|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
 Posted: Sat Feb 20, 2010 2:28 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
As Texas is often held up as a model, it should be noted that 30% of Texas high school students drop out. (2007 stats)
AUSTIN (AP) - One out of three Texas students don't graduate, and more students drop out than finish high school in the state's largest cities, according to education experts.
http://www.lubbockonline.com/stories/012907/sta_012907056.shtml
Education reform is an important issue but single-solution solutions are no solutions at all. Anyone saying differently is a snake-oil salesman.
I automatically distrust anyone who starts off a discussion of public education by saying it's a monopoly. The school district I grew up in had four towns and the farms between them who pooled their students to get about 100 students per grade. Is that a monopoly? Technically yes, if you want to skew the discussion. For vast stretches of the country it is the only practical way to organize the educational system. Of the 450 or so high schools in the state of Iowa, probably 400 of them are similar. Nearly all the states are the same. Any national education reform needs to take that reality into consideration.
I'd like to hear the libertarian argument for/against taxing families/individuals without kids for the benefit of education. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 20, 2010 5:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Pluto wrote: |
| The discussion at hand is that education for grades K - 12 in the US is bad, therefore there is a problem with student and parent attitudes wrt to parenting generally and education specifically. I disagree. Most parents I meet do value their children's future generally and value their children's education specifically. Parents simply don't have choice, that is the problem. |
Parents do have choices, though. Let's take the absolute most extreme case: a small farming town with a single public school and a population insufficient to start more. Let's further say parent X is unhappy with the level of education his child is receiving. He has several immediate and obvious recourses:
1) Leave the city and move somewhere else: voting with your feet is a possibility. Research cities with comparatively good school districts and move to them. You might scoff at this, but I've known people that have done it, because instead of just talking about how they valued their children's education, they acted on it.
2) Get involved himself. Your childs math education isn't what you want it to be? Well, if you really care, start helping him. This is the internet age, there are many resources availible for at home learning. Any parent who really cares about their children's education will do things like this. Unsurprisingly, most don't.
#1 is fairly extreme, and I agree in most cases shouldn't be necessary; as I've all ready said, raising the level of choice parents have regarding schools is a good thing. #2 however is totally obvious, easily achievable by almost everyone, and rarely engaged in. I think we all remember the term deficit peacock? Well frankly, any parent who says, "I care about my child's education," but doesn't at least pursue #2 to help round out any problems he perceives in his child's education is an education peacock. Talk is easy, it's action that's difficult.
When I see the lengths Korean parents will go to to try to educate their children, sending them off to a full day of public school, then rounding out their education with private institute attendance afterwards, it's very hard for me to view the apathy of the general American parent on this topic with anything but scorn. I'm not saying American kids should be doing the 3 pm to midnight 학원 schedule, but at the same time, if you think your child isn't getting enough math, or enough science, or whatever, you have options now. Most parents just don't seem to care.
| Pluto wrote: |
| What are universities doing right and what are K - 12 schools doing wrong? |
Accepting only the top chunk of America's students, and then even throwing a fair portion of them out after their first year? It's easy to get good results when you only accept driven, intelligent students. K - 12 students aren't and never will be in that position. If universities were also forced to accept everyone, and everyone actually went whether they were interested or not, their results would be even worse than K - 12 schools. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pluto
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 20, 2010 7:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
^Point 1: I don't scoff at that at all. In fact, it happens quite often, more often than you realize. If you are a parent where I am from you either flee to the suburbs or send your children to a private school. However, there are a lot of parents who just cannot afford either of those options. They are simply stuck without any choices.
Point 2: Many parents do get involved with their children's education. However, many parents simply don't have the time or expertise to teach their children subjects such as English, math or science. Would you expect a janitor or store clerk to be competent in biology or trigonometry? Of course not. There is a perfectly good reason why teachers and schools are necessary in an advanced market economy. They help parents shore up their children's education where the parents' expertise is limited. Parents, more than anyone else, have the ability to discern what is best for their children. They need more options from the education establishment. The same education establishment which denies these parents choices.
As to the point on universities, I bring them up because we have more choice in where we attend university. Those choices don't exist at the k-12 level. You get what the union provides and if you don't like it, well, tough.
