Thinking about education and the school system.

[Rawr]

So my friend and I are in college and for one of our homework assignments we had to talk with someone about out strengths and weaknesses in school.
Well the person that I talked to was very strong in english, just born that way. Never had to pick up a book and study, she knows grammer and can pick out a right sentence from a wrong sentence in seconds. I on the other hand suck at english. I can not spell, my grammer and vocabulary compare to a third grader. Where the person I talked to was very weak in math, I am not strong in the subject but I get good grades and understand most.

It just got me really thinking about education on the school systems and I figured I would post on here and get some more thoughts maybe help form an idea that I can work farther with.
Please feel free to completely disagree with me but do it nicely.


So if it is true that some people are just born with their level of intelligence...those people who go through school never having to pick up a book just seeming to already know the subject even though it was never taught, and there are the people like me with english who can have 5 or 6 toutors get online help study, read and just can't seem to grasp it. Why is that. Can education be learned or is it cut off at a certain age?
Why is it that people's intelligence levels differ so much? Is it something the person did themselves or is intelligence something that we cannot control at all, and if we can not control it why are we continuously graded on it.

My thoughts...We can not control our intelligence but we can improve it. I think the school system needs to be worked differently to help those students who are not just born with the knowlege.
I had this idea, I tried it out on my little brother and it worked. My little brother is in second grade and he was writing a paper he asked me to read it before he handed it in. It was a second grade paper thats for sure. He did not have an intro at all. I told him it's a really good paper, my favorite part was the intro. Well the next paper he wrote there was a really good intro in it. I think starting from a young age instead of telling us we are wrong which normally just upsets young children and adults teachers need to find anouther way to bring attention to the problem.
Say there is a math problem 4+X=8 and a student puts in 5 in for X instead of a teacher putting a zero or and X on it, using the red pen. Maybe a teacher could hand the paper back and say if X = 5 what would the answer be. replace the students answer with anouther question. they would then be more likely to go back and figure out what they did wrong then if they got a paper back that had a big red X.


Well I know my ideas are very spread out with no organiszation...I'm just kind of ranting here, want to know what you guys think...see if maybe I should explore this a little bit more and maybe start a study or something.
I look forward to hearing your thoughts!

 

[Spikesangel11]

My English abilities tend to fluctuate... I'm very creative, and love writing fanfics and stories and poetry, but when it comes to actually using words (putting together sentences to explain what I'm trying to say), I'm pretty iffy. It all depends on how confident I'm feeling at the time, I think... it's all in my mindset. If I've been given encouragement or praise from others, I get the whole ego-trip thing which helps me to have more faith in myself and therefore my writing turns out better. It also depends on whether I've "warmed up" my mind by reading, etc, because doing so enables me to think more clearly. The thing with me is that I very often put myself down because of failures in the past, which is stupid because the past is past and now is now. I persevered though and managed to prove all my teachers wrong by getting two A*s in English at GCSE. I think it gave me an inner-confidence that I believe one requires to do anything of significance in life... whether it be learning to drive, writing an essay, riding a bike, speaking in public, etc.

Therefore, in answer to your question - I think it's very possible to improve certain areas of yourself with dedication and confidence. If you're confident in yourself, you can do anything you want... within reason, obviously (Bright Eyes quote: "If I can make myself believe, the rest is easy"). I do believe though that some are born better at certain things than others. I'm very good with numbers, so my areas of preference regarding education are maths, physics and psychology... only because I've always found mathematics the easiest to understand. I have a far better grasp of numbers than I do words, but I still adore English because I enjoy it. I actually really don't like maths and find it boring, but I do it and try to excel in it because I find it easy. I'd far rather be writing an essay than solving math problems, believe me. I feel that if I concentrated on reading and writing more than I did on equations, I'd become better at reading, but I'd still be naturally better at maths.

