Education

mikepegg44

Isn't it time to think about a new delivery system for education? Why are we stuck in the same system that has existed for hundreds of years with very little change. Sure the way things are taught in that delivery system may have changed, but kids are still going through the nonsense of going to school 5 days a week for x amount of hours...it is really strange to me.

I don't know. Why is education synonymous with a physical brick and mortar building?

Listening to the radio I heard about a 4 day week change that some schools are meeting resistance on in MN...why does it matter if the educational standards are met?...why do we need to keep doing the same thing over and over while we complain about not spending enough/too much and we consistently get lower outputs...

anyone else tired of the strict adherence to the age old system. It is like the short story the Lottery...this is how it has always been and this is how it must be done in the future no matter what because this is how it has always been...traditions are fine and all, but I think they hold us back in so many areas of life as a culture and society... anyway...too long as usual but the real question...why is education thought of as only being possible in our current model? why is 5 days a week 6 - 7 hours a day a magical number?
This is a legitimate question, I am not an educator I just slept at a holiday inn express last night

inlet13

Good thread. I've been reading more and more on the subject of how computers (and flash software and video) can really assist in the process. So, teachers act more of facilitators answering questions and seeing where students are struggling.

Imagine a framework where a student is working through a lesson "online". Not with a typical text. But, with flash software. There's animations and whatnot telling the tale, maybe asking the student to read a brief portion of text here or there. Then they test their grasp of what they just covered.

While this is occurring, imagine a teacher watching the students overall. They could have data printed out immediately on who's having trouble with what learning objects. Then go discuss with said student.

That would change the entire approach right there. Once we get that down, physical locations may not be "as necessary" as they once were.

Jason P

I think parents would oppose a 4-day week because they would have to hire daycare one day a week.

whygohome

I wouldn't abandon the classroom atmosphere. Everything that inlet and mikepegg discussed is feasible in the classroom environment.

Anyway, something has to be done to change this:

"Scores from the 2009 Programme for International Student Assessment to be released Tuesday show 15-year-old students in the U.S. performing about average in reading and science, and below average in math. Out of 34 countries, the U.S. ranked 14th in reading, 17th in science and 25th in math."--USA TODAY

polaris_x

tough one ... cuz, kids go to school for more than just learning to read or write ... they go to school to learn to interact with other kids and adults ...

having said that - i feel like school's purpose is really to give kids the foundation to learn when they get older ... so, however that is accomplished - i'm open to ...

i would be most worried right now about the level of education, the influence of corporations and special interests and the variance between public and private schools ...

as a bleeding heart socialist ... i believe every child should have access to education ... of top quality ...

mikepegg44

http://news.stanford.edu/news/2012/marc ... 30612.html


I guess this is the stuff I was more referring too. This is a fantastic idea and one I wish more brick and mortar institutions would start taking advantage of this stuff...imagine a university opening their doors to everyone in the world for a few hundred dollars a class, having 350,000 people signing up for it... Universities can become a different place, I just envision so much more for so much less in terms of cost to all involved...I guess it will come into being sooner or later, out of necessity if nothing else

Idris

polaris_x wrote:

tough one ... cuz, kids go to school for more than just learning to read or write ... they go to school to learn to interact with other kids and adults ...

having said that - i feel like school's purpose is really to give kids the foundation to learn when they get older ... so, however that is accomplished - i'm open to ...

i would be most worried right now about the level of education, the influence of corporations and special interests and the variance between public and private schools ...

as a bleeding heart socialist ... i believe every child should have access to education ... of top quality ...

Yea I feel the same way, especially regarding the "level of education" which is vital, I mean we can create the perfect delivery system/method to feed/administer/teach our kids, but if the 'level' or 'quality' of that 'education' is not of the very best, not accurate and whatever else, Then it's all a waste.

The mind of a child is where the revolution begins. what we teach them and how we teach them matters. Anyway
-

brianlux

I totally agree Mike, that our educational system needs revamping. I don't know if it's still there but one of my cousin's had a daughter who attended an "alternative" school (I think it was Seventh Day Adventist but not sure) near Grass valley, CA. At that school the kids only spend part of the day in the classroom and that class work was geared toward an integrated curriculum that related to the real world in both the big sense and in the smaller sense. Math was used to plan the gardens they tended and the recipes they came up with. English was used in writing about their shop, gardening, crafts or culinary experiences. Life and learning were not two separate entities but all of one as they should be. Our schools, for the most part, are a disaster and yet, as I've witnessed, they could be so good.

