Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

'Stupid in America'
Goto page Previous 1, 2

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Off-Topic Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

What to you think is the major contributing factor?

Violence in schools is creating an inferior learning environment.

[ 1 ]

A government monopoly over the school system has established a lack of competition.

[ 1 ]

A deficiency in the quality of teaching is to blame.

15%

[ 2 ]

The Parents are to self absorbed to push little Johnny/Jenny.

30%

[ 4 ]

Driven by a need to fit in, teens are working through high school to afford the latest trend.

[ 1 ]

This generation of kids has been spoiled by their parent��s hard work.

15%

[ 2 ]

Other

15%

[ 2 ]

Total Votes : 13

Author

Message

The Great Toad

Joined: 12 Jun 2004

Posted: Sun Apr 30, 2006 11:31 pm Post subject:

Ok, let me put it simple. American schools make students go. Many other coutries let students drop out. Therefore the underclass dropouts of other countries are not taking the tests- but in America the kids who hate school are. So you have a school system that caters to school hating students who just want to work at a gas station and play their PS2. I think the trade way they do schools in some countries is better. If kids do care enough for a whole rounded high school knowledge level they can go to the libro on their own. It's stupid to force a 17 year old kid who hates science math and English to study trig, chem, and lit. Last edited by The Great Toad on Mon May 01, 2006 11:14 pm; edited 1 time in total

khyber

Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Compunction Junction

Posted: Mon May 01, 2006 12:42 am Post subject:

Quote:

Wearing uniforms decreases personal development and favors top-down control.
Instead, why not help them realize the irrelevance of such materialistic frivolity?

Any links to support your assertions here?
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1175/is_5_32/ai_55625472

And I dunno about that "top down control" gobble-dee gook".
What is the difference between a teacher/school system saying "you must dress this way" and a 'cool' student saying "you look like a f-ing dork you loser!".

While it may be argued that it "stifles creativity" I'm not really keen on that either....but for arguments sake, let's say it's right. Why not just institute, i don't know MANDATORY ART AND MUSIC PROGRAMS that allow children to ACTUALLY express themselves in words and images instead of contrived BS that costs 15 arms and legs.
Imagine, parents could save the money they spend on "school clothes" every year and support those programs....

Perhaps the GREATEST benefit of uniforms is that students are to SOME extent relieved of a HUUUUUUUUUUUUUU social pressure.

And as for your second suggestions:
"Instead, why not help them realize the irrelevance of such materialistic frivolity? " that isn't REALLY easy for kids to do.
http://www.aft.org/topics/discipline/halo.htm

Even while i was still in uni. "several years" ago, I had already thought that uniforms would be of great benefit on the whole.

hermes.trismegistus

Joined: 08 Sep 2005

Posted: Mon May 01, 2006 2:51 am Post subject:

khyber wrote:

Any links to support your assertions here?
link

Your linked article refers to decreased amounts of "school crime", not personal development.

When you homogenize children you reduce their independence. Any effort of reducing individual independence entails power-over paradigms of control, which conflict with holistic paradigms of sustainability.

Uniforms address a SYMPTOM of the problem. Not the problem itself. Avoiding the problem will not help matters. Social band-aids do not work because they gloss over the underlying suffering.

Quote:

And I dunno about that "top down control" gobble-dee gook".
What is the difference between a teacher/school system saying "you must dress this way" and a 'cool' student saying "you look like a f-ing dork you loser!".

A big difference. Children, like everyone else, should come to recognize fear-based compulsions. Understanding of fear and ego makes for a much more difficult time of developing sensations of inadequacy. Peer pressure doesn't necessarily stymie personal development. Homogenization does.

An individual - and a well-rounded child - will realize that external materialisms do not reflect internal worth. A fear-driven egotist, as in your example of a 'cool student', would never unnerve a well-educated child. A fear-driven egotist, as in your example of a 'cool student', would certainly unnerve other fear-driven egotists. These 'domesticated primates' have no true free will and basically operate solely on externally-derived programming. Catering to domesticated primates rather than fostering holistic social systems seems like a sure-fire catastrophe.

Quote:

Why not just institute, i don't know MANDATORY ART AND MUSIC PROGRAMS that allow children to ACTUALLY express themselves in words and images instead of contrived BS that costs 15 arms and legs.

I had the opportunity to take plenty of art and music classes. They did not cost much extra, aside from the cost of purchasing musical instruments. However, I'd certainly agree that additional funding of the arts would produce drammatic social dividends, but that should be obvious to most everyone.

Quote:

Imagine, parents could save the money they spend on "school clothes" every year and support those programs....

Or, imagine if governments reduced the amount of funding that went into oppressive policies and wars. Imagine if governments systemmatically prioritized education instead of indoctrination.

