America has always been a contentious topic, but what do our kids really need?

Contemporary issues include: class sizes, length of the school day, the content of curriculum's, etc. But what about change on a fundamental level?

The public school system as we know it, is the result of an era in which children had to assist parents on the farm in the summer harvesting crops, creating the original summer vacation. The 8-9 hour school day was originally designed for working parents who needed a safe environment to keep their kids in while they worked their jobs.

What would a public school system designed specifically for modern America look like? And what kind of reforms does the current educational system need?

 

[Holder of the Heel]

By far the most important thing to me is the content of curriculum. We seem to desire "well rounded" individuals by enforcing everyone to take mathematics, the sciences, and etc. throughout their schooling, from start through even college, which in every case I have seen (for what that is worth, not a blanket declaration) it has an opposite and/or counter-productive affect. Since people are spending a lot of valuable time taking classes they despise and won't use in life, either not learning anything or dropping it out of their minds the instant the class is over even if next college semester/school year it is needed. I understand learning the basics, and introducing people to all of the fields out there, I mean, hell a lot of people really enjoy mathematics or the sciences and etc. (I give those two as examples because those personally apply to me in this instance), but the great majority of people wish they could move on from it after learning anatomy or geometric knowledge (some don't make it that far, but I do think the two things mentioned should be mandatory) due to us realizing how little it will impact our lives, and in actuality, eat up time that could be spent exploring more options or focusing on present interests. It's damaging the overall knowledge of a human rather than increasing it like the original point, again, as far as I can see, and I myself feel cheated that most of my schooling was so wasteful and that college seems bothersome because to learn about philosophy or other interesting things is now a loaded task because of the knowledge that at some point I will need to waste semesters pouring more hours into a time sink, all for naught. What I would give to be able to convert all that time towards things that are more to my liking and benefit!

Anyways, that is the first thought that comes to mind, briefly put out there. I will possibly come back here in the near future.

 

[Blu]

Educationalists in the U.S., at this point in time, are missing the point when it comes to teaching youth. It's undeniable that exposure to all the different fields of education shows children where their skills lie and which subjects they may enjoy, but this isn't the issue I wish to address.

That which should be discussed is how we should be teaching students, regardless of subject. People's brains work differently, and the brain of a child is by no means an exception. (By now it's pretty obvious I'm putting my focus on elementary, middle, and high school students. These are the ages in which children are going through their most dynamic changes both physically and mentally. The "how" does not apply nearly as much on the college level, since this is where young adults have a better understanding of the dos and don'ts in their own ability to process information and also have the independence to adhere to their own learning practices.)

There seems to be a trend in getting kids more "involved" in today's schools. But the fault here is that this idea of engaging students is biased towards extroverted individuals. Don't get me wrong, a lot of this is exactly what certain students need to stay focused, but what about those who become more mentally stimulated through silence, for example? Trying to clump everyone together in an environment where only a portion remain comfortable, all while forcing students to participate in specific activities which support high levels of social interaction, is only appealing to half the crowd.

To keep all students in a realm of comfort in which their brains can function at their peak, all classroom atmospheres should be used. While social interaction with classroom discussions and social projects are great assets to teaching, they shouldn't be the only options just because they're they only form of teaching that can be taken at face-value. At this point, with cliques, group activities, sports, and several other forms of social integration, kids are being brainwashed into thinking that the only way they can prove themselves among their piers is if they go against their nature by trying to be extroverted. And who can blame them? It's all they ever know.

=

Appealing the both extroverts and introverts is something that today's educational system lacks. Being an introvert myself, I struggled to fit into the extroverted mindset upheld within the walls of my school. It wasn't until much later, after I had developed social skills with that which was once internal intuition, that I realized this wasn't who I was by nature. I could have saved a lot of time and increased my productivity if I simply understood what my strengths were, instead of having them squashed by my teachers and piers.

I'll comment again when I have some worth-while ideas on how to approach this issue. But until then, who understands where I'm coming from? Is there any flawed reasoning in what I've said?

 

[yani]

A modern American school? More teachers, smaller class sizes, and loads of hands on / computer work.

 

[Dre89]

I'm an introvert myself and I know society favours extroverts, but I don't really understand how the school system does. I just remember random people and my family telling me I'm a loser and that I need to go out on Saturday nights.

I guess there's the forced group work in the earlier years and the emphasis on presentations and public speaking (though shyness is different from introversion) but I must be missing the other aspects of the favouritism.

 

[Aesir]

I don't see how it does either, maybe the environment favors extroverts but that's not really a fault of the school.

 

[GwJ]

That's the fault of society. Extroverts are naturally favoured (at least, they appear to be favoured) in society.

 

[Ussi]

I find being extrovert unessessary. I am introvert, and while i did mainly keep to myself, i did know how to converse with others and had heavy participation in class, and thats it. The real problem with school is that some kids see it as a social center than an education learning experience. They focus more on their social lives than their education, end up getting others to thin like them. In their mind, pleasing others is satisfication that when they start doing part time jobs that they desperately want to do so they have experience, they never say no to working extra without thinking as they want to please their boss as a "good" worker.

 

[GwJ]

A mistake a lot of people make about school is that it's NOT supposed to be a social center. Yeah, you learn in school, but it's supposed to build your social skills at the same time.