riotgrl

We absolutely need a total overhaul of education. Personally, I think we should spend more time in middle school identifying aptitude and helping kids find their strengths and weaknesses. They should spend their high school career developing their strengths and addressing their weak areas through a variety of settings - traditional interaction with other students and teachers AND implementation of newer technologies. I actually think it would be great if schools were flexible on hours/days. For example, when I was in high school kids came for "traditional" English and Math classes then left for internships or additional job training at the vocational/technical school. Unfortunately, we seem to have the mantra of everyone should go to college when it should be the mantra of everyone who wants to go to college can. Instead, we are overloading colleges with kids who don't want to go and who aren't successful when in many instances they would do better with training and immediately to work. Since when did it become shameful to go to vocational school? I wish businesses would get more involved in education. We need more direction on what skills they need us to teach the kids and we need more partnerships with businesses to get the kids into internships in high school. Luckily, in Louisville UPS Worldport is located here and our public schools have a good partnership to allow the kids to work there instead of staying in high school all day. I sure wish we could have a wide range of partnerships with alot of types of businesses to give the kids a better sense of what they can do. I think it would also be interesting to rework our high schools where they "major" in certain areas. We do that here to a certain extent but alot of parents won't send their kid to the school with the aviation program (for example) because it is a persistently low achieving school in a bad neighborhood.

josevolution

Jason P wrote:

I think parents would oppose a 4-day week because they would have to hire daycare one day a week.

Yeah this is one of the big issues the $$$$$$

blueandwhite

Overhauling an education system is not a cheap proposition. Moreover, developing an alternative method of delivery that is actually effective requires considerable research and time to develop. The last thing we need to do as a society is create another education fad which creates more social problems and leaves a generation feeling helpless. I get the distinct impression that any changes we see will be poorly planned and of little benefit to students. While the US government is willing to dump trillions into warfare, I doubt that we'll ever see the necessary R&D to develop a truly cutting-edge education system for American students. Private interests and overt partisan politics don't help the issue either.

markin ball

This is slightly off topic however I think the biggest crisis this nation faces is our attitude towards education. Critical thinking, math, science, etc. are politicized to the detriment of us all. We are lost without smart, thoughtful, imaginative people. We need to hunger and value education. It needs to be a top cultural priority.

catefrances

if i had just one iota of patience i wouldve home schooled my kids.

hedonist

riotgrl wrote:

I actually think it would be great if schools were flexible on hours/days. For example, when I was in high school kids came for "traditional" English and Math classes then left for internships or additional job training at the vocational/technical school. Unfortunately, we seem to have the mantra of everyone should go to college when it should be the mantra of everyone who wants to go to college can. Instead, we are overloading colleges with kids who don't want to go and who aren't successful when in many instances they would do better with training and immediately to work. Since when did it become shameful to go to vocational school?

riotgrl, all of what you wrote was so well-said, especially what was quoted. Learning a trade, having the opportunity to do so, is invaluable. Plumbers, electricians, among many others, if they're skillful (and hopefully ethical) will never have trouble finding honest work.

My route involved choosing work/experience over some college education. It suited me better at the time and given where I am now, I'm happy I made those choices. They were the right ones for me.

(a good head on one's shoulders, encouragement and worthy examples do wonders, too)

mikepegg44

blueandwhite wrote:

Overhauling an education system is not a cheap proposition. Moreover, developing an alternative method of delivery that is actually effective requires considerable research and time to develop. The last thing we need to do as a society is create another education fad which creates more social problems and leaves a generation feeling helpless. I get the distinct impression that any changes we see will be poorly planned and of little benefit to students. While the US government is willing to dump trillions into warfare, I doubt that we'll ever see the necessary R&D to develop a truly cutting-edge education system for American students. Private interests and overt partisan politics don't help the issue either.

so you are saying you would rather stay in the situation we are in, spending WAY too much and get little return on the investment....or spending some of that money figuring out ways to better serve our kids.
I don't think everything needs 10 years of R & D. But as real estate prices go up, and new schools are costing millions and millions of dollars...isn't it time to at least re-think the brick and mortar delivery model for all of our education? In the end that will be cheaper.
We don't want to end up watering our crops with Gatorade do we?

Jason P

Which country has the best education rates? What are they doing? Canada is ahead and usually ranked in the top 5 in the world. How much is different between the US and Canadian education systems?

Canada spends $6,500 per year on each student in public schools.

The US spends $13,000 per year on each student in public schools.