As for the amount of money parents spend on these clothes, again, this reflects poor guidance on the part of the tribe. Sick, fear-driven parents often produce sick, fear-driven progeny.

Quote:

And as for your second suggestions:
"Instead, why not help them realize the irrelevance of such materialistic frivolity? " that isn't REALLY easy for kids to do.
http://www.aft.org/topics/discipline/halo.htm

Even while i was still in uni. "several years" ago, I had already thought that uniforms would be of great benefit on the whole.

Actually, materialisms can rather easily be re-imprinted. Incompetence and complacency prevents this from happening on a more wide-scale basis.

During my military service I thought compulsory military service may produce positive effects among the citizenry. Later, having looked at social systems more intently, I realize my folly.

Homoginzation does not create individuals. It creates cogs.

Among the other treatments to this subject, I presently prefer Brenton and Largent's The Paradigm Conspiracy: Why Our Social Systems Violate Human Potential - And How We Can Change Them, or Wilhelm Reich's The Mass Psychology of Fascism.

The integralists also cover this subject. Of which, I presently prefer Ken Wilber's The Simple Feeling of Being: Embracing Your True Nature or A Theory of Everything: An Integral Vision for Business, Politics, Science and Spirituality.

You might also reference Gatto's Educating Your Child in Modern Times: Raising an Intelligent, Sovereign, & Ethical Human Being.

Namaste.

Privateer

Joined: 31 Aug 2005
Location: Easy Street.

Posted: Mon May 01, 2006 3:14 am Post subject:

Hater Depot wrote:

Ya-ta Boy wrote:

My theory: Other countries are more selective in who they test and which test results they turn in for international comparisons.

Pretty much.

http://www.slate.com/id/2124163/

Quote:

The fact that 8-year-olds and 17-year-olds have different attitudes toward low-pressure exams isn't going to come as a surprise to anyone who has raised a teenager—or has been one. The NAEP is used to judge school systems and overall student performance, but the test doesn't matter at all to individual kids. In 2002 nearly half of the 17-year-olds tapped to take the national NAEP exam didn't bother to show up. Students who did show up left more essay questions than multiple-choice questions blank, an indication that they weren't going to be bothered to venture an answer if it required effort.

The "who cares?" phenomenon probably plagues older students' performance on international exams, too. Granted, kids in Japan and the United Kingdom don't pay a personal price for how they do on global tests, either. But cultural pressures can be very different in other countries. Korean schools have staged rallies to rev their children up before they take international assessments. And Germany created a national "PISA Day" to mark the date when 15-year-olds take the exam that will rank them against students in other countries. The U.S. Department of Education, meanwhile, has a hard time convincing principals to administer voluntary international tests at all.

Tell them it's a competition against students from other US states. Think maybe then they'd get fired up a bit? Wink

Privateer

Joined: 31 Aug 2005
Location: Easy Street.

Posted: Mon May 01, 2006 3:17 am Post subject:

canuckistan wrote:

Seriously? Too many don't grow up eating healthy food on any regular basis. Take a look at the average North Americans' shopping cart at the grocery store--it's mostly highly prcessed products laden with suger, fat and salt--or super-giant sized portions at fast food restuarants.

You can't learn well eating crap every day.

Fresh vegetables? Normal straight-out-of-the-ground etc food?
Where?!!!!

Reminds me of Jamie Oliver's 'School Dinners' programme. The crap kids in the UK eat...both at home and school. Sad

Privateer

Joined: 31 Aug 2005
Location: Easy Street.

Posted: Mon May 01, 2006 3:20 am Post subject:

hermes.trismegistus wrote:

As competition increases, cooperation decreases.

As cooperation decreases, communication decreases.

Is it really just a simple inverse ratio?

The US is quite good at team playing actually, and Korea is almost manically competitive but to a point where individualism is simply ironed out.

khyber

Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Compunction Junction

Posted: Mon May 01, 2006 3:29 am Post subject:

It seems to me that you are arguing that uniforms PROMOTE homogeniety right?
1) What is the basis for that claim?
I realize that that is a LOGICAL step but could you provide a fact, a study to back that up?

One of the LARGEST (and most glaringly obvious) problems with your theory is that it insist (in fact implies) that well rounded and intelligent children are being produced by a nuturing, capable schooling system and socialized, encouraged, and guided by loving incredible parents.
the fact is: That is RARELY to NEVER the case.
We aren't talking about idealisms here:

Quote:

A fear-driven egotist, as in your example of a 'cool student', would never unnerve a well-educated child

i'm gonna have to say that your wording here is kind of off...what do you mean by "well educated"? Well socialized?

Quote:

Your linked article refers to decreased amounts of "school crime", not personal development.

