| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
dogshed
Joined: 28 Apr 2006
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
 Posted: Sat Nov 11, 2006 6:09 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Next time I hear some Commonwealth-type ridicule the American educational system, I'll refer them to this article. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Satori
Joined: 09 Dec 2005
Location: Above it all
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 11, 2006 6:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
| Next time I hear some Commonwealth-type ridicule the American educational system, I'll refer them to this article. |
That would not make much sense. This is hardly a reflection of the overal education system, it is simply a decision about how final exams will be graded. This doesn't mean that text speak is taught or encouraged in the classroom or in school assignments. It is simply an acknowledgement that some students will use it in exams, and if it's clear they know the material then giving them no points for an answer just becuase it contains text speak seems to be counter productive and rigid.
I don't agree with the move myself. But your idea that this shows our whole education system to be a joke is well off the mark. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 11, 2006 6:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Satori wrote: |
| On the other hand wrote: |
| Next time I hear some Commonwealth-type ridicule the American educational system, I'll refer them to this article. |
That would not make much sense. This is hardly a reflection of the overal education system, it is simply a decision about how final exams will be graded. This doesn't mean that text speak is taught or encouraged in the classroom or in school assignments. It is simply an acknowledgement that some students will use it in exams, and if it's clear they know the material then giving them no points for an answer just becuase it contains text speak seems to be counter productive and rigid.
I don't agree with the move myself. But your idea that this shows our whole education system to be a joke is well off the mark. |
Where did OTOH say the whole education system of any country is a joke?
You brought that out, apparently from your perception that he was comparing NZ's education system in some way to America's (in the way that each has their faults). And your perception seems to be that America's education system is a joke. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Satori
Joined: 09 Dec 2005
Location: Above it all
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 11, 2006 6:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| Satori wrote: |
| On the other hand wrote: |
| Next time I hear some Commonwealth-type ridicule the American educational system, I'll refer them to this article. |
That would not make much sense. This is hardly a reflection of the overal education system, it is simply a decision about how final exams will be graded. This doesn't mean that text speak is taught or encouraged in the classroom or in school assignments. It is simply an acknowledgement that some students will use it in exams, and if it's clear they know the material then giving them no points for an answer just becuase it contains text speak seems to be counter productive and rigid.
I don't agree with the move myself. But your idea that this shows our whole education system to be a joke is well off the mark. |
Where did OTOH say the whole education system of any country is a joke?
You brought that out, apparently from your perception that he was comparing NZ's education system in some way to America's (in the way that each has their faults). And your perception seems to be that America's education system is a joke. |
He said "next time I hear a ... ridicule the american system I'll refer them to this article". That implies that the NZ education system is also worthy of ridicule because of this new development. That is simply false.
The only leap I made was in presuming that something worthy of "ridicule" is "a joke", if it's something else, my bad... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 11, 2006 6:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
He said "next time I hear a ... ridicule the american system I'll refer them to this article". That implies that the NZ education system is also worthy of ridicule because of this new development. That is simply false.
|
Okay, let me re-phrase my point:
If something comparable were happening in American schools, people would be using it as an example of how bad the American educational system is, or how stupid Americans are in general. So the next time I hear some Commonwealth-type cite(let's say) the teaching of creation science in Kansas as an indictment of American ignorance, I'll be sure to mention that "meh", "LOL", and "my bad" are now considered acceptable English by NZ educational authorities.
Last edited by On the other hand on Sat Nov 11, 2006 6:46 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 11, 2006 6:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| He said "next time I hear a ... ridicule the american system I'll refer them to this article". That implies that the NZ education system is also worthy of ridicule because of this new development. |
Just to reiterate:
The NZ system IS worthy of ridicule, if we're going by the same standards that are sometimes used to ridicule the American system. I'm making a "sauce for the goose" argument here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 11, 2006 6:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Moving on to the other end of the political spectrum:
I wonder if the cultural conservatives who complain about ebonics and whatnot would complain about the promotion of "internet English"? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Satori
Joined: 09 Dec 2005
Location: Above it all
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 11, 2006 9:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
| Quote: |
He said "next time I hear a ... ridicule the american system I'll refer them to this article". That implies that the NZ education system is also worthy of ridicule because of this new development. That is simply false.