As per the power of choice, watch this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iG9CE55wbtY&feature=player_embedded
Maybe, we are, as a society, too obsessed with the linear sciences (ie. Math and science) and we don't spend much time with arts and theatre. This why choice is so important. Not every child is well served by a one size fits all education establishment. Quite honestly, I think we would be better served if we didn't think of education as solely providing for the next generation of economists and engineers. The world would be better off with more artists and theatre performers. It wouldn't be a bad thing if the market for education reflected that IMHO. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senior
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 20, 2010 7:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Pluto wrote: |
| The discussion at hand is that education for grades K - 12 in the US is bad, therefore there is a problem with student and parent attitudes wrt to parenting generally and education specifically. I disagree. Most parents I meet do value their children's future generally and value their children's education specifically. Parents simply don't have choice, that is the problem. |
Parents do have choices, though. Let's take the absolute most extreme case: a small farming town with a single public school and a population insufficient to start more. Let's further say parent X is unhappy with the level of education his child is receiving. He has several immediate and obvious recourses: |
Why would you use that example? Most people don't live in a one school farming village. You could also send the kid to boarding school. This isn't an explanation at all. It's a complete non-sequitur.
| Quote: |
| When I see the lengths Korean parents will go to to try to educate their children, sending them off to a full day of public school, then rounding out their education with private institute attendance afterwards, it's very hard for me to view the apathy of the general American parent on this topic with anything but scorn. I'm not saying American kids should be doing the 3 pm to midnight 학원 schedule, but at the same time, if you think your child isn't getting enough math, or enough science, or whatever, you have options now. Most parents just don't seem to care. |
Doesn't this say more about the state of public schools, than about parents attitudes towards education? They know that the public schools don't offer a good enough level of instruction, so they send their kids to hagwon after school.
Public schools are obviously a monopoly. In a free market for education, under-performing schools would go out of business because all the students would leave, taking their money with them. This isn't possible in the current situation because the money is already spent. Saying that students do have a choice is admitting that it's OK to waste all those resources. As I have screamed already, some estimates state it costs 25,000 per student. If you gave a third of that money to the family, and let them decide which school they want to go to, quality would go up and price would go down. This always happens where there is competition.
I'm not saying close public schools. I'm saying give the money to the student not to the school.[/quote] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 20, 2010 8:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Senior wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| Pluto wrote: |
| The discussion at hand is that education for grades K - 12 in the US is bad, therefore there is a problem with student and parent attitudes wrt to parenting generally and education specifically. I disagree. Most parents I meet do value their children's future generally and value their children's education specifically. Parents simply don't have choice, that is the problem. |
Parents do have choices, though. Let's take the absolute most extreme case: a small farming town with a single public school and a population insufficient to start more. Let's further say parent X is unhappy with the level of education his child is receiving. He has several immediate and obvious recourses: |
Why would you use that example? Most people don't live in a one school farming village. You could also send the kid to boarding school. This isn't an explanation at all. It's a complete non-sequitur. |
I used this example as a demonstration that even in situations which have the least possible choice availible due to their extreme nature, choice still exists. Choice only increases in other situations; there is no situation with less choice. Thus, any parent saying, "My kids education is bad and I don't have any other choices," is just an education peacock; even if the only choice availible is to assist in your child's education yourself, it exists.
| Senior wrote: |
| Doesn't this say more about the state of public schools, than about parents attitudes towards education? |
No, it doesn't. These parents are competitive and want the best for their children. No matter how much better you make those public schools, these parents -- with their competitive drive to ensure their children get the best educations possible -- will continue to behave this way.
| Senior wrote: |
| Public schools are obviously a monopoly. |
If by monopoly you mean one form of education that exists along side private schools, private tutors, and home schooling, yeah I guess you could say that. It's a gross misuse of the word, but if our dear Libertarians have shown one thing, it's that they really don't care what words actually mean. I really don't understand this phenomenon at all. Why is it so hard to just use correct language? Public schools are subsidized entities with a substantial competitive advantage, but they aren't a monopoly. Other sources of education exist.
| Senior wrote: |
| I'm not saying close public schools. I'm saying give the money to the student not to the school. |
And this isn't necessarily a bad idea. I'm still not sure how I feel about this kind of voucher system yet, but I won't deny it's a coherent proposal with some rationality behind it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 20, 2010 8:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Pluto wrote: |
Point 1: I don't scoff at that at all. In fact, it happens quite often, more often than you realize. If you are a parent where I am from you either flee to the suburbs or send your children to a private school. However, there are a lot of parents who just cannot afford either of those options. They are simply stuck without any choices.