So, of course we can make ourselves better in different areas by working hard. I hate History with a passion, for example, because of the need to memorize all the different dates and events and figures... I have a terrible memory. Others are different and find it easy to take brain-pics and keep the information they learn stored in their minds, but I prefer to work with logic, which is where maths comes in. Everyone's different, everyone has different preferences when it comes to learning and trying to expand their knowledge. Look at it this way... there are always those children who delight in pulling the wings off bugs, and others who just don't. I believe that much of our personality and behavioral traits are innate, and that we can't change who we are, but we can improve ourselves and shape our abilities to how we want to be... with hard work.

 

[Professor Walsh]

I had this idea, I tried it out on my little brother and it worked. My little brother is in second grade and he was writing a paper he asked me to read it before he handed it in. It was a second grade paper thats for sure. He did not have an intro at all. I told him it's a really good paper, my favorite part was the intro. Well the next paper he wrote there was a really good intro in it. I think starting from a young age instead of telling us we are wrong which normally just upsets young children and adults teachers need to find anouther way to bring attention to the problem.
Say there is a math problem 4+X=8 and a student puts in 5 in for X instead of a teacher putting a zero or and X on it, using the red pen. Maybe a teacher could hand the paper back and say if X = 5 what would the answer be. replace the students answer with anouther question. they would then be more likely to go back and figure out what they did wrong then if they got a paper back that had a big red X.

Well, you've grasped the core of a lot of modern theories about teaching. Would you like to teach? As a career, I mean, not just helping your brother out. :sheep:

 

[Crashing Doors]

Hm, well I'll just kind of randomly add my two cents.

The school system, at least from the few schools I know first-hand, desperately need improvement. Teachers aren't even necessarily the problem, although plenty of rotten ones find their way into the profession; the programs just don't seem to cut it for a lot of kids. In the 2 high schools I attended, the only improvements I saw were in new facilities and new editions of the same books. Now, new facilities aren't bad, but they don't do much in educating kids (well in the case of my schools, the old buildings weren't bad enough to negatively effect performance); that money could be better spent in either finding new teachers or better training the poor teachers. Too many experimental programs are instituted that kids don't understand; what's worse is that the parents, who the kids look to for help, have no idea how to approach the new kind of teaching. My parents couldn't help my sister with her 5th grade math last year. I mean... and my dad uses "junior high" level math, as well as educated math, every day for work. Honestly, the way they're teaching some subjects, in new age-y ways, needs to just, just go away. If I can't understand a question on a 5th graders geography assignment, when I'm a geography minor... Come on.

Personally, I've always performed very well in school. Now, I'm a modest guy and I feel like an ass saying this, but I really never had to work very hard in middle school or high school. I never studied much, and I still don't study as much as most people--I can memorize things fast (whether or not I remember it for long depends on how interested I am in the subject), I'm a good writer when I care to be; that stuff is just natural--and so on. I don't understand computers, cars, or any of that "hands on" kind of thing though. My older brother on the hand is really good in math, computers, cars, electronics, but he can't write worth a damn. I think I remember him actually commissioning me to write some of his papers in high school. I don't know how to explain it though. Some of my friends who didn't do well in school were told that they just didn't apply themselves, but honestly they probably studied a lot more than I ever did. When you get it, you get it, and studying doesn't always help; at least not when the teachers present it poorly and are reluctant to help students approach it at a different angle (most of my high school teachers were like that--if you didn't get it, to bad, find help with another student).

So, I don't know. I think it's a mix of a lot of different factors. When I'm in class, I pay attention, take notes, re-read my notes at least once, and study in little 30 minute intervals about a week before the test (as opposed to cramming my studying into 4 hours before the exam). As far as writing, I really don't 'know' grammar (ie: I don't know the rules in terms of memorizing them from a book; I can just kind of tell if what I write looks write and if it doesn't, I tweak it until it looks right), and I'm always nervous when I turn in a paper because I feel like it's poorly written. But my GPA only consisted of English courses, I'd have a 4.0 (I think I'm around 3.78 otherwise).

There's really no perfect way because everyone's different. I could probably get on without physically going to class and just figuring it out from the book, but other people work better if they can get involved in group discussions, or see the teacher give examples in class.