 

[Pachinkosam]

I just miss TAKS test now they have this STARR in this test is being timed about 4 hours.As my curios ways approach me in alot of ways its not fair that obama made that pass no play law.

Back in 2008 george w. bush made that no child left behind i was so happy that i can fail my test and they still pass me.But my point in this statement that STARR is not gonna cut it.

Some teachers say it will help the school grades but its just a big lies i hear around my ears.
And kids in later generations are gonna fail STARR for its 4 hour testing.

 

[Holder of the Heel]

Kids will always think school is a thorn in their side and gets in the way of their socialization if the education is such a joke. They must necessarily view it as a social center, it is ironically the biggest benefit of the establishment: social growth.

 

[Jam Stunna]

I was looking at the results of the CAPT from 2011, my state's standardized high school test, and I compared my old town's results to a town that borders it. Here's what it looks like.

Bloomfield (my former home town)
% of students who reached goal in reading: 9.8%
% of students who reached goal in writing: 37.3%
% of students who reached goal in science: 15.6%
% of students who reached goal in math: 13.1%

Simsbury
% of students who reached goal in reading: 80.7 %
% of students who reached goal in writing: 93.7%
% of students who reached goal in science: 78.6%
% of students who reached goal in math: 83.2%

For comparison's sake, here's the average for the entire state.

Connecticut
% of students who reached goal in reading: 44.8%
% of students who reached goal in writing: 61.3%
% of students who reached goal in science: 47.2%
% of students who reached goal in math: 49.6%

What could possibly account for the outrageous difference between Simsbury and Bloomfield, two towns which border each other (both towns located on the left side of the map)?

[COLLAPSE="Bloomfield/Simsbury Map"]

[/COLLAPSE]

Well, let's take a look at the demographics for Bloomfield and Simsbury (all info comes from the 2000 census).

Bloomfield
Total Population: 19,587
% Black: 54.06%
% White: 40%
% Hispanic: 3.67%
Median Household Income: $53,812
Median Family Income: $64,892
Per Capita Income: $28,843
% of familes below poverty line: 5.1%
% of population below poverty line: 7.6%

Simsbury
Total Population: 23,234
% Black: 1.17%
% White: 95.3%
% Hispanic: 1.54%
Median Household Income: $82,996
Median Family Income: $97,008
Per Capita Income: $39,710
% of familes below poverty line: 1.0%
% of population below poverty line: 2.2%

Once again, for comparison's sake, here's the demography of Connecticut overall.

Connecticut
Total Population: 3,405,565
% Black: 9.1%
% White: 81.6%%
% Hispanic: 9.4%
Median Household Income: $53,935
Median Family Income: $65,521
Per Capita Income: $28,766
% of familes below poverty line: 5.6%
% of population below poverty line: 7.9%

What immediately stands out is the demographic differences between the two towns. Despite sharing a border, Simsbury is way whiter and way richer than Bloomfield. Lengthening school days, giving different tests or hiring more teachers will have zero impact on those facts, and I believe they account for the awful state of schools in some places more than any other factor.

 

[Pachinkosam]

Kids will always think school is a thorn in their side and gets in the way of their socialization if the education is such a joke. They must necessarily view it as a social center, it is ironically the biggest benefit of the establishment: social growth.

But i think school is just a waste of life as i speak. I just want my high school diploma and maybe just maybe ill go to college and get my degree.

 

[Aesir]

I'm willing to bet that correlation has something to do with kids in Simsbury living in a much better environment.

It really shouldn't be a surprise to anyone how much income can effect a community.

 

[Sucumbio]

@Jam very telling demographics but what is the root cause of the low test results do you think?

 

[Jam Stunna]

Primarily economic disadvantages that manifest as less preparation for school at younger ages, and throughout childhood.

 

[Sucumbio]

I see...

So really in the case of this town, educational reform is actually going to start as economic reform.

 

[Jam Stunna]

I would argue that's the case everywhere.

 

[Sucumbio]

I agree... the question now becomes is there a way to revamp education in poor communities while the longer-term issue of the economy is tended to. It could take a community years to flourish, if it indeed ever will... there are poor communities all over that have always been poor, and will always be poor. In these cases, how do we change the education in such a way as to make it so "standard" approaches (which obviously don't work) still meet the necessary requirements.

I will be the first to admit that about half of what I learned in high school is gone. Just straight up gone from my head. It'd come back if I were to peruse my kid's textbook, but for all intents and purposes, it's useless information that only benefited me back then to get me a diploma and entrance into college. In the job world, I need basic math and reading skills; the ability to follow through and meet deadlines; the ability to organize tasks and complete them; etc. What I don't need, is to know what y=mx+b means (I think that's how it went, lol!).

Also the communities themselves differ greatly.

A poor community isn't even poor in some respects! What's a 10 year old doing with an iPhone? If they're so poor they can't master the basics of algebra to pass a state test, but they can master social media, what's that saying? Is it just that today's toys are flashier, but still toys? I can't understand Shakespeare but I can play super smash brothers?

It seems this whole mess is just one large catch-22. The economy can't be boosted enough, the poor can't be bothered anyway, and the education system can't be changed enough to bridge the gap of differences in community lifestyles.