It appears that the US does not invest much of that money into accounting classes. :geek:

riotgrl

mikepegg44 wrote:

blueandwhite wrote:

Overhauling an education system is not a cheap proposition. Moreover, developing an alternative method of delivery that is actually effective requires considerable research and time to develop. The last thing we need to do as a society is create another education fad which creates more social problems and leaves a generation feeling helpless. I get the distinct impression that any changes we see will be poorly planned and of little benefit to students. While the US government is willing to dump trillions into warfare, I doubt that we'll ever see the necessary R&D to develop a truly cutting-edge education system for American students. Private interests and overt partisan politics don't help the issue either.

so you are saying you would rather stay in the situation we are in, spending WAY too much and get little return on the investment....or spending some of that money figuring out ways to better serve our kids.
I don't think everything needs 10 years of R & D. But as real estate prices go up, and new schools are costing millions and millions of dollars...isn't it time to at least re-think the brick and mortar delivery model for all of our education? In the end that will be cheaper.
We don't want to end up watering our crops with Gatorade do we?

Part of the problem is WHO is doing the developing. In each district, in each state, and at the federal level we have people creating the next fad who spent very little IF ANY time teaching. Put a bunch of teachers in a room and they will have a much better chance of developing legitimate education system. Then spend time working with parents and businesses and other interested parties to further refine and I think the system would be much better. However, it is usually a top down system and then we are left scratching our heads about why it doesn't work and why we can't compete in the world market. :fp:

polaris_x

is it any wonder a me-first country can't institute a we-first program?

mikepegg44

polaris_x wrote:

is it any wonder a me-first country can't institute a we-first program?

I don't think it has to be seen as me first or we first. P

Basically I am saying the current system holds back the students from moving at their own pace. we should be getting away from the we focus that makes students who could have nothing more than age in common when talking about their development be in the same classes learning the same things.
That and college and universities are so expensive now and there is less and less real tangible value attached to the education you receive something has to happen soon. (not an indictment of liberal arts educations value)
Stanford should be commended for being forward thinking with their SEE program. Hopefully this will become part of the new affordability model. I find it refreshing that a traditional university is allowing access to their catalog to people who have not been accepted into that school. Why define your student body based on academic requirements, if classroom space isn't a limitation...why limit your base and your income as a university...why not allow people to take your courses...imagine 5 - 10 dollars at a time for classes...the university could send those classes out to anyone, and all it would take is 5 dollars and the books... would be fantastic considering the amount of students you have out there if you don't bind yourself to the old way of thinking...I am actually pretty excited to see where this goes...

Jason P

Has anyone looked into taking a class from Coursera? It's free college classes over the internet through a colaberation between Penn, Michigan, Stanford, and Princeton.

https://www.coursera.org/

Anyway, I think this is a new way of providing education and warrants being mentioned in this thread. It's free and available to anyone in the world (providing your government does not have a huge firewall on web content).

I've been considering taking A History of the World since 1300.

catefrances

Jason P wrote:

Has anyone looked into taking a class from Coursera? It's free college classes over the internet through a colaberation between Penn, Michigan, Stanford, and Princeton.

https://www.coursera.org/

Anyway, I think this is a new way of providing education and warrants being mentioned in this thread. It's free and available to anyone in the world (providing your government does not have a huge firewall on web content).

I've been considering taking A History of the World since 1300.

want to be study buddies?

mikepegg44

Jason P wrote:

Has anyone looked into taking a class from Coursera? It's free college classes over the internet through a colaberation between Penn, Michigan, Stanford, and Princeton.

https://www.coursera.org/

Anyway, I think this is a new way of providing education and warrants being mentioned in this thread. It's free and available to anyone in the world (providing your government does not have a huge firewall on web content).

I've been considering taking A History of the World since 1300.

yes, that is what I was referring to with the SEE program. It stands for Stanford Engineering Everywhere I believe!

It is very exciting to think about where this can go

Jason P

catefrances wrote:

want to be study buddies?

I still have to decide on if I want to pull the trigger.

On one hand it sounds cool and enlightening. On the other hand, I have to do homework. :( As the great Sergeant Roger Murtaugh once said, I'm getting too old for this shit.

catefrances

Jason P wrote:

catefrances wrote:

want to be study buddies?

I still have to decide on if I want to pull the trigger.

On one hand it sounds cool and enlightening. On the other hand, I have to do homework. :( As the great Sergeant Roger Murtaugh once said, I'm getting too old for this shit.

but you learn stuff. no one is too old to learn stuff. and history is important and so very interesting. :geek:

polaris_x

mikepegg44 wrote:

I don't think it has to be seen as me first or we first. P

Basically I am saying the current system holds back the students from moving at their own pace. we should be getting away from the we focus that makes students who could have nothing more than age in common when talking about their development be in the same classes learning the same things.
That and college and universities are so expensive now and there is less and less real tangible value attached to the education you receive something has to happen soon. (not an indictment of liberal arts educations value)
Stanford should be commended for being forward thinking with their SEE program. Hopefully this will become part of the new affordability model. I find it refreshing that a traditional university is allowing access to their catalog to people who have not been accepted into that school. Why define your student body based on academic requirements, if classroom space isn't a limitation...why limit your base and your income as a university...why not allow people to take your courses...imagine 5 - 10 dollars at a time for classes...the university could send those classes out to anyone, and all it would take is 5 dollars and the books... would be fantastic considering the amount of students you have out there if you don't bind yourself to the old way of thinking...I am actually pretty excited to see where this goes...

