# American school system



## Barliman Butterbur (Mar 20, 2005)

Mrs. Maggott said:


> American schools work tirelessly to keep their students from becoming profoundly literate...



That is sheer knee-jerk opinion and sheer rot — that, or an extremely unfortunate attempt at wit. I was a teacher in "American schools" for over 30 years, and I know better. Whatever problems the American public school system has, and there are many, American schools do NOT "work tirelessly" — as if there was a conscious official mission to do so — to keep students from becoming literate. You should know better, and you owe me and any other teachers on this forum — in fact, _all_ teachers who work their behinds off to help their students — an apology. I'm afraid if _all_ your opinions are based on no more than such snobbish superiority, then they are worth _nothing._ I'm afraid I must now re-evaluate everything you have opined on this forum in the light of such obvious shallow thinking.

Barley


----------



## Hammersmith (Mar 20, 2005)

*Re: PJ And Film Haters Only, Please*



Barliman Butterbur said:


> That is sheer knee-jerk opinion and sheer rot — that, or an extremely unfortunate attempt at wit. I was a teacher in "American schools" for over 30 years, and I know better. Whatever problems the American public school system has, and there are many, American schools do NOT "work tirelessly" — as if there was a conscious official mission to do so — to keep students from becoming literate. You should know better, and you owe me and any other teachers on this forum — in fact, _all_ teachers who work their behinds off to help their students — an apology. I'm afraid if _all_ your opinions are based on no more than such snobbish superiority, then they are worth _nothing._ I'm afraid I must now re-evaluate everything you have opined on this forum in the light of such obvious shallow thinking.
> 
> Barley


I would agree with you, in principle, but having attended both American and English schools, I would have to say that the standards of the former are lamentably poor, and don't hold a candle to English education systems. I'm not sure whether this is a result of a spectacular disinterest in learning or a byproduct of the American consumer culture, but I doubt anybody is actually _trying _to sabotage American learning.


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (Mar 20, 2005)

*Re: PJ And Film Haters Only, Please*



Hammersmith said:


> I would agree with you, in principle, but having attended both American and English schools, I would have to say that the standards of the former are lamentably poor, and don't hold a candle to English education systems. I'm not sure whether this is a result of a spectacular disinterest in learning or a byproduct of the American consumer culture, but I doubt anybody is actually _trying _to sabotage American learning.



You missed my point. I was taking issue with M's ridiculous and snide comment that there is a conscious effort to destroy student literacy in American schools. How insulting! 

Because of political interference and cultural apathy, just about any public school system in any other English-speaking country is now better than what we have here. But that is certainly not the fault of the teachers!

You come close to the mark when you say "disinterest in learning," and I blame the parents for that in large measure. In just about every case where there is a problem in student achievement, there is a lack of parental support for education. This happens for a number of reasons which include: parental disinterest; parents working such long hours that there is a little communication with their children; the parents themselves are anti-education. This cuts across all cultures: _where the parent values education and enforces learning, grades and behavior are up._

Another main problem is the perennially hostile situation from administrators to teachers, which can also be seen as a labor/management problem.

Another problem is that American schools have never settled on a curriculum that WORKS, and continue to fine-tune it. They are always into the "newest and the latest." This has a lot to do with getting new books (when there's money for them), and starting new programs, virtually none of which have been kid-tested before turning them loose on the teachers and the kids. There is a lot of politics in the selection and purchase of textbooks. And ALL of this militates against solid education.

Yet another problem is the right-wing extremist's attempts to dissolve the public educational system completely.

I see this as particularly insidious:

The conservative extremists WANT to turn average citizens into stupid compliant sheep, so that they are under control and too apathetic and demoralized to vote. That way it's easier for them to stay in power. They want the money in the hands of religious and private schools (voucher system) so that the priveleged can stay that way and the rest of us are left twisting in the wind. Just take a look at the all-inclusive range, both domestic and foreign, of the damage being done by the present administration. Don't get me started!

Barley


----------



## Mrs. Maggott (Mar 20, 2005)

*Re: PJ And Film Haters Only, Please*



Barliman Butterbur said:


> That is sheer knee-jerk opinion and sheer rot — that, or an extremely unfortunate attempt at wit. I was a teacher in "American schools" for over 30 years, and I know better. Whatever problems the American public school system has, and there are many, American schools do NOT "work tirelessly" — as if there was a conscious official mission to do so — to keep students from becoming literate. You should know better, and you owe me and any other teachers on this forum — in fact, _all_ teachers who work their behinds off to help their students — an apology. I'm afraid if _all_ your opinions are based on no more than such snobbish superiority, then they are worth _nothing._ I'm afraid I must now re-evaluate everything you have opined on this forum in the light of such obvious shallow thinking.
> 
> Barley


Sorry, but the thinking here isn't necessarily just mine. Several studies done over the years (and I don't have names etc. to give you, but the information is available) have determined that most American children enter public schools 2 years ahead of the children of other "first world" nations - and leave it 2 years behind them as well as the children from one or two "third world" nations as well. Furthermore, I know for a fact that children who come to this country as "exchange students" have to repeat the grade that they spent in American schools because their own countries consider the year that they spent in American schools to be worthless. 

