Jump to content

Utah Yearbook: Special Edition


The Human Torch
 Share

Recommended Posts

Reese, here's your problem. It sounds like you want "schooling" to be about education and fun and optimizing the development of your child. Horse ****. That's not what school is for. It's indoctrination into being a cog in the economy. Think about it. You're corralled into a group of demographically diverse people and told to do things. Teacher asks you a question, you respond. If you get it wrong, you get marked down. Just like work. Your boss asks you a question/tells you to do something, if you come up with the wrong answer too many times, you're out of a job.

WTF? What's the alternative? Do tell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, pavonis, you have accused us at times of being "too close knit" of a community to welcome outsiders. Let me give you a primer, as best I can remember, which based on my current blood alcohol content is probably not terribly well.

 

Cerina = Reese

Krawlie = Jacob

Tank / (Whatever the fuck he's going by now) = Seth

Carrie M. = Amidala = Letsgo777 = a variety of other aliases = Amanda = (a real name I won't disclose due to her privacy concerns)

Pong = some douchebag, real name unknown

Evolence = Gwen

..,And a bunch of other people I don't remember. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone thinks they'd be a great teacher, until they try. Either they

  • suck at it and don't know
  • suck at it and do know (and continue anyway)
  • suck at it and give it up because they know they suck at it (ending up sending the kid back to public school anyway)
  • or they actually are good at it (with the same conditions - know/don't know/quit).

 

People who are intuitively good at teaching are pretty rare, and if they are good at it, they shouldn't be teaching just their own kids. Of course, the rewards for teaching are pretty shit here so it's hard to blame the people who would be good at it for leaving it for more lucrative and/or less humiliating work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A good teacher has the ability to teach a subject with multiple approaches. If one approach doesn't work, another tactic or explanation is readily available. A good teacher has a strong grasp of the subject, because you can't teach what you don't know. And a good teacher has a love and enthusiasm for the subject such that the students will be encouraged to find the subject interesting enough to study on their own, and will ask questions about the subject because they are wondering about it outside of class.

 

Homeschooling would be great if the people who homeschooled had a strong grasp of every subject that they should teach to their kids. How many people deeply love history, mathematics, science, literature, grammar, etc?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok. So what about the responsibility of learning? Does that fall on the teacher to teach or the student to learn? Or is it 50-50?

 

Suppose you have a fantastic history teacher, let's call her Mrs. Hooper for kicks, who absolutely thinks American History is the end-all be-all of Jr. High education, and would use a variety of teaching methods to reach as many students as her 50 minute class time would allow. Let's also suppose you have a student, named Reese again for kicks, who even at 32 25 still does not give a rat's ass about history, finds the entire subject suspect to misinterpretation and boring as all hell. But let's suppose Reese is a huge fan of all of your STEM subjects; she's in math clubs, would go on to be president of the Electronics Club in high school, and took calculus, geology, physics, electronics, drafting, and computer science as electives in high school (no art, music, cooking, woodworking, etc.) During Mrs. Hooper's American History class, Reese rarely paid attention, didn't bother to read half the assignments, and only really got excited about a project when she got to create a scale model of Auschwitz for the Holocaust unit (and when they staged a sit-in to protest the unfair "tax" on worksheets the administration placed to pay for the 8th grade end of the year picnic, but really they sat in the hallway socializing until the principal sent everybody back to class.) So whose fault is it that Reese can't tell you what the hell started the War of 1812? (And for the love of everything, who the hell cares about this shit, not once in the past 19 12 years has this ever come up in conversation or at work. For Reese, I mean.) And moreover, what if Reese didn't have to spend 250+ hours a week trying to have a subject she didn't care about shoved down her throat and instead got to spend that time dissecting more fetal pigs or building rockets or studying algebra and geometry?

 

I can actually see this conversation veering more into a discussion about everything I feel is wrong with our education system. So let me cut to the chase. I don't believe every child should be expected to spend as much time studying every subject ever like they make you in public school. I do believe there should be a bare minimum of skills learned though, but the rest of that time can be spent really developing an individual's strengths and interests. I don't give a flip if the surgeon who performs my surgery knows what started the War of 1812 or if they can discuss the symbolism in Hills Like White Elephants, but I really like the idea of an extra few years of study in anatomy and physiology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Learning is 100% the student's responsibility. Teachers provide the opportunity to learn. Clearly you didn't like history, no matter how enthusiastic and intelligent the history teacher was. It's your fault for not seizing the opportunity to learn about the War of 1812. It's your own fault for lacking the initiative to find the links between your own interests and that of the history class. If you didn't even tell the teacher how you felt about the subject, it's your own fault for not carrying anything worthwhile away from the class.

