Nationalized Education Curriculum pre-k to 12th

[Unkotare]

...How do you feel about schools separating students based on demonstrated knowledge (tests) vs the teacher's discretion (pass or fail)? ...

Schools use both. Some people bitch about both.

 

[Unkotare]

... Do you believe homework should take priority over studying/readings ...?...

It's not either/or.

 

[Unkotare]

.....What opinions do you have on creating a harder curriculum? ...

"Harder" will always be a relative measure.

 

[Unkotare]

.... Finally for this thread, any opinions on removing textbooks and using pieces if not entire sections of sourcebook (instead of talking of political philosophy from a textbook include some of The Prince)?

Both are already used.

 

[HenryBHough]

There should never have been any federal agency concerned with education in any way. It was wrong when it was thought up. It quickly proved it was wrong. Now it's 100% political and stands in the way of education.

Education controlled other than by 100% local values and needs is not education. Just indoctrination. I learned that from my 6th grade teacher, an Irish Catholic DEMOCRATIC Party devotee. But that when it hadn't dropped the "IC".

She was soooooo right!

 

[Unkotare]

ELA already uses "primary sources," of course. History classes use primary sources all the time, more according to the level of class involved.

 

[Pythagoras]

I was merely using the FDA as an example of a "non-constitutional" creation. Do you disagree with the creation and jurisdiction of the FDA or its motives too? Do you just not read what medicine to take and ask for whatever ails you or do you refuse most medicine that isn't all-natural? Does this also mean you're an anti-vaxxer? When was the last time you ate food? Were you looking at the cost to amount ratio or did you hunt for your own food? How many times have you had dysentery in the past lifetime?

Do you believe that for efficiency or just because you believe the constitution is the only thing we can follow? or why? I do agree with the fact that the state and city need to not only work on keeping up with current information but also have most of the local jurisdiction on lock. The disagreement I have is when it comes to what to teach specifically. How do you feel about everyone learning the same thing? Even in the state, you live in? What if they decide reading doesn't matter anymore and want to regress into oral tradition is that in their right?

This is something a take a huge issue with mainly because of what religious education can do if it is allowed to go unchecked. Do you think any religious school should be able to dictate its own curriculum? Do you believe a school can not have a medical professional due to doctor Jesus their lord and savior? Do you draw the line when religious teachers rape children or beat them? With absolute control, it will become significantly harder to catch those who are heinous and evil don't you think?

I believe thst the US Constitution is the core of our system and needs to be followed to the letter. There are means to change it, if necessary. Whether or not I agree with the purpose of the FDA is irrelevant because the Government has no legitimate power in that area. I follow the recommendations of my medical professionals.

I believe every locality should have the right to determine what level of education they will offer. Public pressure will prevail and whatever the community wants, and is willing to pay for, is what they will get. I do believe that religious education does not belong in public schools. However, I have no issue with parochial education. Obviously staff and administrators cannot injure their charges or commit crimes and be protected from charges.

I see a lot of their power being in approval and testing however in all frankness our current FDA system is kind of a joke from my personal opinion. That being said I still belive it is legitimate and necessary for the public well-being as poorly Maintenence as it is. I digress.

The desire to follow the constitution to the letter especially since it has the ability to be amended also makes sense for me. I just don't have that much faith in the entirety of the public especially when it comes down to getting things done. This being said I do agree with the fact the local government should stay on top of things and have most of the power, just not on what the students should learn because then it can get so disjointed the education crisis would be overwhelming.

I agree with the religion and education statement. Personally, I don't like religious institutions beyond places of worship but I know that will not change anytime soon so I have accepted they'll be there. When it comes to religious pushes in the curriculum is where I have issues. The suppression of certain theories based on science or philosophy happens to be another issue I have. ( I of course am of the mind that philosophy and religion are separate beasts) Again I digress.

The only thing I see is the curriculum issue and that's mainly just me wanting an equally well-informed general public who stand on equal ground. I will never agree that education should be lowered to fit some standard but pushing for a stronger education system all around is where I currently stand. Is there an arrangement of the curricular decisions you'd support? Council of the board of Ed. from each state? Locality/state decision making? Free-for-all?

Why are you referencing the FDA? What does that have to do with the topic?

I was using it in the context of an "unconstitutional" creation asking if that was what that person considered unconstitutional the same way he considered federal education oversight. That is all.

 

[Pythagoras]

ELA already uses "primary sources," of course. History classes use primary sources all the time, more according to the level of class involved.

I understand primary sources are in use but several schools have considered losing textbooks and transitioning to those sources instead. I am not just referencing their use in some cases more so asking about the total transition which some people are for and others are against. I am merely curious to hear everyone's side of that as well as take a poke at it with an inquiry.

 

[Unkotare]

ELA already uses "primary sources," of course. History classes use primary sources all the time, more according to the level of class involved.