I'm sorry, Barli, but while I know that there are just great teachers and administrators out there - and I'm sure that you are one of them - the educational establishment in this country is more interested in ideological indoctrination, multi-culturalism and teaching self esteem than it is in teaching a true classic edcuational curriculum. Many (and I mean _many_) studies of American textbooks reveal that they are mediocre at best and terrible at worst. Our children know little or nothing about history - including American history - and much of what they _do_ know, as Ronald Reagan once said, "ain't so". Most can't name the capitals of the various states or even locate those states on the map. Our nation is being forced to "outsource" and/or "import" the personnel to perform techological jobs because many American students are unable to perform well enough in math and science to do them. My God, we even need cash registers to tell kids how much change a customer gets from a transaction because they are barely able to figure it out on their own! Again, are there exceptions? Certainly there are, but they are just that - exceptions. 

As well, most of even the best colleges have "remedial" courses in math, reading, science etc. for incoming freshmen because the young people entering those institutions are simply unable to perform in those disciplines at a level which would insure their success in college. And, of course, the state of much of American "higher education" isn't any better! Our nation's campuses are hotbeds of far left ideology which is absolutely intolerant of any viewpoint other than that which is prescribed by the administration and faculty. Students who have differing viewpoints are often victims of intense discrimination and even persecution. This is a far cry from the ideal of a university education where _all_ viewpoints are presented in the public forum to be examined and debated. Indeed, there _is_ no debate any longer; it is not tolerated. For instance, recently a University of Colorado professor in an examination wanted his students to write an essay on why President George Bush is a "war criminal". When one student wrote an essay on why Saddam Hussein was a war criminal, the student was summarily flunked. In our day, such a thing would have been unthinkable.

Now, are there exceptions to these situations? Certainly. I'm sure there are fine public schools (although given what they are being forced to use as textbooks, I cannot imagine where they are!) and facilities of higher education that still hold to the classic understanding of "educating" students. I have heard of Hillsdale College which seems to be one such academic haven, but as far as most state and ivy league institutions, well more than enough studies have been performed to reinforce my beliefs. 

Of course, there are those who have no problem whatsoever with the current state of American education and discredit all those studies that have been done over the years that I reference here. They believe in "outcome based" education and a host of other educational fads and fancies that have arisen over the years which I and others believe have profoundly negatively affected America's educational system. As a result, what I and others like me find "wrong", they find "right" and vice versa. 

Still, I don't think that anyone can dispute the "dumbing down" of America's school children. There's simply far too much documentation from objective sources with no "axe to grind" to merely disregard it as ideologically inspired. Furthermore, as there seems to be no evidence that something has entered the gene pool which makes young Americans less intellligent than their parents and grandparents, there is simply no other explanation for this situation other than their education.

Nor has this anything to do with "superiority". I never went to college although I did graduate with a Regents diploma from a high school on Long Island and was a member of the National Honor Society. But my education was inferior to my mother's and my children's was inferior to mine - and that's simple fact. All one has to do is look at the laughable answers that many children - some at the high school level - give to questions that should be "no brainers" to _grade schoolers_. Yes, at first glance these absolutely ridiculous answers to what are relatively simple questions are "funny" - but as one pundit put it, they became considerably less humorous when one considers that some of those responding might some day be operating on you or flying a plane on which you were a passenger! 

Sorry, Barli. I know that you and many other wonderful teachers struggle endlessly to educate young people. Teaching is a calling - like medicine and the ministry - rather than a mere job. But you are not getting the support that you should be getting from the "educational establishment". From the writers of textbooks to those who "teach" such insane concepts as the "look-see" method of reading which produces previously unheard of "functional illiterates", the whole system is badly flawed and the result is frankly to obvious to ignore.


----------



## Ithrynluin (Mar 20, 2005)

This thread was split from a movie forum thread.

As difficult as it may sound, keep this thread clean of political commentary, since that will result in the instant closure of this thread. No exceptions.


----------



## Hammersmith (Mar 20, 2005)

Thanks, Ithrynluin! I started trolling on my own thread, which is just plain


----------



## Annaheru (Mar 20, 2005)

As someone who has come out of the American School system recently let me say that I have seen everything. From teachers who are apathetic time-fillers, to energetic and brilliant educators. I have also seen many who become apathetic over time, because they have no way to enforce discipline: kids do whatever they want and all the teacher can do is reflect that in their grades, which is no good for anyone. If I, educated in PA, one of the states with the highest teacher certification standards, have seen all this I would imagine that its pretty standard. I think educational blame can be split into 3 parts: kids, parents, and teachers. The parents and teachers of today are a reflection on their parents and teachers. America is in a downward slump where each suceeding generation of children has less respect for their elders, and less discipline. If they don't have respect or discipline it can be an almost impossible task to teach a child anything, and I truly respect and pity those who are willing to try.

@barley, most high school and college instructors that I've met have come down on the left-wing of politics. How can the current 5 years of administration have had more effect (good and/or bad) than a group of 20+ year tenured teachers? Just something to consider- not in any way trying to comment on you personally. (hope that wasn't too political, if it is, O Mighty Mod, freely ax it)


----------



## Greenwood (Mar 21, 2005)

Mrs. Maggott said:


> For instance, recently a University of Colorado professor in an examination wanted his students to write an essay on why President George Bush is a "war criminal". When one student wrote an essay on why Saddam Hussein was a war criminal, the student was summarily flunked. In our day, such a thing would have been unthinkable.


The essay topic at first glance strikes me as completely inappropriate and I would think the student could appeal to the college administration on those grounds. However, without knowing what the course was and the background behind the question, it is hard to know if it was inappropriate. If the the essay topic was legitimate, than I would say the student who chose to completely ignore the topic deserved to be flunked. Example: in debate tournaments you are assigned a position to support or oppose. If you decide you don't like the position you have been given and argue the other side you lose. I have no idea what the context of the incident Mrs. M. cites is, but a smart student would have made the case for both Bush and Hussein being war criminals.  