 

The War of 1812 is the reason we sing "The Star-Spangled Banner". The war started because the US stood up for itself against British impressment of sailors on the high seas. We got our asses kicked for the most part, but we had enough victories to pat ourselves on the back and prove to ourselves we weren't independent just by a fluke. It's an important war to remember.

 

So you like STEM. Good. There's more to understanding science and technology than just the physics and mathematics, though. Understanding the history of the R&D behind our modern world is how we appreciate the people who contributed to what we have now. What are farads, joules, watts, newtons, coulombs, etc, if not a history of STEM?

 

Frankly, people who don't have a good grasp of history, literature, art, math, science, etc, aren't good citizens. They don't have an appreciation for the world they live in. Artists should know science. Historians should know mathematics. Mathematicians should know literature. English majors should know useful things. The trick is finding a way to connect what you love to what you dislike, so that you can become interested in what was previously boring to you. Part of doing that is a teacher's job, but they can't do it for you if you don't tell them what you are interested in.

 

"250+ hours a week"?? There are only 168 hours in a week. Did you fail to pay attention in math as well as history?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oops. Minutes. I also don't proofread my writing.

 

But ok, if it's 100% the student's responsibility to learn then what does it matter if they have a good teacher or not?

 

I don't agree with you by the way. I think you just wanted to point out Reese's (who said this was me?) shortcomings. Even though she was just 13 at the time. (By the way, I didn't say I don't know what the war was about. Just not how it started. Reading comprehension, yo. Did they not make that a part of your doctorate?)

 

I believe a well-rounded basic education is necessary for life, but you're not going to sit there and tell me that you're well versed in every subject. I'll call you a liar. And you'll know you're a liar.

 

But do you think that even if I had told my history teacher that all I really cared about was math & science she would have tailored a curriculum specifically for me? With 150+ other students? Oh come on! That's on that level of ridiculousness that only THT appreciates.

 

As a parent though, I would totally take the extra step to make each subject relatable to my son's personal interests. I know one parent who made every single subject she taught her kids about Star Trek. However she could fit it in, every single lesson included Star Trek.

 

By the way, not all home school classes are taught by the parents. A lot of times the parent is more of a facilitator. One reason home schooling is becoming more mainstream is because of the technology available to us. If a kid has a question that the parent can't answer, there are a lot of resources available to both the parent and child to get the answer. Actually, one of my personal favorite things about home school is the increased opportunity to teach and train kids to find answers for themselves. If they care enough to ask the question, they'll care enough to find the answer.

 

Plus, you know, parents are already their children's teachers. Whether they're "good" or "qualified" or not. They are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

But ok, if it's 100% the student's responsibility to learn then what does it matter if they have a good teacher or not?

 

Because a good teacher can provide better and more varied opportunities for that student to learn.

 

A student who is below grade-level finishes her book report. She does a so-so job, completes all the requirements, and her so-so teacher gives her a so-so grade on her report card.

 

A student who is below grade-level finishes her book report. She does a so-so job, completes all the requirements, and her good teacher takes note of the areas she had the most difficulties with, and finds a fun, level-appropriate way to challenge them.

 

A student who is an advanced reader for her grade finishes a book report. She does an excellent job, and her so-so teacher says "Good job!" and gives her the "A" she has earned on her report card.

 

A student who is an advanced reader for her grade finishes a book report. She does an excellent job, and her amazing teacher says "Good job! What did you think about (some event that happened)? I really liked how you caught (this particular theme) in the book, have you ever read (some) series of book? If not, you can find a lot of the same (particular themess) here, but in a different genre. I hope you check it out. And gives her the "A" she has earned on her report card.

 

A good teacher knows their subject, identifies problem areas, engages, tries to stir critical thought, and provides opportunities for further learning that the student may not be aware of. It is the teacher's job to provide those opportunities, it is the student's responsibility to take advantage of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oops. Minutes. I also don't proofread my writing.

 

But ok, if it's 100% the student's responsibility to learn then what does it matter if they have a good teacher or not?

Pong answered this question superbly.

 

By the way, I didn't say I don't know what the war was about. Just not how it started. Reading comprehension, yo. Did they not make that a part of your doctorate?

