'Education, Education, Education!'

[898216]

The quote is a famous Tony Blair one.

I am interested to know what people think about education (principally in schools) and its impact on those it caters for.
Recently I have heard many people say that a child can only be taught in a school, by a teacher.
As a former pupil at a rather rough Comprehensive in Leeds, I beg to differ.
It is my firm opinion that schools - especially state schools - can only ever provide the most basic of foundations - for obvious reasons. I know that the vast majority of people who achieved at my Comprehensive were, to all intents and purposes, self-taught. Little teaching and still less learning took place within those walls.

I know that in America a fair proportion of people are home-schooled; such schooling is almost anomalous in England.

Just wondered what people thought...

-898

[kylesfa]

my girlfriend is a 4th grade teacher, and ive been *taught* (lol) to think that it takes both a school with GOOD teachers and interested, involved, and hard working parents
i dont think it can all be done in schools, they just dont have enough time with the kids...the framework can be laid out, but the parents really need to help build on it...at the same time i think kids really need the social interaction that comes with going to school and being in classes with other kids...thats something they really miss out on when they are home-schooled

JMO...hope it makes sense

[Shiss Dräck]

There are a lot of things that can't be taught on schools, IMO i'ts a fair combination of both that makes a good student. BTW, I've never known anyone that has been homeschooled (In my old town at least), maybe a lot of people are and I'm just ignorant at that matter. BTW, out of curiousity, what's the american english equivalent word for a "Comprehensive"? Lol that noun is unknown in my vocabulary.


Dan

[OvalQueen]

Originally posted by Shiss Dräck
BTW, out of curiousity, what's the american english equivalent word for a "Comprehensive"? Lol that noun is unknown in my vocabulary.
Dan

Comprehensive : adjective

Definition: inclusive

Synonyms: absolute, all-embracing, all-inclusive, blanket, broad,
compendious, complete, comprising, containing, discursive, encircling, encyclopedic, exhaustive, expansive, extensive, far-reaching, full, general, global, in depth, infinite, overall, sweeping, synoptic, the picture, thorough, umbrella, wall-to-wall, whole, wide, widespread.

[DodgeRam88]

TV is my teacher. All my classes are so boring, except for Human Conscience, and I find myself dozing away. I wouldn't want to be home-schooled, but I think a child that is home-schooled would get ALOT more attention then a teacher can give that has 300 students a day. A parent would be able to tell better what subject their child is struggling in. On the downside, there is little socialization with other children if you stay home all day. School is basically the only way to meet people when you are young.

-Chris

[rustler 2x4]

Or, a good parent would see that you're struggling in some area and work something out with you or the teacher. Even with the best teacher, If you have parents that don't care, it doesn't make it any better.

[Wrong Turn]

School. . .Hmmm. . .When the teachers know what they're doing, then it's all right. I dislike public schools, because not all teachers know what they are doing (especially some of the ones I've had. ). I want to go to a private school, a place that has some discipline, or to have my dad help me with my homework more often.

[pitslayer666[]]

Originally posted by DodgeRam88
TV is my teacher. All my classes are so boring, except for Human Conscience, and I find myself dozing away. I wouldn't want to be home-schooled,

School is basically the only way to meet people when you are young.

-Chris

no offence ment to this person but u really need to think seriously hard about that comment or the comments there, i mean these are the people that are gunna gunna be running the countrys yeh ill agree that public schools are a mess, i know, my one was, they only cared about the grades that was it, personally i think the best way to be schooled is just to go to school, its boring yeh, but think of yourself in 5-10 years time, where are you gunna be, look at me im a millionair because i sat aroun got schooled by tv all day socialised in school i dont think so somehow

personally on the uk government issue, the uk needs to get out of the EU and drop the taxes, raise the money going into schools, if people dont want to go to school they should give them an option of, you either go to school work and get a good job or you dont, if you dont you wont get any goverment help no dole no benefits etc

just my views

[898216]

Originally posted by Shiss Dräck
BTW, out of curiousity, what's the american english equivalent word for a "Comprehensive"? Lol that noun is unknown in my vocabulary.

A Comprehensive school in England is a non fee-paying one, financed by the state, and not based on any entrance examination.

I have been to only two in my life.
The first, in a small Northern town, Northallerton, was one of the nicest places one could possibly conceive of. Nice people, good discipline, a haven of learning.