Point 2: Many parents do get involved with their children's education. However, many parents simply don't have the time or expertise to teach their children subjects such as English, math or science. Would you expect a janitor or store clerk to be competent in biology or trigonometry? Of course not. |
I, personally, would expect anyone competent to be a parent to be able to teach the basics of biology or trigonometry with the aid of the internet. I just googled "free trigonometry lessons online," for instance, and got a lot of hits. High school math, science, etc just isn't that hard. What it requires, however, is a parent willing to sit down and make sure the child goes over this material, and quite possibly learning some of it themselves so they can help. I consider this a part of parental responsibility, and feel it gets shirked too often. I don't blame anyone for not wanting to do it, but people who don't want to do it shouldn't be having children. It's a huge responsibility.
Again, I agree that we should take steps to improve our schools. I'm simply saying that, if a parent does feel their children are getting a deficient education in certain areas, they can and should round out that education (which is a much lesser task than handling the entire education themselves; working a few hours a week with your child on math or science isn't so horrible, is it?). No child with proper parents should be struggling to get a decent education in our current system, even if the schools aren't perfect.
| Pluto wrote: |
| As to the point on universities, I bring them up because we have more choice in where we attend university. Those choices don't exist at the k-12 level. You get what the union provides and if you don't like it, well, tough. |
I agree this is true, I just think it's also a factor that the universities have more choice in the students they accept too. And this is something that must be considered when we start talking about student choice; the details of such a system leave a lot to be discussed and worked out. The simple fact is that in a choice-based system, some schools will be better than others and as such everyone will want to go to them. But schools have limited resources and thus can accept limited pupils, so it then becomes a matter of how we work out which students get to attend the best schools, and which have to settle for less. Do we favor the wealthy and allow payments above and beyond basic vouchers? Do we go purely on test results, which increases the stratification between students all ready doing well and students struggling?
A lot of people are excluded from the college model, and a lot of people have to settle for far less than the best. I'm sure a lot of us here were lucky enough to be able to attend tier 1 schools, but how many of our class mates weren't? This doesn't mean we can't implement a more choice based system, it just means there are substantial complexities that need to be worked out in advance. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pluto
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 20, 2010 10:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Pluto wrote: |
Point 1: I don't scoff at that at all. In fact, it happens quite often, more often than you realize. If you are a parent where I am from you either flee to the suburbs or send your children to a private school. However, there are a lot of parents who just cannot afford either of those options. They are simply stuck without any choices.
Point 2: Many parents do get involved with their children's education. However, many parents simply don't have the time or expertise to teach their children subjects such as English, math or science. Would you expect a janitor or store clerk to be competent in biology or trigonometry? Of course not. |
I, personally, would expect anyone competent to be a parent to be able to teach the basics of biology or trigonometry with the aid of the internet. I just googled "free trigonometry lessons online," for instance, and got a lot of hits. High school math, science, etc just isn't that hard. What it requires, however, is a parent willing to sit down and make sure the child goes over this material, and quite possibly learning some of it themselves so they can help. I consider this a part of parental responsibility, and feel it gets shirked too often. I don't blame anyone for not wanting to do it, but people who don't want to do it shouldn't be having children. It's a huge responsibility.
Again, I agree that we should take steps to improve our schools. I'm simply saying that, if a parent does feel their children are getting a deficient education in certain areas, they can and should round out that education (which is a much lesser task than handling the entire education themselves; working a few hours a week with your child on math or science isn't so horrible, is it?). No child with proper parents should be struggling to get a decent education in our current system, even if the schools aren't perfect. |
Yes, I agree that parents have the power to use the Internet as a tool to help educate their children. It would also be nice if parents took their children to libraries and museums to help supplement their children's education too. Still, I'm not as sanguine as you are when it comes to parents educating their children; teachers and schools are necessary. For one, please remember, that only about a quarter of the NA population has at least a Bachelors degree. Therefore, I feel that many parents don't have the capability to educate their children in spite of all of the options available. Also, many parents have to work which further takes time away from educating their children.
| Fox wrote: |
| Pluto wrote: |
| As to the point on universities, I bring them up because we have more choice in where we attend university. Those choices don't exist at the k-12 level. You get what the union provides and if you don't like it, well, tough. |
I agree this is true, I just think it's also a factor that the universities have more choice in the students they accept too. And this is something that must be considered when we start talking about student choice; the details of such a system leave a lot to be discussed and worked out. The simple fact is that in a choice-based system, some schools will be better than others and as such everyone will want to go to them. But schools have limited resources and thus can accept limited pupils, so it then becomes a matter of how we work out which students get to attend the best schools, and which have to settle for less. Do we favor the wealthy and allow payments above and beyond basic vouchers? Do we go purely on test results, which increases the stratification between students all ready doing well and students struggling?