I understand primary sources are in use but several schools have considered losing textbooks and transitioning to those sources instead. I am not just referencing their use in some cases more so asking about the total transition which some people are for and others are against. I am merely curious to hear everyone's side of that as well as take a poke at it with an inquiry.

Makes no sense. In History classes, texts are used to contextualize and interpret primary sources and help younger students see and understand these sources in larger historical periods. You wouldn't be doing students much of a service by just tossing a copy of the Code of Hammurabi at them.

 

[Pythagoras]

ELA already uses "primary sources," of course. History classes use primary sources all the time, more according to the level of class involved.

I understand primary sources are in use but several schools have considered losing textbooks and transitioning to those sources instead. I am not just referencing their use in some cases more so asking about the total transition which some people are for and others are against. I am merely curious to hear everyone's side of that as well as take a poke at it with an inquiry.

Makes no sense. In History classes, texts are used to contextualize and interpret primary sources and help younger students see and understand these sources in larger historical periods. You wouldn't be doing students much of a service by just tossing a copy of the Code of Hammurabi at them.

Just because someone is using those books doesn't mean they aren't being taught continuity and change over time. I of course am not saying that you can't teach the periods in a history textbook but instead of using the texts books giving passages and other primary sources alongside teaching the same information. Instead of a textbook noting the prince was a book. The class would go over what the prince is. Read parts and then discuss. In my world history course in high school, several teachers had wished it had been available but since the school decided it was more important to read the 2 pages allocated to the renaissance they couldn't. Later in that year part of the courses writing had been about the effects of ancient greek culture on Europe to which several people were ill-prepared. I am not saying we must remove teaching history in a grand scheme I am asking if more direct sources could be more beneficial.

 

[Unkotare]

... I am not saying we must remove teaching history in a grand scheme I am asking if more direct sources could be more beneficial.

As I said before, the more advanced level courses use more primary sources.

 

[Pythagoras]

... I am not saying we must remove teaching history in a grand scheme I am asking if more direct sources could be more beneficial.

As I said before, the more advanced level courses use more primary sources.

Do you think it should be more common even in lower-level courses just to adjust people better when writing in the future, just out of curiosity?

 

[Unkotare]

... I am not saying we must remove teaching history in a grand scheme I am asking if more direct sources could be more beneficial.

As I said before, the more advanced level courses use more primary sources.

Do you think it should be more common even in lower-level courses just to adjust people better when writing in the future, just out of curiosity?

It's less common in lower level courses because the students there are less well prepared to understand what they are engaging. It does no service to students to give them challenges without tools. Students need and deserve respect and to be held to high standards, but 'teaching' skydiving without handing out the parachutes is kinda unproductive.

 

[Pythagoras]

... I am not saying we must remove teaching history in a grand scheme I am asking if more direct sources could be more beneficial.

As I said before, the more advanced level courses use more primary sources.

Do you think it should be more common even in lower-level courses just to adjust people better when writing in the future, just out of curiosity?

It's less common in lower level courses because the students there are less well prepared to understand what they are engaging in. It does no service to students to give them challenges without tools. Students need and deserve respect and to be held to high standards, but 'teaching' skydiving without handing out the parachutes is kinda unproductive.

I do not disagree. What do you think would make the system more effective. I understand a lot of limitations come from mandatory testing and other complications but that aside I'm wanting to learn what other people believe to be effective and productive. The curriculum is so complex with intelligence and ages it can seem to be impossible to make perfect but improvement is always attainable. I don't want you to think I am ignoring these factors just merely seeking information from others on opinions hoping to run into solutions and perspectives I haven't previously.

Personally, I think it starts with teaching skills earlier on than we do. To try to negate early education being a daycare center which when I went through the system it was. I know it isn't always possible to teach kids to read in pre-k but I mean accelerating levels that are pointless like having to review the American revolution 10x over covering the same information more advanced. I think it should be more skill-based till high school and then letting high school be similar to today's college in writing and studying in-depth about advanced and specific topics. I am not claiming this to be the only solution or even the most pragmatic however it is personally what I look towards. What do you look towards? what do you aspire our education system to be?

 

[Unkotare]

.... I think it should be more skill-based till high school and then letting high school be similar to today's college in writing and studying in-depth about advanced and specific topics....

That, more or less, is how it IS now. You need to keep in mind that there are basic level courses, honors course, AP courses and specific electives. That's how it is NOW.

 

[Votto]

What are your opinions on a nationalized education system...

The US Constitution neither mandates nor provides for ANY involvement of the Federal Government in the Education System. Therefore the mere idea of a Federal Education System, Department of Education, or anything of the sort is a non-starter in my mind.

Yes but today we have cell phones, so everything is different now and we should ignore the Constitution.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Federal Department of Education should be closed immediately.