The second was in Leeds. This was the sort of place on would hope didn't exist in the Civilised World. The stories ex pupils tell are greeted with disbelief then...I won't say anymore - you can probably imagine. Its intake included areas such as
here.

However, it is wrong to complain, because it certainly mouled me as a human being. I know that similar places exist in Manchester, Sheffield, Glasgow, London, New York, etc. etc.

-898

[stampede720]

I think there are three things:

-Parents. Pretty self-explanatory. They really need to be supporting, intelligent enough to handle their responsibilities, and (I should know about this one--y'all) maybe even teaching half-decent grammar at a young age.

-School. Good teachers who actually care is a plus...I've had some nutty-in-a-bad-way teachers that could teach, some nutty-in-a-good-way teachers that you could learn more from in one class than you could from some teachers in a semester, etc. etc. My elementary school was pretty messed up. I was going to the 4th grade classroom twice each day for advanced math and science, which was a major pain. I ended up with my best option being going to 4th grade in the middle of the year and "winging" English/Social Studies/etc. It actually turned out pretty good...I'm still in Honors classes, though. Ah, I digress...

-Student. A person comes to school without a mindset to learn won't. Personally, my goals are pretty high. I'm aiming for top-5 GPA (hopefully Valedictorian), but I have a friend who could care less, and are failing the lowest-level Math class (Foundations 1, aka Pre-Algebra, I think) offered at our school. Teachers can "make sparks", but IMHO the "fire" has to be lit within the student(s).

My 2¢.

[DodgeRam88]

pitslayer, no offense taken. I'm not saying that I hate school and don't have the erge to learn. I do very well in school and have never failed or even come close to failing a class. Also, I may look like I am not paying attention in class but I heard everything the teacher said. You qouted me saying that school is a place to meet people when you are young. You must have taken that the wrong way. I didn't mean school is only good for a place to hangout. I was on the subject of children being home-schooled and how their really isn't any other kids they interact with. BTW I'm not out looking for a get rich quick sceem so I can sit around and do nothing, the truth is I've planned my education for the present and future to help me get into law inforcement.

-Chris

[JCnBill]

a child that is home-schooled would get ALOT more attention then a teacher can give that has 300 students a day.

True, BUT home-school teachers are not proficient in every field of learning. I preferred the method of being taught by those who specialized in their respective disciplines. Also, I've no knowledge of a home-school that had alkaine metals to drop into water so that we could see the reaction... :eek

School is basically the only way to meet people when you are young.

Dude, you gotta get out!

IMHO:

What we learn in schools is problem solving - which is a subscription to the theory that everything is a project. In a school other than home-schooling, you are taught problem solving in teams as well as afforded the chance to learn to fend for yourself on an intellectual level. You are also taught socialization of one form or another.... and become a product from your relative success.

Then there is the "home life/parents" learning that occurs. It is quite different and I don't think can be compared other than to say that parenting and teaching supplement one another in each of our unique cases.

I guess what I am saying is that I think Tony missed the point of school....

Lastly, my Pop, Mom are retired teachers. My sister and brother-in-law are active in the teaching profession... I just couldn't bring myself to follow along.

[Ruffles 44]

Originally posted by stampede720
A person comes to school without a mindset to learn won't.

Exactly! And a child gets the mindset to learn at home, at a early age. IMO it's all about parents. A parent who really loves and cares about their child will show them how important education really is to their future. A child who realizes that will try their best to excell in school. It all starts at home........

Just my opinion........

[DodgeRam88]

School is basically the only way to meet people when you are YOUNG

When you are in 4th grade you don't go out all over the place where you can meet people now do you?

-Chris

[898216]

'720 made some good points. However, I might just add that many of the problems in schools (obviously, I can only speak for England, but I'm sure it's the same everywhere), that actually prevent learning, centre around misbehaving pupils (usually only two or three) who disrupt lessons thus commendering teachers' time.
The problem at my school was that instead of it been two or three, it was more like fifteen or twenty, i.e. half the class.

Obviously, such a place - even though the actual school was based in a very middle/upper-middle class area, with about half of its intake from there - does not attract the better teachers. Many came...many left (pretty darn quickly). The school was therefore left with very few motivated teachers.