|
Okay, let me re-phrase my point:
If something comparable were happening in American schools, people would be using it as an example of how bad the American educational system is |
Using any one example to assess an education system is misleading. In fact, it's better to assess the results than the practices. But if you're going to do it by citing practices, you'd have to at least cite several poor practices, not one, to make a point.
| Quote: |
or how stupid Americans are in general. |
That would be silly. Failures in the school system can't "prove" that americans are silly. Perhaps the fact that amercans are silly ( Im not saying they are ) could prove that the school system is weak though. Better to decide first what "stupid" means, and the go test for it, rather than pointing to isolated teaching practices and then trying to say "This means that".
| Quote: |
So the next time I hear some Commonwealth-type cite(let's say) the teaching of creation science in Kansas as an indictment of American ignorance, I'll be sure to mention that "meh", "LOL", and "my bad" are now considered acceptable English by NZ educational authorities. |
I would say it's an indictment of the ignorance of the Kansas education authorities, not american ignorance. I would also judge it as a far more heinous educational practice than allowing text speak in exams. That doesn't mean I'm in favour of the latter though.
And lets be clear, this move is not about condoning this language as acceptable. It's kind of a giving in basically. It's saying that it's too late to stop it, and if we don't acknowledge answers given in this language we will be cutting out too many students who actually do know the material. It's not a good thing in my book, but I don't think it's anywhere near on the level of teaching creationism. It's still up to the teachers to rail against this language in the classroom, to strongly encourage students not to use it, to refuse homework that uses it, to do everything they can to discourage it. But when it comes to exam time, to let it slide for the sake of not penalising someone who knows the material but it just too hopelessly far gone in this language degradation to write in full English. I see it only as a major problem in the actual subject of English, which is the only subject, as far as I can think, where it's not only what you say but how you say it that gets graded.
Of course, students should be able to read and write this language as part of a fully rounded literacy. But they should be in control of thier language and should be able to use formal academic and business language where appropriate.
Last edited by Satori on Sat Nov 11, 2006 11:52 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sleepy in Seoul
Joined: 15 May 2004
Location: Going in ever decreasing circles until I eventually disappear up my own fundament - in NZ
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 11, 2006 10:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Perhaps instead of focusing on any perceived inadequacies of the New Zealand education system, perhaps it might be better to reflect upon the shoddy reporting in the CNN article (one of the main reasons I would never watch or read anything from CNN voluntarily). The CNN article stated:
| CNN crappy reporting wrote: |
| credit will be given if the answer "clearly shows the required understanding," even if it contains text-speak. |
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. An article from the New Zealand Herald (despite the name an Auckland regional newspaper) clearly states:
| Quote: |
The New Zealand Qualifications Authority is dashing media reports that students could use text abbreviations in exams without penalty if their answers otherwise showed the required understanding.
Such use has sparked fears that students would be put at the mercy of exam markers who had differing levels of cellphone literacy.
Bali Haque, deputy chief executive of the authority, said there had been no change to guidelines and there was no specific policy about text language.
However, he warned: "If people are expecting they can come up with an exam script full of text and pass, then they're dreaming.
"Examiners will be expecting the use of the English language in full. I think students are intelligent enough to understand that. Most would know the difference between using formal language in an exam and informal with friends on the weekend."
Mr Haque said the guidelines allowed markers flexibility to forgive the occasional abbreviation or spelling or grammatical error if a student had otherwise shown a clear understanding of the question. |
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/search/story.cfm?storyid=000A1C5A-061D-1553-83E783027AF1010F
The words I have placed in bold should make it clear to even people of limited mental ability that it merely gives the leeway for a marker to forgive a small number of spelling errors if the meaning is clear (and correct). It does not state that leeway must be given or even, indeed, that it will. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Satori
Joined: 09 Dec 2005
Location: Above it all
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 11, 2006 11:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Chur chur... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 11, 2006 8:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sleepy:
Thanks for the heads-up on the dubious nature of this article. Yeah, these off-the-wire horror stories you read often turn out to be exaggerated or decontextualized. (see the "piglet banned in the UK" story.) I should have been more skeptical.
Satori:
I think we basically agree. Criticizing either educational system on the basis of one single policy is not legit.
| Quote: |
| the shoddy reporting in the CNN article |
Stupid bloody Americans.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