Mrs. M., how about giving us some references to your statements that can be checked?


----------



## Alcuin (Mar 21, 2005)

Barley, I love you: you are a tremendous person, a stand-up guy, and obviously very passionate about this; but this is a subject on politics, and it doesn’t belong in a forum on Tolkien and his work. Maintaining this thread can only come to grief and anger for everyone who encounters it, with no corresponding increase in anyone’s understanding or enjoyment of Tolkien, but resulting in a decided increase in what is an already unfortunately high level of animosity. – Alcuin


----------



## Arthur_Vandelay (Mar 21, 2005)

Greenwood said:


> Mrs. M., how about giving us some references to your statements that can be checked?



Amen. Nobody is interested in defending strawmen.



Mrs Maggott said:


> I'm sorry, Barli, but while I know that there are just great teachers and administrators out there - and I'm sure that you are one of them - the educational establishment in this country is more interested in ideological indoctrination, multi-culturalism and teaching self esteem than it is in teaching a true classic edcuational curriculum.



Without being apprised of any details or evidence, we again must assume that Mrs M is attacking a strawman here--not to mention establishing a false dichotomy between a "true" classic educational curriculum (again, no details supplied), on the one hand, and a ("false?") ideologically-slanted, multiculturalist education on the other.

I can only repeat the remarks I made in the "British Schools" thread: if you set up "classical" education (whatever that means) as a kind of bulwark in defence of Western Civilisation and the encroachments of "multiculturalism" and so-called "far left ideology," this is in itself an ideologically-slanted gesture which produces a politicised education (albeit in the service of other kinds of politics).



> Our nation is being forced to "outsource" and/or "import" the personnel to perform techological jobs because many American students are unable to perform well enough in math and science to do them.



"Force" has nothing to do with it, nor is it a question of adequate education. You can have the most "classically" educated students on the planet, and it won't alter the fact that companies are in the business of maximising profits, and that labour in India or Indonesia (for example) is cheaper than it is in the United States.

Welcome to Globalisation!



> They believe in "outcome based" education and a host of other educational fads and fancies that have arisen over the years which I and others believe have profoundly negatively affected America's educational system.



_Several factors are driving the shift toward learner outcome-based education, including the fact that more and more jobs demand specific technical skills, and students and employers expect higher education to ensure that students master them. However, another factor is the increasingly competitive environment for both consumers and providers of higher education. Both the increasing demand for postsecondary education and the feasibility of technology-based delivery are making the higher education market attractive to new private-sector providers. Likewise, existing institutions are now looking to offer programs outside of their traditional geographically-defined service areas. As a result, the consumer of higher education (both individuals and corporate clients) can now choose from multiple providers. In this environment, being able to make some judgment about the quality of competing program offerings becomes critical. Traditional site-based measures of quality, like accreditation, are having a very difficult time coping with new network-based program models. Learning outcomes, as measured by student competencies, is the quality measure that makes the most sense to consumers._ (Source)

This is, I believe you will find, fairly typical of the rationale offered for outcomes-based education: in a nutshell, its focus on "student-centred learning," "problem-solving," "lateral thinking" and so forth (it is believed) best equip students for life and work in the modern economic world--in which individuals are expected to be "flexible" and "adaptable" (which means, among other things, that there's no longer such a thing as a life-long career). 

And what does this mean? Well it means that the fact that Mrs M has mentioned "outsourcing" and "outcomes education" in the same post is no coincidence. Both are symptoms of the increasing influence (since the late 70s and early 80s) of economic neo-liberalism, particularly but not exclusively in Western societies. Another symptom is one to which Barley has already referred: the dissolution of the public education system (or at least the push for it to be dissolved or weakened). (See, for example, this article on public education by Milton Friedman). [Therefore--ironically--another symptom of the influence of economic neo-liberalism on public policy regarding education is "No Child Left Behind." (See the article: Neoliberalism and schooling in the U.S.; see also the article 
The Digital Death Rattle of the American Middle Class: A Cautionary Tale, which asks: "_Will downwardly mobile middle-class knowledge workers continue to embrace the dogma of neoliberalism, and accept the blame and personal responsibility for their own structural and economic obsolescence, and that of their children?_")]

And if you know anything about neoliberalism, you'll know there's absolutely nothing remotely "left-wing" about it!


----------



## Greenwood (Mar 21, 2005)

Alcuin said:


> Barley, I love you: you are a tremendous person, a stand-up guy, and obviously very passionate about this; but this is a subject on politics, and it doesn’t belong in a forum on Tolkien and his work. Maintaining this thread can only come to grief and anger for everyone who encounters it, with no corresponding increase in anyone’s understanding or enjoyment of Tolkien, but resulting in a decided increase in what is an already unfortunately high level of animosity. – Alcuin


In defense of Barley, he did not start this discussion. That credit belongs to Mrs. Maggott. Barley reponded to an off-topic comment she made about the educational system in another thread. A moderator then split off Barley's response (and subsequent responses) into this thread.


----------



## Alcuin (Mar 21, 2005)

Greenwood said:


> In defense of Barley, he did not start this discussion. That credit belongs to Mrs. Maggott. Barley reponded to an off-topic comment she made about the educational system in another thread. A moderator then split off Barley's response (and subsequent responses) into this thread.


Wise of the moderator to split it away.

I’m certainly not accusing the good innkeeper of anything; his was just the first post on the list. A man with mud – or other material – slung on his clothes may honestly feel righteous indignation. Whether he was drinking his mug of ale in a seat by the curb or inside the commons of the Prancing Pony is of no matter: he’s still angry. My point is that this is not a Tolkien-related subject, and if followed to its logical conclusion, will inevitably invite responses that may well enrage participants on both sides. IMHO, this forum is quite warm enough already without building bonfires in the sidestreets.


----------



## Gothmog (Mar 21, 2005)

Alcuin said:


> My point is that this is not a Tolkien-related subject,


It is true that this is not a Tolkien-related subject, that is why it has been moved to a non-Tolkien forum.


> and if followed to its logical conclusion, will inevitably invite responses that may well enrage participants on both sides.


Well if this is a problem, do not follow it to that 'logical conclusion' there is no law that states such a path must be followed.


----------



## Scatha (Mar 22, 2005)

Since most of you find it nice to jump on one person, because she does not give examples, allow me to state something in her defense.



Arthur_Vandelay said:


> "Force" has nothing to do with it, nor is it a question of adequate education. You can have the most "classically" educated students on the planet, and it won't alter the fact that companies are in the business of maximising profits, and that labour in India or Indonesia (for example) is cheaper than it is in the United States.
> 
> Welcome to Globalisation!



Globalisation has nothing to do with the fact that the US needs to hire people from abroad, when speaking languages other then english or spanish is required.  

About 80% of your students know everything there is about the US, but knows next to nothing about the rest of the world, much less where other countries are on a bloody map.  That is a very one-sided education.

Priding themselves to come from one of the richest nations in the world, but forgetting that it also has the highest national deficit. 

Bragging to be americans, where 95% of the pioneers and colonists of North America were europeans. (the other 5% were the natives, but those were neatly tucked away in reservations or massacred)

They are able to recite the US constitution, the god knows how many presidents you have had, some of them even can in the correct order  , but when asked who Dostojevski was they have absolutely no idea. (save for a few intellectuals)

That, Arthur_Vandelay, is what Ms Maggot is talking about and it *definately is* a lack of adequate education. 

Now do not take me for someone that just posts to bash at the US. I find it a real shame that this is the way things are, where it could have been so much better. You have to admit however, that the US does push itself forwards as being 'elite'. Yet in the eyes of most european nations, the US is a child, still struggling to grow up, where the european countries have several centuries of development behind them already. (most dating back to the early middle ages)

In the years past, I have made many friends from the US and it certainly is not the people that are the problem here, but it is your politicians.

.


----------



## joxy (Mar 22, 2005)

Scatha said:


> ....when asked who Dostojevski was they have absolutely no idea.


For which, much thanks.


----------



## Arthur_Vandelay (Mar 23, 2005)

Scatha said:


> Since most of you find it nice to jump on one person, because she does not give examples, allow me to state something in her defense.



Nobody's "jumping" on Mrs M., Scatha. When somebody is making assertions of the kind Mrs M. was making, it is perfectly reasonable to ask for supporting evidence/references. How else are we to distinguish cogent arguments from hasty generalisations or misrepresentations?



> Globalisation has nothing to do with the fact that the US needs to hire people from abroad, when speaking languages other then english or spanish is required.



What languages other than English (or even Spanish) might be required in an offshore Microsoft call centre that deals with US customers? 



> About 80% of your students know everything there is about the US, but knows next to nothing about the rest of the world, much less where other countries are on a bloody map.  That is a very one-sided education.
> 
> Priding themselves to come from one of the richest nations in the world, but forgetting that it also has the highest national deficit.
> 
> ...



Being somewhat familiar with Mrs M's sentiments on matters political, I'm not one hundred percent certain that she'd agree with some of your remarks about the US  

In any case, you declare that you have come to speak in her defense--but all you are doing is making the same kind of error that she has made. That is, you make a number of assertions about Americans without offering supporting evidence. 

Now, your assertions may be right, or they may be wrong. But without proper evidence--evidence that can be independently assessed--it is impossible for us to determine whether or not you are misrepresenting the case about the knowledgeability of Americans. 

And this is coming from someone who has indulged in his own fair share of "US-bashing" in the past


----------



## Scatha (Mar 26, 2005)

Arthur_Vandelay said:


> What languages other than English (or even Spanish) might be required in an offshore Microsoft call centre that deals with US customers?



Nice try arthur, but I said when speaking other languages then english or spanish *IS* required. 




> all you are doing is making the same kind of error that she has made. That is, you make a number of assertions about Americans without offering supporting evidence.



I suggest you take a look around you, Arthur. Most of what I stated is evidence, historical facts or researched facts from the US educational board (not accounting for those lucky enough to go to a private school, because their parents can afford it.)

As far as I see it, the largest problem with the US school system, is that it is being under-funded. Only those I mentioned before have the chance to get a decent diploma, because they are able to pay for a huge tuition (sp?) fee. Where as in Europe, the main part of this is payed by the government, a minor part by the parents or the students themselves, after they finished school. (loan) This system allows us to give everyone the same chances for a decent education.

That is the hang up, namely that those having the means to get a good degree, count too much on the money of their parents and thus having little lust to make the effort... where as on the other side, those not having the money are not even getting in, but were willing to make the effort. A few grants are given (some for the wrong reasons, such as sports), but those do not cover the amount of people looking to get a good degree.