A lot of people are excluded from the college model, and a lot of people have to settle for far less than the best. I'm sure a lot of us here were lucky enough to be able to attend tier 1 schools, but how many of our class mates weren't? This doesn't mean we can't implement a more choice based system, it just means there are substantial complexities that need to be worked out in advance. |
Parents and children should also have the right to discriminate against the schools they attend. At least, it should be that way. In turn, schools should accept those students who they feel are best suited to their mission. It is a two-way street. Now, admittedly, I am no egalitarian so such effects of outcome don't concern me. However, if we look at the college model there are more choices. There is Cal Tech which suits those students that are adept at math, science and engineering and there is UCLA (one of those dastardly publicly funded universities by the way) which excels at filmography. In fact, I would argue that UCLA is the World's premier university concerning all things film. I envision the same thing happening at the k-12 level. There would be schools that would specialize in math and science, those that would specialize in arts and theatre, those that specialize in trades (ie. carpentry and plumbing) et cetera. What concerns me is not so much equality of outcome, rather diversity of outcome. Choices entail diversity. I feel such diversity would better serve society in the end.
Last edited by Pluto on Sat Feb 20, 2010 10:36 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 20, 2010 10:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Pluto wrote: |
| Still, I'm not as sanguine as you are when it comes to parents educating their education; teachers and schools are necessary. |
I agree they're necessary, and I agree we should take steps to improve our educational system. Increasing parental choice in education is probably one such way to go about this; the specifics of how it should be implemented are open for debate.
| Pluto wrote: |
| Parents and children should also have the right to discriminate against the schools they attend. |
I agree, they should, and I also agree with your point about the potential benefits of diversified education with more specialized schools. Such programs do exist now within the public educational system, but few students are aware of them or take advantage of them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pluto
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 20, 2010 10:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Pluto wrote: |
| Still, I'm not as sanguine as you are when it comes to parents educating their education; teachers and schools are necessary. |
I agree they're necessary, and I agree we should take steps to improve our educational system. Increasing parental choice in education is probably one such way to go about this; the specifics of how it should be implemented are open for debate. |
Educating their education, whoops  *Education = Children.*
Anyways, I am aware of some public schools in the suburbs that do prepare some students for the trades. The choice isn't available in a lot of districts though. More is needed.
As for how to go about offering more choice. I like the Belgian model. Also, I know German schools start preparing children for either university, the trades or the arts from as young as grade 7 or 8 students. Per haps, we should look at those countries for a blueprint. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sergio Stefanuto
Joined: 14 May 2009
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 21, 2010 3:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Yataboy wrote: |
| I automatically distrust anyone who starts off a discussion of public education by saying it's a monopoly |
A monopoly is neither here nor there. People have irrational fears of monopolies. All that matters is good and affordable service and consumers getting what they want in return for their money, government or otherwise. The problem with public works is that, since their raison d�etre is government dole, they�re insulated from the effects of poor performance, which hurts consumers, especially the people supposedly protected by such a policy � the poor. One can hardly look at public education in the US and UK and call it an unqualified success. What is the solution? I�m not really sure. I�ve never studied it. Thomas Sowell asked the rhetorical question: When you put out a fire, what do you replace it with? His point of course being: the fact that I personally am unable to put the fire out doesn�t challenge my assertion that something is burning down. Poor state schools are very similar to prisons. Poor kids mix with other poor kids, get nowhere educationally � in many cases barely literate � and, in effect, we create the problem we set out to solve (business as usual in government, I'm afraid). Good state schools, on the other hand, are very good and those with pushy parents, which is generally the wealthy, do well in life. In other words, generally speaking, state education closely resembles what supporters of state education fear a laissez-faire system would look like � the poor left to rot, while the wealthy get along great. The only real difference is that privatization would save the taxpayer a fortune.
| Yataboy wrote: |
| I'd like to hear the libertarian argument for/against taxing families/individuals without kids for the benefit of education |
Since a libertarian presumably favors privatization, it seems a moot point. Personally, since clearly the whole of society benefits from an educated population and at least trying to improve the lot of the poor, I would like to keep a small safety net � �educaid / �educare�? � for the poorest 5-10% of society. Remember these people are largely only poor to begin with because of a long series of government follies � permanent mass unemployment (caused by huge tax bills to finance superfluous public works), welfare state (to fund those rendered unemployed by government folly), drugs-prohibition, etc. The biggest victims of these follies, the poor, will, I'm sure you'll find, be disproportionately represented amongst the 30% of Texas high school students you cited who drop out of high school. If they've dropped out of highschool because school isn't for them and they'd sooner be usefully-employed...then this is probably evidence of families desperately trying to make ends meet. Chances are, mind you, that they've chosen a life of delinquency which will probably wind up in welfare-dependency and jail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pluto
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Sun May 09, 2010 9:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Plugging a new documentary that I am really looking forward to seeing. The movie covers the problems of monopoly, education and the state, specifically the State of New Jersey. The level of corruption, graft, incompetence and sleaze just seem to be mesmerizing. The name of the movie is The Cartel which you can check out here.
Also, the director, Bob Bowden was recently on Stossel, but the show is not up on Hulu yet. We Will have to wait about two more weeks or so. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mr. Pink
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
Location: China
|
| Posted: Sun May 09, 2010 2:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I was reading an old issue of Newsweek (from March) that had some articles on the state of education in America.
Senior is right, the teacher unions are holding education hostage. When it is near impossible to fire teachers who do not do their jobs properly, it is time to get rid of the unions.
(I am amazed how the unions can dictate working conditions...school boards should "scab" out the work and bust up the unions)
As for the quality of education in America, that too is a truth that many don't want to face up to. The value isn't there unless you live in a rich neighborhood and thus your school gets tons of funding. Even then, it isn't always a good value situation.
I can see more and more people looking to either private schools or going to schools in rich districts. Thus the divide between the rich and the poor gets even bigger. Blame the teacher unions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sergio Stefanuto
Joined: 14 May 2009
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sun May 09, 2010 9:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The UK has one of the most bureaucratical and centralized government-run education systems in the developed world and Labour immensely increased spending in education. The results are predictably dire.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SeoulnPepe
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Sun May 09, 2010 10:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thought you boys on either side of the argument would enjoy this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XxxpAB2bC4
It's a good laugh...
Anyway, there are plenty of reasons the education system is messed up, and it's not just teacher unions...it's also incompetent administration (specially ones who love to go on power trips)...poor decision making at all levels (specially on the financial side of things)...poor training at teacher's colleges (way too much self-righteous non-sense...some in my cohort got into trouble for speaking with an Italian accent during a drama skit)...no vision (they sure preach endlessly about having it, a lot of talking but not a lot of walking as it were)...add to some of these variables (there are more, but I won't list them all) parents' sometimes irrational demands, irresponsible kids, plenty of "busy work" (lesson plans, yearly plans, standards, endless meetings, grading, grading, and grading, and teaching to the test to get into University)...and you've got a fine mess to untangle...
A good read is John Taylor Gatto's The Underground History of American Education, and The Well-Trained Mind: A Guide to Classical Education at Home by Wise-Bauer & Wise. The home-school movement is growing, and it's getting pretty organized...my niece recently finished high school at home (California), and her sister is just starting out (at the elementary level). We plan to do the same with our son...
It's a crazy, scary world, and the powers that be are there because they propagate the mentality and the mindset (i.e. the world view) that creates the mess we're in...an easily controlled and duped populace is better than a thinking and conscious one...MTV and marketing 101 anyone? Watch a show called "The Merchants of Cool" (it's free on PBS online)...it's quite revealing about how so much of "mainstream" is actually "created"...just like our schools.
While I realize that last paragraph is a generalization, it's a good starting to point to thinking about the purpose of our educational system, and why we have it set up the way it is... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
No_hite_pls
Joined: 05 Mar 2007
Location: Don't hate me because I'm right
|
| Posted: Sun May 09, 2010 10:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I went to private school 1-8 grade then public 9-12. My private school was full of "teachers" that would have never made it in public school. They where extremely unqualified and uneducated.
People want miracles out of the public school system that is not going to happen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