i think when you boil down the problem - that is ultimately what it comes down to ... America has a fundamental problem of not being able to deliver programs efficiently - many people want to say that is inherent in gov't but many countries are able to deliver high quality programs at a fraction of the cost ...

drop out rates are a huge problem ... the discrepancies in basic education quality is a huge problem ... adequate funding is a problem ...

Jason P

mikepegg44 wrote:

yes, that is what I was referring to with the SEE program. It stands for Stanford Engineering Everywhere I believe!

It is very exciting to think about where this can go

I missed that post earlier. Looks like a few of the SEE courses are also available thru Coursera.

I don't know how much a credit cost nowadays, but each class must have well over a $1,000 value to it.

know1

Jason P wrote:

I think parents would oppose a 4-day week because they would have to hire daycare one day a week.

I agree.

While I agree in principal to the OP's post, I do also somewhat like and respect that our kids have somewhere relatively safe and beneficial to go to while their parents are working.

catefrances

know1 wrote:

Jason P wrote:

I think parents would oppose a 4-day week because they would have to hire daycare one day a week.

I agree.

While I agree in principal to the OP's post, I do also somewhat like and respect that our kids have somewhere relatively safe and beneficial to go to while their parents are working.

plus there might be some actual learning going on.. and thats always a bonus.

blueandwhite

mikepegg44 wrote:

blueandwhite wrote:

Overhauling an education system is not a cheap proposition. Moreover, developing an alternative method of delivery that is actually effective requires considerable research and time to develop. The last thing we need to do as a society is create another education fad which creates more social problems and leaves a generation feeling helpless. I get the distinct impression that any changes we see will be poorly planned and of little benefit to students. While the US government is willing to dump trillions into warfare, I doubt that we'll ever see the necessary R&D to develop a truly cutting-edge education system for American students. Private interests and overt partisan politics don't help the issue either.

so you are saying you would rather stay in the situation we are in, spending WAY too much and get little return on the investment....or spending some of that money figuring out ways to better serve our kids.
I don't think everything needs 10 years of R & D. But as real estate prices go up, and new schools are costing millions and millions of dollars...isn't it time to at least re-think the brick and mortar delivery model for all of our education? In the end that will be cheaper.
We don't want to end up watering our crops with Gatorade do we?

I'm not suggesting that the status quo is the preferred course, but I don't have a lot of faith in government to improve education given that populist nature of modern politics. Any changes to the system will undoubtedly be defined by lobbyists and special-interest groups who have very little concern for the general welfare of young learners. Governments will almost certainly face heavy public scrutiny for their investments which will result in unwanted or unreasonable compromises that could literally defeat the point of making any changes in the first place.

cincybearcat

mikepegg44 wrote:

Listening to the radio I heard about a 4 day week change that some schools are meeting resistance on in MN...why does it matter if the educational standards are met?.

Personally I think the school system should change to reflect todays society. No more early release days (seriously, what is up with that?), etc. Make it year round school. Longer school day, use the extra time to provide more study hall type situations for kids. Provide smaller breaks throughout the day and with activities to help break it all up. No cramming it all in 8-230, Sept-May.

But hey, maybe that's just me. More families are dual working parent families, why don't we have a school system that helps kids learn better while actually helping out the families schedules (you know, the customers of the school system?).

catefrances

cincybearcat wrote:

mikepegg44 wrote:

Listening to the radio I heard about a 4 day week change that some schools are meeting resistance on in MN...why does it matter if the educational standards are met?.

Personally I think the school system should change to reflect todays society. No more early release days (seriously, what is up with that?), etc. Make it year round school. Longer school day, use the extra time to provide more study hall type situations for kids. Provide smaller breaks throughout the day and with activities to help break it all up. No cramming it all in 8-230, Sept-May.

But hey, maybe that's just me. More families are dual working parent families, why don't we have a school system that helps kids learn better while actually helping out the families schedules (you know, the customers of the school system?).

lets not forget that teachers may well be half of a dual working parental unit themselvs... so whose schedule are you going to follow? teachers dont just walk into the classroom at 8 and walk out again at 230. they need to prepare, they need to make sure they know more than the kids and they need to take into account every individual students needs so those longer working hours you think might be a good idea.. theyre already working.