That is a trend that derives back from history, where only those with money could get into jobs that made the good money. Aka, the rich get richer and the poor do not even get the opportunity.

I feel that this trend stinks, as a lot of bright young minds simply are not getting the chance to develop themselves the way they could have, if the system was not so damn crooked. Get my point?


----------



## e.Blackstar (Mar 27, 2005)

As an American student, I rather agree that American schools are ****. Incredibly so. I know several exchange students and the like, and when asking, one sees that European (other places too, but especially Europe) schools are waaaaaaaay farther ahead than ours, which may have partly to do with the curriculum and may also have to do with the "who cares" adittude of the students, but it definetely has nothing to do with a widespread breakdown of ethic or skill on the part of the teachers.


----------



## Scatha (Mar 27, 2005)

e.Blackstar said:


> ... may have partly to do with the curriculum and may also have to do with the "who cares" adittude of the students, but it definetely has nothing to do with a widespread breakdown of ethic or skill on the part of the teachers.



The teachers have no blame whatsoever, blackstar. They cope with the means they are provided with and a lot of those try to do extra as well.

It is true however, that the curriculum in europe is higher as well, demanding more from the students in all of the academic directions. Then again, Europe has three of the oldest universities in the world. (surprisingly enough, none of them is english)


----------



## Arthur_Vandelay (Mar 28, 2005)

Scatha said:


> Nice try arthur, but I said when speaking other languages then english or spanish *IS* required.



Well, we were talking about the outsourcing of labour. So, as much as it is a good thing to encourage bilingualism (or multilingualism) among students, it nevertheless remains the case that offshore labour is cheaper, and that businesses aim to maximise profits.



> I suggest you take a look around you, Arthur. Most of what I stated is evidence, historical facts or researched facts from the US educational board (not accounting for those lucky enough to go to a private school, because their parents can afford it.)



Indeed? So it is the position of the US educational board that: 

_About 80% of your students know everything there is about the US, but knows next to nothing about the rest of the world, much less where other countries are on a bloody map. That is a very one-sided education.

Priding themselves to come from one of the richest nations in the world, but forgetting that it also has the highest national deficit.

Bragging to be americans, where 95% of the pioneers and colonists of North America were europeans. (the other 5% were the natives, but those were neatly tucked away in reservations or massacred)

They are able to recite the US constitution, the god knows how many presidents you have had, some of them even can in the correct order , but when asked who Dostojevski was they have absolutely no idea. (save for a few intellectuals)_


----------



## Firawyn (Apr 15, 2005)

Well isn't this a nice cup of tea. I for one, (I'm sorry ahead of time Barly), say screw the public school system altogether. 

I was in public school until forth grade, and then I started homschooling. I look at people I knew then, and thank GOD my mother pulled me out. The kids of my generation are sluts and druggys and I want no part of it. 

I'm also particularly miffed at the fact that GOD is being pushed out of the schools. Seperation of church and state my butt. On all the money you spend it says 'in God we trust'. But do we? Do we really trust God? If we did, then we would WANT him in our schools, we would want him in our childrens' lives! 

I suppose I'm done now. *grin* But please, contradict me here, I love a good debate.... *thinks that perhaps this should be moved to a new thread*


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (Apr 16, 2005)

Firawyn said:


> ...I say screw the public school system altogether.
> ...The kids of my generation are sluts and druggys and I want no part of it.
> ...Seperation of church and state my butt.



Sorry Firawyn — there's no debating with a closed mind that expresses itself in such a vulgar manner, and that harbors both bigoted generalizations and a smug superior hostile attitude. If God does indeed exist, I doubt if She would be happy about the way you think at such a young age, and I daresay your mom would be horrified as well. 

Barley


----------



## Firawyn (Apr 16, 2005)

lol, oh Barly, you have much to learn about me. I had no intent of being vulger, indeed if I had, my launguage would have been more profane. Now to the things you highlighted, the first thing is this is all my poinion. I have a perfectly open mind. My confictions, however, are firm. I will listen to anyone's opinions, as I would want them to listen to mine. Weather or not I choose to change my confictions in consiquence to their opinions is MY perogitive. You see? Also, when I said the kids of my generation were sluts and druggys, I was not being judgmental or whatever else you might call me. The teen pregnency rate has gone up DRAMATICLY in the last 10 years. You third point was simply a comment I made, due to my fellings on the matter. I am EXTREAMLY agitated that GWBush prayed at his inogeration (both times mind you) and he prays publicly when ever her darn well pleases. YET, I student can get detention for praying aloud in school, esp if there are a group of them. IT'S NOT FAIR!

My mother, as you so keenly have brought into this, would not be 'horrified' at my actions here. Quite the contrary, in fact, she would be pleased that I was standing up for myself. You'll have to pardon me, so far I've been a quiet little member on this board and I've watched people get warned by mods to watch their tongues or 'else', and I'm tired of being a good girl. I think that I can mannage to 'push it' a bit, and not get kicked off TTF  . Heh! I love this place. Anyway, so you were saying Barly?


----------



## Hammersmith (Apr 16, 2005)

Firawyn said:


> YET, I student can get detention for praying aloud in school, esp if there are a group of them. IT'S NOT FAIR!


Are you serious?  
*Sings* "In the laaaand of the freeee...."


----------



## Beorn (Apr 16, 2005)

Mrs. Maggott said:


> American schools work tirelessly to keep their students from becoming profoundly literate...



Mrs. M., I expected this of you the least! One who lives only 20 minutes away from me. You, of all people, should know that Long Island has some of the best public schools in the country!