1) You were extremely unclear as to what you implied by "personal development"
2) There have been VERY VERY few studies that deal with uniforms in schools.
So far, the majority of the conclusions points to better reduced criminal behaviour as well as general social behaviour. The second article, also mentions that uniforms end up creating a positive feedback system in school environment.
No, those two don't deal with "personal development" per se. But read articles and I challenge you to argue that the evidence shows that it HAMPERS personal development.
Don't just talk about idealisms here: I want the cold hardness of data and study.
Theory is good for theory classes, but Social Studies 11 ain't no theory class.

Quote:

However, I'd certainly agree that additional funding of the arts would produce drammatic social dividends, but that should be obvious to most everyone.

I agree...and yet, it ain't.

Quote:

Or, imagine if governments reduced the amount of funding that went into oppressive policies and wars.

yeah...that's gonna happen.
And keep in mind that the US puts MORE into education than Canada and many European countries (per GDP AND as a % of budget).

Quote:

Imagine if governments systemmatically prioritized education instead of indoctrination

isn't it the same thing?

Quote:

Actually, materialisms can rather easily be re-imprinted.

link?

Quote:

You might also reference Gatto's Educating Your Child in Modern Times: Raising an Intelligent, Sovereign, & Ethical Human Being.

I'm a fan of "raising an Morally INtelligent Child" Robert Coles.
It's more to the point is FAR more useful to teacher AND parent. Alsi is a lot more pragmatic than i'm guessing your list.

hermes.trismegistus

Joined: 08 Sep 2005

Posted: Mon May 01, 2006 4:59 am Post subject:

Privateer wrote:

Is it really just a simple inverse ratio?

It seems to be.

Ref:

Kohn, Punished by Rewards: The Trouble with Gold Stars, Incentive Plans, A's, Praise, and other Bribes and No Contest: The Case Against Competition
James Zimmerman, "Treating Suicidal Adolescents: Is It Really Worth It?" and Treatment Approaches With Suicidal Adolescents
Robert Anton Wilson, Quantum Psycholgy: How Brain Software Programs You and Your World
Bob Gowin, Education
Alice Miller, Thou Shalt Not Be Aware: Scoeity's Betrayal of the Child
Howard Gardner, Frames of Mind
Irwin Hyman, Reading, Writing, and the Hickory Stick
Richard Erskine, Theories and Methods of an Integrative Transactional Analysis

I could provide specific page numbers if you'd like.

khyber wrote:

I've already given you references on independence versus dependence on top-down control paradigms. In those references you can find many different case studies tracing the deleterious social and individual effects of homogeniety.

You can find facts to support pretty much any viewpoint. I can drag up a list of facts as to why Bush may be the greatest US president ever. Would you buy them? Don't solely rely on facts to support your models. Rely on utility and empowerment. Test models in the laboratory of life.

khyber wrote:

One of the LARGEST (and most glaringly obvious) problems with your theory is that it insist (in fact implies) that well rounded and intelligent children are being produced by a nuturing, capable schooling system and socialized, encouraged, and guided by loving incredible parents.
the fact is: That is RARELY to NEVER the case.

I have never implied that "well-rounded and intelligent children are being produced by a nurturing, capable schooling system and socialized, encouraged, and guided by loving incredible parents." Indeed, I have argued that because these qualities appear lacking, social and individual paradigms suffer.

khyber wrote:

what do you mean by "well educated"? Well socialized?

I would never equate socialization with education. The two have precious little in common.

By "well-educated", I mean those possessing and striving towards holistic, sustainable, integral solutions. Those espousing fractured, segregating, materialist and fundamentalist paradigms do not count as well-educated. They seem more appropriately referred to as well-indoctrinated. I don't support indoctrination over education.

khyber wrote:

But read articles and I challenge you to argue that the evidence shows that it HAMPERS personal development.

Of course they hamper personal development. Any external control mechanism limits development. Any limitation on personal expression - personal expression which does not result in the oppression of others - limits personal development. Why do you think such attention gets paid to opening these blocks in Jungian and transactional psychology, neuro linguistic programming, as well as Tantra and esoteric Buddhism (among many other schools of actualization)?

khyber wrote:

Don't just talk about idealisms here: I want the cold hardness of data and study.

I've provided references discussing the effects of these control paradigms.

No, indoctrination and education have precious little in common. Associating the two shows unfamiliarity with the relevant fields we've been discussing.

As for re-imprinting, we have several models to pick from, depending on the imprint and psychological make-up of the individual. NLP may work for one while Lilly's "metaprogramming of the human bio-computer" may work for another. Still another may put the pieces in place with Leary's 8 circuit model of consciousness. Others may prefer Reich's gestalts. Many benefit from Korzybski's general semantics, but the memes can prove difficult and take time. It would seem you don't have much exposure to transactional or interpersonal psychology.

I don't want children with morality. I want children with ethics - extrinsic and intrinsic.

Namaste.

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Off-Topic Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2
Page 2 of 2

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

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe