why does the u.s. rank so low on science, is their anything we can do to fix this?

[onedomino]

Too many parents hand their kids off to schools and expect them to return educated without any effort on their part. Consider, however, that a good result in math usually requires the participation of the parents (unless the kid is gifted or very self motivated). No one "learns" analytic geometry in a 50 minute per day classroom session. For the average kid to have command of analytic geometry (11th grade math) it takes lots of effort and homework; with parents helping and checking the homework every night. How many parents are either willing or capable of doing that? To reach the same level as kids in northern Europe and Japan, one must have at least some calculus before high school graduation. How often does that happen in the US? How many parents can check the solutions to differential equations in their kid's calculus homework? If we want our kids to really excel in math, we are going to have to extend the school year, spend a lot more classroom time on math, demand strong effort and lots of homework, combined with as much parent participation as possible. If we really want to press for strong results we will better connect job and college placement with achievement in math. For example, Got Ds and Cs in calculus? Then your entry level position is worth X. Got Bs and As, then it is worth 1.25X.

 

[Annie]

Yes I do agree. BUT!!!! I dont believe that the lower income familys deserve to be locked out of the prep school program, financial aid would help.

financial aid is unnecessary in public grammar or high schools.

Of course those that show less aptitude and less ability to learn and solve problems, should not waste everyones time distracting kids who DO care about learning. They need to be put into some type of trade school program at a very young age. That way they can help society by learning what they are good at, and staying out of the way of kids who want to learn mathmatics or science, and not have to deal with class clowns.

Good.

 

[Vintij]

financial aid is unnecessary in public grammar or high schools. Good.

It is if you want to reform education on a mass scale, unless the government wants to pay for public education reform.

 

[Annie]

It is if you want to reform education on a mass scale, unless the government wants to pay for public education reform.

So you wish to abolish the public schools? What are you speaking of?

If you were following he logic of what you are agreeing to, those unable or unwilling to complete prep classes, would be put into alternative classes, that are less intensive, rigorous, expensive. That would not imply more money needed for those qualified, on the contrary, with those unable/unwilling to participate in classes of a higher calibre being excluded, both class time and monies will be saved for those that qualify. It's called, discrimination.

 

[Vintij]

So you wish to abolish the public schools? What are you speaking of?

If you were following he logic of what you are agreeing to, those unable or unwilling to complete prep classes, would be put into alternative classes, that are less intensive, rigorous, expensive. That would not imply more money needed for those qualified, on the contrary, with those unable/unwilling to participate in classes of a higher calibre being excluded, both class time and monies will be saved for those that qualify. It's called, discrimination.

No not abolish them at all. Just every single new public school that is built, will be aimed at eventually sitting at the top percentage of public schools, by not allowing under qualified students to get in. This will draw highly qualified students to the new schools, and open up room at the older schools for the majority of average/below average students to get more attention.

Here is a good idea, seperate underclassmen (9th and 10th graders) to consume a school compiled of the majority 9-10 graders. The ones who "graduate" or get promoted will continue on to a better uppder division school. The ones that dont do well, will continue in the rest of high school in the same school 11-12 grade but with smaller classrooms. Then make the 11-12 grades number 1 goal of graduating with a decent chance at going to college. Thats it, focus on college. The ones that got promoted will go to an all upper classmen school, and almost guarantee themsevles a spot in a college campus with the expectations and difficulty being much higher at these schools. All public.


What do you think? All we have to do is make subdivisions, and focus seperately on each division. And ofcourse, build more schools.

 

[Annie]

No not abolish them at all. Just every single new public school that is built, will be aimed at eventually sitting at the top percentage of public schools, by not allowing under qualified students to get in. This will draw highly qualified students to the new schools, and open up room at the older schools for the majority of average/below average students to get more attention.

Here is a good idea, seperate underclassmen (9th and 10th graders) to consume a school compiled of the majority 9-10 graders. The ones who "graduate" or get promoted will continue on to a better uppder division school. The ones that dont do well, will continue in the rest of high school in the same school 11-12 grade but with smaller classrooms. Then make the 11-12 grades number 1 goal of graduating with a decent chance at going to college. Thats it, focus on college. The ones that got promoted will go to an all upper classmen school, and almost guarantee themsevles a spot in a college campus with the expectations and difficulty being much higher at these schools. All public.


What do you think? All we have to do is make subdivisions, and focus seperately on each division. And ofcourse, build more schools.

LOL, I'm sorry. Suddenly you are doing a 180, I'll catch up. High school is too late to start 'dividing'. If we are going on ability/attitude, it must start way earlier. Even the Europeans get that.

So forget the kid who has run into social problems, but is really bright. They've been id by 4th/5th grade.

Not fair? What's not fair? Those that act out or just hate school, contaminating the environment?

Who do we save? Who do we throw over?