Barliman Butterbur said:


> That is sheer knee-jerk opinion and sheer rot — that, or an extremely unfortunate attempt at wit. I was a teacher in "American schools" for over 30 years, and I know better. Whatever problems the American public school system has, and there are many, American schools do NOT "work tirelessly" — as if there was a conscious official mission to do so — to keep students from becoming literate. You should know better, and you owe me and any other teachers on this forum — in fact, _all_ teachers who work their behinds off to help their students — an apology. I'm afraid if _all_ your opinions are based on no more than such snobbish superiority, then they are worth _nothing._ I'm afraid I must now re-evaluate everything you have opined on this forum in the light of such obvious shallow thinking.
> 
> Barley



*I applaud you.* Teachers deserve a million times the gratitude they receive.

There are too few people in this world who see the value of teaching and learning. There are too many people in this world who pass off schooling as a waste of time simply because it's required.

The major part of the problem, from what I can tell having been in only one school district my whole life, is that education is vastly underfunded. Grossly. Horribly. Disgustingly. In a world where education typically leads to higher living standards, it would (or rather, should) follow that education is intrinsic to the US' survival as a major world power. This, I feel is the reason why schooling in America isn't as strong as other countries.



Hammersmith said:


> I'm not sure whether this is a result of a spectacular disinterest in learning or a byproduct of the American consumer culture


I think this is a result of "a spectacular disinterest in learning," which is caused by my reasons above: People feel school is pointless because it's required. Also, people in the US have become impatient due to the "I want it now" mentality. Instant satisfaction, though it's been brought into our culture through things such as credit cards, does not mesh with learning. Learning takes time, and more and more people are unwilling to give up their time.



Mrs. Maggott said:


> the educational establishment in this country is more interested in ideological indoctrination, multi-culturalism and teaching self esteem than it is in teaching a true classic edcuational curriculum.[...] Our children know little or nothing about history - including American history - and much of what they _do_ know, as Ronald Reagan once said, "ain't so". Most can't name the capitals of the various states or even locate those states on the map.



I find it hard to believe that such a statement could be defended. And even if perhaps I know less in American History than previous generations, I know more in maths and sciences.



Mrs. Maggott said:


> Our nation is being forced to "outsource" and/or "import" the personnel to perform techological jobs because many American students are unable to perform well enough in math and science to do them.


It's cheaper.



Mrs. Maggott said:


> My God, we even need cash registers to tell kids how much change a customer gets from a transaction because they are barely able to figure it out on their own!


This is because calculators have made it much easier just to type it. If kids had a rely on doing the math in their head, they could! Since calculators are pretty much _required_ for advanced math courses, no one bothers to keep the skill of doing it in your head.



Mrs. Maggott said:


> For instance, recently a University of Colorado professor in an examination wanted his students to write an essay on why President George Bush is a "war criminal". When one student wrote an essay on why Saddam Hussein was a war criminal, the student was summarily flunked. In our day, such a thing would have been unthinkable.



Let me refer to a previous quote:


> are there exceptions? Certainly there are, but they are just that - exceptions.


And that's just what this is: an exception!



Mrs. Maggott said:


> but as far as most state and ivy league institutions, well more than enough studies have been performed to reinforce my beliefs.


Stonybrook University, part of the State University of New York is one of the top educational institutions in the world! And, what's more is that it's right in your backyard!



Mrs. Maggott said:


> Still, I don't think that anyone can dispute the "dumbing down" of America's school children. There's simply far too much documentation from objective sources with no "axe to grind" to merely disregard it as ideologically inspired. Furthermore, as there seems to be no evidence that something has entered the gene pool which makes young Americans less intellligent than their parents and grandparents, there is simply no other explanation for this situation other than their education.



I wouldn't call it dumbing down. I think of it more as less well educated. An underfunded educational system cannot possibly educate students as well as a well funded one. Many students feel that since it takes so long to get through school that it must be useless. After all, why can't it be done as fast as I can apply for a credit card and get a reply within 60 seconds?

With less funding, fewer teachers can be hired, fewer school buildings can be built, and fewer supplies can be bought. This leads to teachers having more and more students per class, which results in each lesson taking longer because it must be taught to each student, and each question must be addressed. And this, results in teaching for testing. Teach what's on the SAT. Teach what's on the Regents test. That's all they have time for. 

(Aside: Scatha: perhaps the vast size of the US is the cause of our geographic knowledge isolation? Before TTF I never spoke to a person from outside the US. In Europe, do you suppose a greater knowledge of geography is required because the countries are so close together? By the same token, most students I know _can_ place the U. S. states on the map correctly, but could most Europeans do the same?)



The education system in the United States is in pretty poor condition, but under no circumstances is it trying to make students less literate. Mrs. Maggott, you should know that, and also that such a cynical statement is completely untrue. American education isn't as strong as other countries'. However, it is still working due to people like Barliman. Underfunding and allowing the instant satisfaction mindset has lead to its state, but there is no reason to claim that it's working against its original intention.

- Mike


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (Apr 16, 2005)

Firawyn said:


> ... so you were saying Barly?



What I said still stands. And your spelling needs some serious improvement.

Mike: Thanks for the pat on the back, and your spot-on insight (post #25) into the situation. 

And, one of the more recent problems is the No Child Left Behind law, which is doing exactly the opposite of what its name implies — as do most Bush administration laws and policies.