However, what vexes me more than anything is when I meet people now who left the school three years ago. [In the UK schooling is compulsory until the age of 16. At 16 all are free to leave and, up to about seven years ago, 60% did. Higher education is now more open, and the % is more like 20.] These people claim that they had no chance of learning and their current position (usually on the dole - which is quite profitable here - or doing some dead-end course at college) is not their own fault. They blame the lack of teaching, disruptions, etc.
IMHO, such people are simply those who are not motivated enough to work around the limitations & difficulties that Providence has cast. They would probably have failed at Eton!
I know a modest number of people from the school - myself & my brother included (location=home city) - who have achieved huge straight-As & have since gone on to the best universities in the country, perhaps the world.
To use the old aphorism: 'You play the hand you are dealt & do the best with the cards.'

This thread, BTW, was motivated by three such pupils - who are congenital cadgers, malingerers, rogues, idlers & thieves, I might add - who I met in town a couple of days ago. These ne'er-do-wellers gave their own respective sob-stories. Though they irked me, I don't dwell on it or anything, I just wanted to know what others thought.
It has been very interesting thus far...

-898

[Trike]

Originally posted by JCnBill

True, BUT home-school teachers are not proficient in every field of learning. I preferred the method of being taught by those who specialized in their respective disciplines.

This is a fairly broad generalization. Many of the people that I know that are home schooling their young children have a backround in elementary education. Also if you choose to home school your children longer most areas have home school groups that offer certain classes that might be difficult to do in home environment or that parents may not have experience teaching. (Physics, Chem, Calc.. etc).

Stampede and 898 both make very good points. I think what it boils down to though is that it is very important that children get the appropriate attention. Ideally this would come from both their parent(s) and their teachers, but enough dedication on the part of one can overcome failures on the part of another.

[JCnBill]

In the example of disruptive classmates interrupting the course of study:-

Is the teacher not providing to the rest of the class techniques on how to deal with disruptive behavor within a social setting? That lesson will be incredibly important in life - arguably moreso than much of the explicit lessons students are formally tested on. In a business meeting, there will be disruptive people - they need to be dealt with appropriately given the respective situation and audience... it will certainly help to have those lessons in your memory. Effective Learning is much, much more than achieving "book-smarts!"

If I could have audience with Tony, I say that instead of hounding the schools/teachers, recognize and play to their respective strengths... complaining gets you nowhere (other than to 10 Downing(?) Street!)

Trike, I recognize your perspective:- what I said is indeed a broad generalization, but I do believe it is accurate.

[898216]

Originally posted by JCnBill
Is the teacher not providing to the rest of the class techniques on how to deal with disruptive behavor within a social setting?

Absolutely. It was no academic education - that was something one had to get alone - but it was, if you'll excuse the cliche, an education in life.

What bothered most civilised human beings at the school, however, was not the disruptions in lessons - they were a given; instead, it was the rampant and remorseless tyranny that the disruptive pupils exercised outside the classroom.
While this (and they) did not bother me (I grew very early, lol) it disrupted - indeed, ruined - the lives of the vast majority of civilised pupils who simply wanted to have a civilised school life.

Back to your point though JCnBill, the education in life, I am afraid to say, failed to stick to many of the civilised pupils. They are, now, too willing to attribute the misbehaviour and tyranny, to which they were victims, to 'social factors'; I beg to differ with all who do. The behaviour witnessed cannot be justified in the name of a poor upbringing, bad 'life experiences' etc. It was indicative of congenitally uncivilised, unmannerly, disorderly and violent dispositions. I could, but won't, highlight a myriad of examples to support this.

Perhaps the saddest thing of all, though, is the fact that the vast majority of disruptive pupils at the school, who endeavoured to impede the education of serious pupils, will now be supported by a decadent welfare state, financed, in future years, by those whose education was impeded!

-898

[wannasmaxx]

I think school isn't there to teach you meaningless facts, but to teach you how to interpret such facts. I can think of no instance of where "someone did something to someone else in some time that doesn't matter" is useful to me, but "someone did something to someone because of something" would be a much better "real-life"scenario as it allows you to see why something happened and why it happened. School shouldn't be looked at as an assessment of what you know, but what you can learn. It teaches you to learn how to do things that will be pertinent in real life. Take math's for example. I could care less fi X+90=170 adn X=80. but if you put that application into business, such as "we made 170mil this quarter, but we need to pay a flat out rate to our suppliers of 80mil.... we need to sell 80 k units at 10 each. That's what we are actually learning in school, but we don't know it. A classroom scenario will allow the student to take his/her own responsibility to learn the material for him/herself. Being homeschooled is a sucker's way of getting an education. Sure, you don't have bullies to take your lunch money for the lunch that isn't worth eating, but you also don't learn how to interact with such people and make a deal. If your mommy asks you if you get everything she teaches, you'll be dependant on your boss to make sure you understand you are supposed to put the trash in that big metal container outside. Employers these days want self-sufficient workers who know once the trash is full it goes in the metal container. I guess my point is: even though I don't like going to school at 8:30 every morning, I know it will help me when it comes time to make money and raise a family.