No, reading comprehension was not part of my doctorate. You'll be unsurprised to learn that reading comprehension is the sort of thing that's taught at much younger ages, long before graduate school, and typically a skill you can't get into grad school without. So, I comprehended your question just fine. Impressment is what started the War of 1812.

 

I believe a well-rounded basic education is necessary for life, but you're not going to sit there and tell me that you're well versed in every subject. I'll call you a liar. And you'll know you're a liar.

I'm a history buff, one college credit short of a minor in the subject in college (I wasn't going to spend an extra semester to finish a minor - I was satisfied with my grasp of history without the need for paperwork documenting it). I took the normal literature and English composition classes. I could teach these subjects at an elementary level confidently.

 

But do you think that even if I had told my history teacher that all I really cared about was math & science she would have tailored a curriculum specifically for me? With 150+ other students? Oh come on! That's on that level of ridiculousness that only THT appreciates.

If one student asks, there's probably a few others who have the same question but didn't ask on their own. It wouldn't need to be a dedicated curriculum for "Reese" exclusively. The teacher could've incorporated more STEM-related history into the course. Doing so wouldn't necessarily exclude other students, and might've piqued the interest of more than just "Reese". It's possible to reach more students without losing the interest of others.

 

I teach a physics course that interweaves history and economics with physics, so that a variety of majors find the class stimulating, and the students have told me they quite enjoyed it. My reviews were exclusively positive. And that's teaching physics, a class usually considered scary hard and avoided at all costs.

 

By the way, not all home school classes are taught by the parents. A lot of times the parent is more of a facilitator. One reason home schooling is becoming more mainstream is because of the technology available to us. If a kid has a question that the parent can't answer, there are a lot of resources available to both the parent and child to get the answer. Actually, one of my personal favorite things about home school is the increased opportunity to teach and train kids to find answers for themselves. If they care enough to ask the question, they'll care enough to find the answer.

Sounds nice, but kids can't ask questions without some input from a stimulating teacher. They need someone to ask questions to them and then someone qualified to answer their resulting questions. I suppose you could e-mail experts occasionally, or have a local professor stop by to give a guest presentation once in a while. Doesn't change the fact that learning is done by the student, not the teacher. A motivated student will learn much despite a bad teacher, and a poor student will learn little even from an excellent teacher.

 

Plus, you know, parents are already their children's teachers. Whether they're "good" or "qualified" or not. They are.

And isn't that a scary thought. Didn't CM propose licensing for parenthood? Seems like a good idea to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a few thoughts because now I am home for the summer minus a few continuing education type things I am planning:

 

Homeschool requires time investment on the part of the parent. If you consider this time well you can be a good homeschool teacher. I've seen homeschooling where it's parenting with worksheets. Because a homeschooler needs to pass a test to prove their learning to get into college (they essentially take a type of GED test for homeschoolers) it has lead to mixed results. When I managed a Taco Bell I had a lot of homeschooled drop outs that ended up working during the day. This is because you can't just get a workbook and say "Do page 125." They need more than that and many worksheets are not set to add challenge and leaps in logic that lead to problem solving skills. Another issue with the time investment is people who put too much time into it and the kids are "graduating" at 12. While kids brains are good at soaking up information earlier in life I think pushing for quick homeschool benchmarks is also bad for kids and is more about parenting ego and not healthy teaching. It happens in regular class environments too and kids end up being labeled into something (I've seen early graduates of accelerated homeschool environments being pushed into subjects they don't even like!) They don't have time to explore and see other subjects that they may enjoy. This goes back to the time investment because you have to spend time allowing kids to explore a bit. These kids are just in the first 15% of their lives. There is so much life ahead of them.

 

Second, I feel offended when people chose homeschooling over public schools. This is because I am a public school teacher and I do a mighty fine job. I work hard to challenge and bring interesting lessons and I care for every child and their learning. Not because of my own ego so much as I want good people to be a part of America and attain the best things they can for themselves. However, I know Reese's school district. I can see how this is a choice she'd want to make once I set my personal pride aside. Some of the biggest complaints about schools are not what they offer in curriculum to learn but how the school deals with social issues - bullying, truancy, delinquency and the rules as they are enforced. Yes, there are people who should not be teaching, but schools are a microcosm of the outside world. If you don't at least learn from schools how to deal with society - you have the opportunity to at least be motivated to make changes or lift yourself up and out of that.

