"Americans are Simple-Minded"

[MikeK]

The rest of the world views us, and especially our education system, as a joke. Americans are openly ridiculed in other countries b/c the majority of the country doesn't give a shit about learning and our school systems have suffered because of this.

Sad but all too true.

 

[antagon]

Your approach, I call the "classical approach," isn't new, it was applied in public schools between their origin, and 1960, but then it failed: Thus the rise of other methods. I have very little basis for speculating what happens in private parochial schools, but as such, they do have the OPTION of taking any student that darkens their door. This is a tremendous "benefit" that doesn't exist in any public school.

For the past 50 years, your approach to public education has been recognised as inadequate. The "Head Start" program doesn't employ the methods you've mentioned, but is merely a preschool program the DOE offers for poor kids.

students who excel in school are touted by the school system to have parents who value educational achievement. this happens in the public school system, just like anywhere else. public schools acknowledge that this is the case. what is the public school response? appropriate less value to educational achievement to curb... ... 'hopelessness'. wtf?

what i contend to be effective has happened in public schools all along, despite their policies. for all successful students, an attachment between performance and grades, grades and success has been cast in stone. this system certainly didn't fail circa 1960. students with better grades have learned more at school; there's no hokus pokus about not learning, just getting grades. these students have also demonstrated the ability to conform to a set of instructions based on a result for an extended time: this is the formula for making a living in a society like ours, for occupations from laborer to chief exec.

you are claiming that these public school methods have been applied to put out people who can get ordinary jobs just as well as extraordinary ones. i argue that these new systems have failed to do so where the system in the 50s and 60s did great. jobs, even the ordinary ones which i drew anecdotes from earlier, aren't based on having someone soak up 8 hrs a day with arbitrary effect. instead, many job descriptions call for 'results-oriented' individuals in an effort to weed out the losers produced by the tactics which you're defending. again, these practices run against the grain of intuition.

i dont believe in your failure conjecture about schools in the 1960s. can you substantiate that a crisis is what brought about this bullshit? i have an entirely different theory.

 

[Samson]

Your approach, I call the "classical approach," isn't new, it was applied in public schools between their origin, and 1960, but then it failed: Thus the rise of other methods. I have very little basis for speculating what happens in private parochial schools, but as such, they do have the OPTION of taking any student that darkens their door. This is a tremendous "benefit" that doesn't exist in any public school.

For the past 50 years, your approach to public education has been recognised as inadequate. The "Head Start" program doesn't employ the methods you've mentioned, but is merely a preschool program the DOE offers for poor kids.

students who excel in school are touted by the school system to have parents who value educational achievement. this happens in the public school system, just like anywhere else. public schools acknowledge that this is the case. what is the public school response? appropriate less value to educational achievement to curb... ... 'hopelessness'. wtf?

what i contend to be effective has happened in public schools all along, despite their policies. for all successful students, an attachment between performance and grades, grades and success has been cast in stone. this system certainly didn't fail circa 1960. students with better grades have learned more at school; there's no hokus pokus about not learning, just getting grades. these students have also demonstrated the ability to conform to a set of instructions based on a result for an extended time: this is the formula for making a living in a society like ours, for occupations from laborer to chief exec.

you are claiming that these public school methods have been applied to put out people who can get ordinary jobs just as well as extraordinary ones. i argue that these new systems have failed to do so where the system in the 50s and 60s did great. jobs, even the ordinary ones which i drew anecdotes from earlier, aren't based on having someone soak up 8 hrs a day with arbitrary effect. instead, many job descriptions call for 'results-oriented' individuals in an effort to weed out the losers produced by the tactics which you're defending. again, these practices run against the grain of intuition.

i dont believe in your failure conjecture about schools in the 1960s. can you substantiate that a crisis is what brought about this bullshit? i have an entirely different theory.

So, you still haven't a single example where your "classical" methods of motivating students in public schools has been effective since the 1960's?

Sorry, but until you return to my planet, there isn't much to discuss.

 

[Samson]

Unfortunately the Liberal philosophy does not acknowledge the need for strict discipline as a principal component of the educational process. Evidence of this is most apparent in some American schools in which the teachers are actually afraid of their students.

What do you mean "strict discipline?"

Should the educational process employ rubber hoses?

Sorry to break it to you, but this us almost universally unlawful, and "Conservative" lawmakers haven't made any effort to make it otherwise. Most voters seem to agree that "strict discipline" is a parental responsibility, not an institutional one.

 

[Samson]

The rest of the world views us, and especially our education system, as a joke. Americans are openly ridiculed in other countries b/c the majority of the country doesn't give a shit about learning and our school systems have suffered because of this.

Sad but all too true.

Interesting.

Let's assume you're right:

Americans Are Openly Ridiculed In Other Countries, where other people, most of whom have never visited the US, have concluded from.....whatever....that the majority of the USA "doesn't give a shit about learning."

A. Who gives a shit what they think in other countries?
B. Most Other Countries don't even speak English, so WTF do they know about the details of American Society
C. Comparing the USA with other countries is idiotic: The USA has NO, ONE, EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM, but is comprised of a large number of systems, most of which act INDEPENDENTLY of each other.

 

[antagon]

is this about motivation? this is about grading kids, marking math problems wrong and scoring soccer games. none of this is mutually exclusive to teaching kids how to do things or being sensitive to their emotions. you suggest that they are and should be avoided for that reason. i argue that these methods are more effective motivators than when they are removed.

these methods are in wide-spread use in public education for children under 14, whereas what you're talking about is in fact the approach which lacks the track record, and is counter-intuitive to success.

ignoring the fact that things work in our public schools is the problem. you've made it the basis of your argument.

i've never been on your planet, samson. no sense in my returning then. on your planet there was some kind of crisis in our schools in the sixties. on my planet, the crisis was the reinvention of education in the 70s in and of itself.

 

[Samson]

is this about motivation? .

Yeah it is about motivation.

I wish I had the time to review the entire fuckin' thread for you, but if you haven't discovered this concept already, it probably wouldn't help.

 

[Middleman]

Sad but all too true.

Interesting.

Let's assume you're right:

Americans Are Openly Ridiculed In Other Countries, where other people, most of whom have never visited the US, have concluded from.....whatever....that the majority of the USA "doesn't give a shit about learning."

A. Who gives a shit what they think in other countries?
B. Most Other Countries don't even speak English, so WTF do they know about the details of American Society
C. Comparing the USA with other countries is idiotic: The USA has NO, ONE, EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM, but is comprised of a large number of systems, most of which act INDEPENDENTLY of each other.

Actually, English is a second language for much of the world. Americans, on the other hand, don't even get taught Spanish, then gripe like crazy about not knowing Spanish.

 

[Samson]

Sad but all too true.

Interesting.

Let's assume you're right:

Americans Are Openly Ridiculed In Other Countries, where other people, most of whom have never visited the US, have concluded from.....whatever....that the majority of the USA "doesn't give a shit about learning."

A. Who gives a shit what they think in other countries?
B. Most Other Countries don't even speak English, so WTF do they know about the details of American Society
C. Comparing the USA with other countries is idiotic: The USA has NO, ONE, EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM, but is comprised of a large number of systems, most of which act INDEPENDENTLY of each other.

Actually, English is a second language for much of the world. Americans, on the other hand, don't even get taught Spanish, then gripe like crazy about not knowing Spanish.

"Much" of the educated world.

The vast majority of the world is not "educated" beyond the 8th grade, and if it is, it certainly isn't taught English, but rather, some technical skill: Carpentry, Plumbing, Electrical, Masonry. This is why education in other countries works so well: They don't try to educate EVERYONE.