[plcjeep]

I think one of the reasons that public shools are lacking in the United States is that some parents are now expecting teachers to raise their kids, instead of just teaching. Another thing I have noticed and this goes right back to education, is a general lack of discipline in both the class room and at home. Instead of parents trying to be their childs best buddy, they need to step up and set strict rules - and follow through with them, instead of buying them a toy or a car to get them to behave. Back to education: there is a definate lack of discipline in some schools because school districts are so afaraid of lawsuits. I say if a child is disruptive or violent to other students, they have no business being there. You can throw all the money you want at a school and it will still be a mess if the school cannot control its students. Another problem with todays schools is the lack of emphasis on core classes in favor of classes that increase a students sensitivity. I would like to see more emphasis in science and mathematics, as it used to be.

[898216]

Originally posted by plcjeep
I think one of the reasons that public shools are lacking in the United States... Back to education: there is a definate lack of discipline in some schools because school districts are so afaraid of lawsuits. I say if a child is disruptive or violent to other students, they have no business being there. You can throw all the money you want at a school and it will still be a mess if the school cannot control its students. Another problem with todays schools is the lack of emphasis on core classes in favor of classes that increase a students sensitivity. I would like to see more emphasis in science and mathematics, as it used to be.

For any English readers: public schools in America are the same as comprehensive/state schools here.
For American readers: public schools in England are what I think you refer to as private schools.
Just to avoid confusion.

There are a couple of wonderfully-conceived schemes currently running in the UK.
The first is that disruptive pupils deserve care and need to be nurtured. In effect, this means they are taken out of lessons and given private tuition. So, basically, if a pupil with no intention to learn misbehaves, he/she receives one-to-one tuition, while the kids who want to learn and behave themselves are left in large, unruly classes.
The second is the 'Gifted and Talented' scheme. During a time of unnecessary profliferation and democratisation in pre-16 schooling, the government now pay pupils who would otherwise leave school the sum of (up to) £50 to stay in school. Of course, stationary and exercise books have been badly hit by inflation!

I certainly agree with plcjeep's comments on the lack of discipline; though in England, I don't necessarily think this centres around the threat of lawsuits - indeed, lawsuits (and the [in America it seems] omnipresent threat) aren't really too much problem over here.
Instead, it centres around the fact that many of the teachers are unwilling to discipine pupils because they actually believe the cant that flows from the minority (no connotation other than percentages) societal intelligensia (excuse the term!), i.e. newspapers, universities, etc., who have, for over a generation now, promoted a warped and cant-filled social liberalism.

In my - I must sadly admit, rather extensive - experience, the teachers are almost solely to blame for the lack of discipline. Boys will be boys, and, sadly, the modern girl will be the modern girl. Children have always needed the firm, yet benevolent hand of discipline. But finding the right medium is essential.
To be quite frank - and I speak only for England - I do not believe that the teachers are capable of finding that or any other judicious medium.

A class of forty well-behaved and civilised children, all intending to learn and better themselves, would be no problem whatsoever. Unfortunately, the ruffians, wasters, miscreants and rogues will always be a disruption.

I honestly think it would be better for all concerned - themselves included - if they were taken out of an institution they have no sympathy with or for (say at the age of 14). They could then be placed in a practical institution where they may learn practical skills, just as essential to life (plumbing, joinery, etc.) - skills in which their propensities may allow them to excel far more than they ever could in an academic institution.
This way they could earn a better future for themselves and go on to become productive members of society, rather than the criminals, maligners and idlers that most develop into - you would not believe the figures (prison, unemployed, etc.)!

-898

[Wrong Turn]

It's amazing how some teachers will not discipline any students, I mean, the stuff I've seen students get away with is amazing! I fear I've already ruined my chances at success, by not taking school seriously. Now that I'm 16, I can see every mistake as I make them, but old habits die hard. ie not paying attention, not doing homework, but I'm not disruptive to the class, and I like learning, I find I learn more outside of school. I'd still like to go to a good private school though. . .