 

Pavonis is also right about learning well rounded subjects. I may have hated Physics but at least I understand things in the world better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chrome just ate my reply. So now, the tl:dr version. Yay!

 

I think we're thinking about different age groups here. My mind has mostly been thinking of the wee little ones, like my kid. I don't believe that you can expect 100% responsibility from young children. Many of them have yet to learn how to learn, let alone what their share of the responsibility should be. Six months ago I might have disagreed with that, but after spending more time with my son's peers I don't believe typical children are equipped to take learning into their own hands until maybe after elementary school.

 

Where I'm coming from, home school is a great option for us because:

  1. We're involved parents who genuinely care about our son's education. We've researched all the options and have a firm grasp of what will be expected of us.
  2. My husband has an education degree already anyway.
  3. Our son is highly gifted. I could write a book about why public school is a death trap for gifted kids, but I'll spare you. He has physical and emotional needs that the school doesn't understand fully, he's more advanced in some subjects than others but not at level with his peers on any of them, he's already fallen into the habit of mimicking his classmates' behavior and abilities to remain their social peer, and he keeps getting sent home for being feverish (but rarely actually sick.)

Obviously not every family is going to be a good home school candidate, but that doesn't mean that all home schooling is a bad idea.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I was also under the assumption we're talking about Elementary to around Jr. High level teaching.

 

My sister home schools, but once they hit that bridge into adulthood she has them in courses taught by accredited professionals. I wouldn't say she's rich, then again that's subject to point of view, but my brother-in-law is an Air Force Colonel and also has his own command so...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the biggest problem everyone has in this thread, and I have noticed in myself and have been trying to change, is you can't automatically judge a book by its cover. You can't say public schools teachers are bad because not all are. You can't say homeschooling is bad because it is not always the case. You can't generalize everything. As an example, a guy I work with has a doctorate. Smart as a whip in 'book sense' but has the 'common sense' of a toad. I'm surprised he can he even tie his own shoes in the morning. But does that mean everyone with a doctorate is a moron when it comes to common sense? No.

 

Spam, you say kids being home schooled are the ones working at Taco Bell. Uh, sorry. There are others who graduated from the public school system who slipped through without learning anything or dropped out because the system was failing them. So to generalize there is wrong.

 

Let me give an example of how home schooling isn't as bad as everyone is making it out to be. A couple I know had a child who was diagnosed with leukemia. They went through their treatment and during that time and the time after where they couldn't be around anyone due to their immune system they were home schooled for several years. After about 4 years and finally being in remission the doctor has cleared her to go back to school. She was accepted into an IB school and will be going there instead. Not bad for being home schooled.

 

Another example is Tim Tebow. He was home schooled and he seems to be doing pretty good.

 

Of course there are examples as well where home schooling is not for the best. So it's one of those case by case basis situations to me. For Reese, it sounds like it will work. Her husband has an education degree. And I've met Noah and he is one smart little man. Always paying attention and, you can tell, always thinking. So maybe home schooling would work in the elementary years and maybe an IB school or AP work would come into handy later on.

 

BTW, there was a post in this thread that was dripping with irony yet I chose to overlook the chance of a lifetime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the biggest problem everyone has in this thread, and I have noticed in myself and have been trying to change, is you can't automatically judge a book by its cover.

But that's exactly what covers are for - prejudging. Else why do publishers bother putting any art on the cover?

 

You can't say public schools teachers are bad because not all are. You can't say homeschooling is bad because it is not always the case. You can't generalize everything.

Sure you can. That's what we do. We generalize because having different rules for every possible person and situation that we may encounter is too much hassle!

 

As an example, a guy I work with has a doctorate. Smart as a whip in 'book sense' but has the 'common sense' of a toad. I'm surprised he can he even tie his own shoes in the morning. But does that mean everyone with a doctorate is a moron when it comes to common sense? No.

I'd be interested to hear a tale of this common-sense-of-a-toad doctorate-holder. I never have any of my own. Of course, about 1 out of 3 people I know has a doctorate, so maybe I'm just inured to a lack of common sense!

 

Spam, you say kids being home schooled are the ones working at Taco Bell.

No, she said the homsechool drop outs were working at Taco Bell while she was managing. It's not a generalization, more of an ancedote.

 

BTW, there was a post in this thread that was dripping with irony yet I chose to overlook the chance of a lifetime.

You shouldn't overlook such chances. They're rare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.