European model has been very clear and successful in many ways.

US model not so clear, but saves many that would have been lost through European model, often of 'lower classes.' Damn.

 

[CSM]

LOL, I'm sorry. Suddenly you are doing a 180, I'll catch up. High school is too late to start 'dividing'. If we are going on ability/attitude, it must start way earlier. Even the Europeans get that.

So forget the kid who has run into social problems, but is really bright. They've been id by 4th/5th grade.

Not fair? What's not fair? Those that act out or just hate school, contaminating the environment?

Who do we save? Who do we throw over?

European model has been very clear and successful in many ways.

US model not so clear, but saves many that would have been lost through European model, often of 'lower classes.' Damn.

Sonds like a caste system for education.

 

[Vintij]

LOL, I'm sorry. Suddenly you are doing a 180, I'll catch up. High school is too late to start 'dividing'. If we are going on ability/attitude, it must start way earlier. Even the Europeans get that.

So forget the kid who has run into social problems, but is really bright. They've been id by 4th/5th grade.

Not fair? What's not fair? Those that act out or just hate school, contaminating the environment?

Who do we save? Who do we throw over?

European model has been very clear and successful in many ways.

US model not so clear, but saves many that would have been lost through European model, often of 'lower classes.' Damn.

Yes thats what I meant. Separate them, tag them, develope them according to ability. Try to make the smart, even smarter.....try to make the dumb, average. Try to make the average, smart. But do it in different ways, different schools, different classrooms. Dont let either group, "contaminate" the other.

 

[Annie]

Yes thats what I meant. Separate them, tag them, develope them according to ability. Try to make the smart, even smarter.....try to make the dumb, average. Try to make the average, smart. But do it in different ways, different schools, different classrooms. Dont let either group, "contaminate" the other.

Actually, I was asking you to make a choice. Should the US follow the European model or continue on its path of educating 'all' till 18? Get it?

 

[CSM]

Actually, I was asking you to make a choice. Should the US follow the European model or continue on its path of educating 'all' till 18? Get it?

I am following so far but I have to ask: Since individuals tend to develop at different rates, should there not be methods for crossing over at different stages? Perhaps the student who gets pigeon holed into the "votech" path develops later on and hits upon the personal characteristics necessar to pursue a college path later in the educational process. Perhaps a student set on the college path finds themselves attracted to a different calling (artist or musician for example) which does not necessarily require a college education to succeed.

 

[Vintij]

Actually, I was asking you to make a choice. Should the US follow the European model or continue on its path of educating 'all' till 18? Get it?

Well with the no child left behind act, im not sure we can completely model our system after Europe, but a hybrid system would work well. A system that would be more like the "some children left behind" act. The unusually low interest and low potential students, but they dont have to stay home all day. Progams can be made, designed to prepare them for the work force.

 

[Annie]

I am following so far but I have to ask: Since individuals tend to develop at different rates, should there not be methods for crossing over at different stages? Perhaps the student who gets pigeon holed into the "votech" path develops later on and hits upon the personal characteristics necessar to pursue a college path later in the educational process. Perhaps a student set on the college path finds themselves attracted to a different calling (artist or musician for example) which does not necessarily require a college education to succeed.

That is the rationale, along with other criteria of US model, which is not followed, to the best of my knowledge, anywhere else in the world. The European model was 'borrowed' by the Japanese during their Meiji revolution 2 C ago. Others have since adopted.

The only thing, and I do mean ONLY thing to recommend the US model is that some children are lost until a certain point, for a variety of reasons. If any of those reasons are but ability, the US model gives them a chance. IE, the US model gives ability a chance as last resort. The US model throws no one out until basically the end of 11th grade, even then, not cast in stone. Community colleges.

 

[CSM]

That is the rationale, along with other criteria of US model, which is not followed, to the best of my knowledge, anywhere else in the world. The European model was 'borrowed' by the Japanese during their Meiji revolution 2 C ago. Others have since adopted.

The only thing, and I do mean ONLY thing to recommend the US model is that some children are lost until a certain point, for a variety of reasons. If any of those reasons are but ability, the US model gives them a chance. IE, the US model gives ability a chance as last resort. The US model throws no one out until basically the end of 11th grade, even then, not cast in stone. Community colleges.

I agree. I can imagine a student who finally "wakes up" or finds some area that really does interest him enough to foster further study that just might not be in a particular school's program.

 

[Annie]

I agree. I can imagine a student who finally "wakes up" or finds some area that really does interest him enough to foster further study that just might not be in a particular school's program.

That is the 'thing' that keeps the US from throwing out the model. There are ever so many 'gifted' 'bright' 'average' 5-10 grade kids that for a variety of reasons fail to pass at the 85% or better level. Some for learning reasons, many more psycho-social. In any case, do we want to lose them?