If people would just be more the same, we'd have so fewer problems.

 

[Tueuse de Vampires]

I'm not sure if this completely fits the question, but I found something in a paper I thought was interesting, and it seems at least a bit relevant.

The article was comparing the German school system with the American one. The basic difference is that German secondary school is split up in 3 branches, while in America you have one secondary school type for everyone. Here's a passage from the article:

One main difference in the compared educational systems, and maybe a reason for the under-average German ranking is the structure of German secondary education. The PISA study has shown that Germany is the country with the biggest difference of ability between the lowest form of education (Hauptschule) and the highest level (Gymnasium). The study has also shown that "students attending Hauptschule only reached 394 points in reading literacy, students of Realschule were able to gain 494 points, students attending the gymnasium attained 582 points."(Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) The OECD average was 500 points, which shows that Germany has many students who don′t have any problems keeping international standards and are able to compete with the superlative students of every country. But the study also shows that Germany has many students who are just way behind in performance. In the US the performance spread was by far less differentiated, which might be related to the fact that all students regardless of talent go to the same secondary form of education for 12 years. Also interesting is, that German comprehensive schools /Gesamtschulen) ,which basically follow the American system of high school education (kids of different abilities all go to the same school-type for 12 years) achieved an overall score of 494 points, which is only six points under the OECD average of 500, and 10 points under the score of the American students (504). Maybe German officials should start thinking about developing a more egalitarian school-system where all students go to the same school-type for 12 years. This would also help to get rid of a caste system that divides students according to performance in Germany. This could also help to provide more equal opportunities to all students. Although German education follows the general principle of equality, children at a young age are intensely influenced by their parents in choosing the form of secondary education, which is not always an advantage...

source

Now, I do get the author's point about equality, but is that really desirable? Of course, if you're from a lower school form, I guess it is. Like it says in the text, those students have large deficits! But, speaking as someone who went to Gymnasium (remember, with the average of 582, so decently above OECD average), I think it would be a stupid thing to do. Why should we (the 'smart' kids) settle for mediocracy in a system where no one is really bad, but not really good either, when we can graduate from high school with one of the best educational backgrounds and an international advantage? And believe me, I know what I'm talking about! Since I actually do study abroad, I can assure you that there are educational differences between the Germans (who, if they are in university, enjoyed the priviledge of Gymnasium eduation) and, students of other nationalities. It's not like they're dumb and we're smart, but it often seems as if many Germans have a broader base of general knowledge and better writing skills, to name some examples.

To turn the whole thing around, would it be better for the American educational system to be more like the German one? Of course it would be more selective, but as a benefit everyone gets taught on their own level. Some people just need a bit more of explanation and time to practise in some stuff than others do. On the other hand, others will just get bored in a school that is made for everyone, and consequently won't live up to their full potential.

 

[InsaneMystic]

I agree with what you said, Tine. A universal school system for all will struggle with the dilemma of either going over the head of the slower learners while boring the quicker ones, or the other way around... and the Gesamtschule solution doesn't convince me, either. AFAIK, on those, you seperate the kids into courses per subject, depending on their performance, right? I think that leads to more friction among the pupils, not less - if the kid in your same year, on the same school, takes all the "top" courses while you're stuck with the "normal" ones, it'll rub in the "he/she's smart and you're not, nyah nyah" into your face every single day at school, doesn't it?

Still, the giant problem about Hauptschulen is that there's a vicious circle going on there making its standards worse and worse. They turn into the schools almost exclusively for kids of immigrants whose skills in the German language doesn't allow them to attend Realschule or Gym, leading to a cliquey immigrant subculture there that brings German parents to try their very best to not have their kids go there if at all possible, even if they'll have to struggle with keeping up at Realschule... so year by year, it will be even less German kids on Haupt (and only the really slow/bad learners) among a vast majority of immigrant kids with bad language skills (who in some schools make up 90%!! of Hauptschüler).

Looking at that situation, I think the result of 394 out of a standard of 500 points has almost to be considered surprisingly good. 🙁