 

[flacaltenn]

What are your opinions on a nationalized education system with a completely equal Curriculum? How do you feel about schools separating students based on demonstrated knowledge (tests) vs the teacher's discretion (pass or fail)? Do you believe homework should take priority over studying/readings (of course excluding language and mathematics)? What opinions do you have on creating a harder curriculum? Finally for this thread, any opinions on removing textbooks and using pieces if not entire sections of sourcebook (instead of talking of political philosophy from a textbook include some of The Prince)?

I've never figured out how you tune or fix lagging and failing schools WITHOUT national testing. The states FUDGE their own testing numbers. The problem is -- APPARENTLY testing of any kind is "racist" and biased.. And the screams about NAEP for example are horrific.

If you're NOT gonna allow national testing -- then just DISBAND the Dept of Ed.. They have NO PURPOSE if they have no data to go on...

I dont there's time or benefit to roll in "original sources" in K-6, but for the higher grades it would advance the dialogue to do that and might rejuvenate some of the problems in teaching history and literature. Certainly NOT really advantageous for math, science because those curriculums are already tortured in "politically correct" propaganda which should be removed entirely if we don't want to lose our STEM edge in education...

The Department of Education funds Title I programs for the poor and Special Education. That's about all they do. If you are Jack Student or Suzie student and do not fall into those categories, the Ed Dept does not contribute anything to the cost of your education.

My Uncle and Aunt were Principals in some of worst schools in the NYC system.. The have the physical scars and the 3 stripped cars to show for it.. Later -- my uncle was retained as a consultant to the system.. He DRAGGED me into those schools, everytime I visited to show me the battlefield. I was maybe 14 to 16 --- but it was like watching non reality on TV -- but for REAL...

They both told me -- Dept of Education programs was a TIME WASTE.. Not even worth the effort of the paperwork for the assistance that you got... But appreciated that I asked.. LOL..

And today I understand that from the numbers and increasing compliance work that's required. And without a NAEP national baseline for performance -- The D of Ed can't even FIND the right schools to focus on.. Not a fan of "national curriculum". Not a fan of animatronic teachers following a day to day script.. But I AM A FAN of MEASURING performance before and AFTER pouring mountains of money into the crapper..

 

[Pythagoras]

... Do you believe homework should take priority over studying/readings ...?...

It's not either/or.

I was using them together but dependent not the course it can change from a form of reading to study or some other form.

 

[Pythagoras]

What are your opinions on a nationalized education system with a completely equal Curriculum? How do you feel about schools separating students based on demonstrated knowledge (tests) vs the teacher's discretion (pass or fail)? Do you believe homework should take priority over studying/readings (of course excluding language and mathematics)? What opinions do you have on creating a harder curriculum? Finally for this thread, any opinions on removing textbooks and using pieces if not entire sections of sourcebook (instead of talking of political philosophy from a textbook include some of The Prince)?

I've never figured out how you tune or fix lagging and failing schools WITHOUT national testing. The states FUDGE their own testing numbers. The problem is -- APPARENTLY testing of any kind is "racist" and biased.. And the screams about NAEP for example are horrific.

If you're NOT gonna allow national testing -- then just DISBAND the Dept of Ed.. They have NO PURPOSE if they have no data to go on...

I dont there's time or benefit to roll in "original sources" in K-6, but for the higher grades it would advance the dialogue to do that and might rejuvenate some of the problems in teaching history and literature. Certainly NOT really advantageous for math, science because those curriculums are already tortured in "politically correct" propaganda which should be removed entirely if we don't want to lose our STEM edge in education...

The Department of Education funds Title I programs for the poor and Special Education. That's about all they do. If you are Jack Student or Suzie student and do not fall into those categories, the Ed Dept does not contribute anything to the cost of your education.

My Uncle and Aunt were Principals in some of worst schools in the NYC system.. The have the physical scars and the 3 stripped cars to show for it.. Later -- my uncle was retained as a consultant to the system.. He DRAGGED me into those schools, everytime I visited to show me the battlefield. I was maybe 14 to 16 --- but it was like watching non reality on TV -- but for REAL...

They both told me -- Dept of Education programs was a TIME WASTE.. Not even worth the effort of the paperwork for the assistance that you got... But appreciated that I asked.. LOL..

And today I understand that from the numbers and increasing compliance work that's required. And without a NAEP national baseline for performance -- The D of Ed can't even FIND the right schools to focus on.. Not a fan of "national curriculum". Not a fan of animatronic teachers following a day to day script.. But I AM A FAN of MEASURING performance before and AFTER pouring mountains of money into the crapper..

That must have had a huge effect on how you judge education very few people I'm sure have actually had that type of experience. What do you believe would help the system? Is there anything else in your experience that you believe is a cause or could be a resolution to these issues of identification for allocation of funds? I am very curious.