Barley


----------



## Firawyn (Apr 16, 2005)

Pardon, Barl_e_y. I know my spelling is horrid, though my vocabulary is rather extensive for my age. (thanks to my english teacher)  

And there is another point. Please do NOT misunderstand me when I say 'swrew the PSS'. Teachers are great people to be willing to spend their lives helping children learn. Honastly, I highly respect you. You are smart, truthful, funny when you're in a good mood, and you stick to your convictions. I think that you and I are acctually similer personalities.  Now isn't that just a little scary.


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (Apr 16, 2005)

Firawyn said:


> Pardon, Barl_e_y. I know my spelling is horrid, though my vocabulary is rather extensive for my age. (thanks to my english teacher)
> 
> And there is another point. Please do NOT misunderstand me when I say 'swrew the PSS'. Teachers are great people to be willing to spend their lives helping children learn. Honastly, I highly respect you. You are smart, truthful, funny when you're in a good mood, and you stick to your convictions. I think that you and I are acctually similer personalities.  Now isn't that just a little scary.



"Please do NOT misunderstand me..."

If you would be understood, you must be clear. It's great fun to be dramatic in print, and no one loves that more so than me! However, if I want to be _accurately understood,_ then I've no choice but to take the care to choose the words that will both say precisely what I mean to say _and_ be clearly understood and not be misinterpreted, or simply puzzle the reader.

Not to press the spelling issue too hard: I have known a great number of both kids and adults who are highly intelligent, who have complex ideas to express, and who have been handicapped by poor spelling and writing skills. 

If i wuz a absloot *jeenyus* hoo speld purly and expresd myslef bad on papper, wud u think i wuz smart ur stooped? 

So you see, correct spelling not only _helps,_ but is _indispensable,_ if you genuinely want to be taken at all _seriously._ Spellcheckers are of great value, but only for spelling words — they will not spot a wrongly used but correctly spelled word, a wrong homonym, or poor syntax. And when you go to college, as I'm sure you will, you'll need to be able to express yourself in clear clean well-expressed English. Your professors will settle for nothing less. And since you only have a couple of years to go for that, better tell your English teacher to help you out, starting now! 

Barley


----------



## Firawyn (Apr 17, 2005)

Thanks for the advice Barley! Okay let's see if I can clearly articulate what I am trying to make a point of and get back on topic. (Multi-tasking) 

When I said ‘screw the school system’ what I should have said way ‘I don’t believe the school system works as well as it once did.’ Way back in the frontier days, most children were home schooled. When people developed a school system and children soon went off to the one room school houses, it was because the parents were not educated enough to give their children the knowledge they needed/wanted. As time passes, more and more people are going to collage just for the sake of doing it, and now most parents are educated enough to home school their kids again. With the severe degrading of morals (at least where I live) a smart parent would only being protecting their child by taking them out of the system. The system is full of unnecessary elements of a child’s educations which they are forced to endure weather they like it or not. There are drugs, drinking, sex out of wedlock, vulgar speech and actions, bullying, etc. Why put your child through that mess if you can teach them at home? A common reason not to home school is the lack of social interaction. This is a misunderstanding of how we live. Just because we’re ‘home schooled’ doesn’t mean that we are always at home. Quite the contrary in fact; home schoolers are often out on field trips and even shopping can be considered math! Home schoolers use every day life to learn what they need to know, much like the frontiersmen did. This does not mean that we don’t use text books; it simply implies that we use our resources. It’s an economical thing. While we use our recourses we are socialized plenty. Collages will often accept home schooled applicants before others because they are already independent workers, a skill that most Public Schooled kids don’t have. Here’s a list of things that home schoolers have the advantage in: 



•	Home Schoolers can work at a pace of their own. 

•	Home Schoolers can personalize their studies.

•	Home Schoolers can work from noon to six if they’re not morning people

•	Home Schoolers have more time available to be flexible with a job.





•	Public Schoolers have to keep up with a class full of students.
•	Public Schoolers have to stick with standard procedure. 
•	Public Schoolers must be at school at an early hour, sometimes this effects their ability to learn.
•	Public Schoolers can’t work during school hours and often can’t find work.



So you can see, Dear Barley, that there are many advantages to home schooling. I will post a clearer response to my other point later; I’m on my way out the door. Until then, cheers!


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (Apr 18, 2005)

Firawyn said:


> Thanks for the advice Barley! Okay let's see if I can clearly articulate what I am trying to make a point of and get back on topic. (Multi-tasking)
> 
> When I said ‘screw the school system’ what I should have said way ‘I don’t believe the school system works as well as it once did.’ Way back in the frontier days, most children were home schooled. When people developed a school system and children soon went off to the one room school houses, it was because the parents were not educated enough to give their children the knowledge they needed/wanted.



As with all schools — public, private and home — all depends on the attitude and preparation of both teacher and student. As it happens, just yesterday I was one of a team of judges presiding at the 2005 UCLA Alumni Association Freshman Scholarship State Finals, and one young fellow — ready for college and the product of home schooling — won a $10,000 scholarship. I have never objected to the idea of home schooling. I have _plenty_ of objections when it's done badly and there's no supervising authority — which of course applies to all forms of schooling.



> As time passes, more and more people are going to collage [that's "college" — a collage is a collection of objects attached to a flat surface to create a work of art — you see what trouble you can get into when just one pesky letter is wrong ] just for the sake of doing it, and now most parents are educated enough to home school their kids again.



This is something that is open to debate. My experience shows me just the opposite. Fewer kids are getting into college if only for the reason that it is becoming beyond their means. And most of the parents I have dealt with haven't the time, education, training or interest to homeschool their kids. That's still quite a rarity, at least in America.