[Shiss Dräck]

Originally posted by OvalQueen


Comprehensive : adjective

Definition: inclusive

Synonyms: absolute, all-embracing, all-inclusive, blanket, broad,
compendious, complete, comprising, containing, discursive, encircling, encyclopedic, exhaustive, expansive, extensive, far-reaching, full, general, global, in depth, infinite, overall, sweeping, synoptic, the picture, thorough, umbrella, wall-to-wall, whole, wide, widespread.

Lol I know what the actual adjective means, but he was using it as a noun, so that was the reason I was wondering.

Dan

[Tervuren]

I'm a home schooled kid for all my schooling. Only time i've ever been in the school system was putting up a school's lighting system for their auditorium.

I think I'd be a much more boring person if I had of gone to public school, I've learned a lot more of very different things. My interactions have been with adults, so I'm often taken as a lot older then I am. I've had one freind on the internet guess me as being an old guy, 50's.

The past two days, I've been learning from an eletrician freind of Dads, we worked together wiring up some stuff. I learned a lot of usefull stuff in those two days, that in a school, I couldn't have taken the time off to do/learn that.

Between the skills of and my 3 other siblings, we're a rather dangerous team. Typicly if your play a gaming, you want to split us up, with all of us on the same team its totaly unfair! I have the ability to think far outside the normal, I'm very creative, and can figure things out.

Kids who are home schoooled, have parents that are very interested in their kids learning, if the same level of dedication were taken in a school system, I think you could get similar acedemic results.

Originally posted by wannasmaxx
Being homeschooled is a sucker's way of getting an education. Sure, you don't have bullies to take your lunch money for the lunch that isn't worth eating, but you also don't learn how to interact with such people and make a deal. If your mommy asks you if you get everything she teaches, you'll be dependant on your boss to make sure you understand you are supposed to put the trash in that big metal container outside. Employers these days want self-sufficient workers who know once the trash is full it goes in the metal container. I guess my point is: even though I don't like going to school at 8:30 every morning, I know it will help me when it comes time to make money and raise a family.

wannasmaxx, I'd dissagree strongly with you on that one. At my current job, when I started, a standard cycle time for a set of 68 parts on a specific proccess, was 30 minutes. in an 8 hour day you'd have about 15 sets done. After a few weeks, I could do that in just 3 hours! Being that I was able to learn in my own way, I learned to figure out what is holding me back, eliminate the slow points, and you go much quicker. I started repositoining where I set parts, picked them up, how they were rotaed. After a major change around of my work area, I was able to do what had been a full day's work in just 3 hours. That doesn't quite match your description of homeschoolers. Another procces, went from about 45min, to 15minutes.

By being homeschooled, I was able to actualy g with my Dad into a work environment, I've learned all sorts of things from people in all different positions. janitors to bussiness execs, machinists, 3d modlers, plant managers, etc.

[Poohblah]

School is one of those weird things that adults like but kids don't... then they grow up and decide school is good.

I went to a private school when I lived in MD. That was by far the best school I ever went to, all the teachers and classes were so great, and the other students were awesome, many of them really rich, too (I knew I girl with a Bentley, a Hummer H1 and H2, a Lamborghini, and some various other SUVs!). We had great parties at her house. Anyway now that I moved I'm not going to private school any more, my parents started a new business and bought two new houses and they don't another $15,000 a year eating away at their funds.

I think school is boring, but to tell the truth, lying around the house all day would be boring, too, even with my Rusty.

[Nitro_Fumes_101]

I think once you are in the 7th grade you cant really learn that much more. You already know the much needed math (add, subtract, divide, and multiply), You know how to use a dictionary, and your english and vocabulary knowledge is really good. After you learn what you are going to use for the rest of your life you should get to start learning about w/e carrear you want to start. Like a doctor or auto tech.

[Tervuren]

One problem with the way some schools teach reading, is they've gone away from phonetics. This makes it much harder for someone to be able to read/understand a word they haven't come to. I fortuantely was taught to read phoneticly, rather then trying to memorize words. I want to learn the phonetics reversed at some point in my life, that would be cool. Where you say it, play it backwards, listen to it, then talk backwards, which when you reverse, comes out fowards. Being able to repeat things backwards would be a fun skill.

In fact, I'm practicing right now.