> With the severe degrading of morals (at least where I live) a smart parent would only being protecting their child by taking them out of the system. The system is full of unnecessary elements of a child’s educations which they are forced to endure weather they like it or not. There are drugs, drinking, sex out of wedlock, vulgar speech and actions, bullying, etc. Why put your child through that mess if you can teach them at home?



As I said, I have no objection whatsoever when it's done right. And as for the rest of what you say, all the more reason to get the public school system back to where it used to be, for the majority of those who can't afford home schooling.



> A common reason not to home school is the lack of social interaction. This is a misunderstanding of how we live. Just because we’re ‘home schooled’ doesn’t mean that we are always at home. Quite the contrary in fact; home schoolers are often out on field trips and even shopping can be considered math! Home schoolers use every day life to learn what they need to know, much like the frontiersmen did. This does not mean that we don’t use text books; it simply implies that we use our resources. It’s an economical thing. While we use our recourses we are socialized plenty. Colleges will often accept home schooled applicants before others because they are already independent workers, a skill that most Public Schooled kids don’t have...
> 
> So you can see, Dear Barley, that there are many advantages to home schooling. I will post a clearer response to my other point later; I’m on my way out the door. Until then, cheers!



As I said, I've no objection to any form of schooling when it's done right.

Barley


----------



## Arthur_Vandelay (Apr 18, 2005)

Firawyn said:


> when I said the kids of my generation were *sluts* and *druggys*, I was not being judgmental or whatever else you might call me. The teen pregnency rate has gone up DRAMATICLY in the last 10 years. You third point was simply a comment I made, due to my fellings on the matter.



Insofar as those terms are pejorative, they are judgemental--your use of them suggests your contempt for those whom you label, and contempt is a form of judgement. (I would also ask you, as a Christian, how well you think such contempt might sit with Christ's command to "love one another.") However much the teen pregnancy rate has risen in the past decade, is it really fair to label pregant teenagers "sluts?"

Not only are those terms judgemental, they are offensive (as much as the terms "pinko," "raghead," "f*gg*t," or "bible-basher" are offensive), and therefore contribute nothing to the discussion. Barley suggests that you improve your spelling if you wish to be taken seriously. To that end, you should also refrain from name-calling.



Firawyn said:


> Seperation of church and state my butt. On all the money you spend it says 'in God we trust'. But do we? Do we really trust God? If we did, then we would WANT him in our schools, we would want him in our childrens' lives!



The First Amendment to the US Constitution reads . . . 



> *Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof*; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.



The wall of separation between church and state is not supposed to infringe the freedom of religion: but to facilitate it. For more information about this, see Separation of Church and State: a Most Important Decision. 

And for an alternative perspective on the issue of God in schools, read Growing up in Moral Majority Small Town USA. 



Firawyn said:


> YET, I student can get detention for praying aloud in school, esp if there are a group of them. IT'S NOT FAIR!



Are you speaking from experience here, Firawyn? If so, what were the circumstances in which a student received detention for praying in school? Are such disciplinary actions widespread, and if so, can you provide concrete evidence (i.e. independently-conducted reports and studies) of this?

I ask, because what you allege appears to be a misconception about prayer in public schools: have a look at Popular misconceptions about public school prayer. According to that source, for instance:
[font=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]


> Praying in school is not against the law. In fact, the U.S. Constitution guarantees students the right to pray in public schools; it is a protected form of free speech. A student can pray on the school bus, in the corridors, in the cafeteria, in their  student-run Bible club,  at the flagpole,  sports stadium, and elsewhere on school grounds. They can even pray silently before and after class in the classroom. They are not allowed to pray solely  Christian prayers as an organized part of the school schedule. However, they  may be able to hear or read prayers from a variety of religious traditions and inspiring statements from secular sources. Prayers cannot solely be from a single religious faith group.



[/font]


Firawyn said:


> As time passes, more and more people are going to collage just for the sake of doing it, and now most parents are educated enough to home school their kids again.



On this point, I would have thought one of the biggest barriers to home-schooling is not necessarily how educated the parents are, but the fact that many families are finding it increasingly difficult to survive on a single wage. For such families, home-schooling would require some form of state-funded financial assistance for the stay-at-home parent; and it strikes me that many opponents of public schools would be equally opposed to welfare. 



> With the severe degrading of morals (at least where I live) a smart parent would only being protecting their child by taking them out of the system. The system is full of unnecessary elements of a child’s educations which they are forced to endure weather they like it or not. There are drugs, drinking, sex out of wedlock, vulgar speech and actions, bullying, etc. Why put your child through that mess if you can teach them at home?



The picture you paint of homeschooling here is very disturbing: a kind of "gated community" for the mind. The "system" to which you refer is a microcosm of society in general, so you certainly wouldn't be "protecting" your children from drugs, drinking, sex out of wedlock, vulgar speech, bullying, etc. simply by pulling them out of public (or even private) schools: unless you also confined them to the house 24 hours-a-day (which, as you say, is not true of homeschoolers); removed all televisions, newspapers, radios and computers from the home; and prevented your children from entering the workforce upon completion of their education. And that, of course, is tantamount to saying: "Sure, I'll teach you to drive . . . but you may only practice in the backyard. It's too dangerous to drive on the roads."

You don't "protect" your children by wrapping them in cotton-wool; but what you can do is endow them with a critical and informed awareness of the world. Any education system that achieves this--public or private--is a good one.


----------

