Cybargs
Moderated
+2,277|6141

RAIMIUS wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

If you don't know the math there is nothing you could do. The reading though...I don't understand how he couldn't work that out.

It is a little bizarre that in this country we have such a focus on individualism but at the same time rely on a one size fits all education model. You would think we had figured out a system that takes advantage of each different persons inherent skills and abilities by now.
Odd that they guy can't remember ANY algebra or geometry...I can understand missing things like the surface area of a sphere, but knowing NONE?!
I really don't see why he should mess up the reading section so bad, either.
seems a little sus to me.

macbeth: not enough money and it would cost too much.
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
Macbeth
Banned
+2,443|5010

Cost too much to do what? I haven't even heard of anything close to what I described. The only sort of structural reform of our education system I have read about or that gets any attention is providing financial incentives to students. Otherwise we are stagnant in education ideas.
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,953|6057|949

Cybargs wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

well standardize tests are to judge a school and hold no weight in for the student (unless its the ACT or SATs).
Did you read the article?
yes i did, but i was replying mainly to this part


“If I’d been required to take those two tests when I was a 10th grader, my life would almost certainly have been very different. I’d have been told I wasn’t ‘college material,’ would probably have believed it, and looked for work appropriate for the level of ability that the test said I had."

when i took standardized tests, no one received the scores but me and just placed me in a percentile ranking. and these tests don't determine a students future at all, but i do agree most standardized tests are a complete sham and ineffective way to judge how well a school/student is doing.
to your comment that standardized tests are to measure school performance - that was explained in the article.

to your comment that the tests don't determine a student's future - you're obviously missing the point.  He's speaking about self-esteem.  If his test came back placing him in the lowest 5%, it may affect his self-esteem ('well, I'm not a top achiever, I never will be, I'm going to pursue a career as a burger flipper as opposed to an educator, because I am part of the bottom 5%').
Macbeth
Banned
+2,443|5010

If you didn't pass a standardized test in NJ you didn't graduate. If you failed you had to take a prep course and got another shot. If you fail at that I have no idea what happens. So they do matter in some places outside of wherever that guy was.
Tripulaci0n
Member
+14|5581
Dont fail. That's your job when you're a kid
HaiBai
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
+304|4909|Bolingbrook, Illinois
isn't as easy as it seems depending on your definition of failure
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6099|Canberra, AUS

Jay wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

interesting, related article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ans … _blog.html

A longtime friend on the school board of one of the largest school systems in America did something that few public servants are willing to do. He took versions of his state’s high-stakes standardized math and reading tests for 10th graders, and said he’d make his scores public.

By any reasonable measure, my friend is a success. His now-grown kids are well-educated. He has a big house in a good part of town. Paid-for condo in the Caribbean. Influential friends. Lots of frequent flyer miles. Enough time of his own to give serious attention to his school board responsibilities. The margins of his electoral wins and his good relationships with administrators and teachers testify to his openness to dialogue and willingness to listen.

....

“I won’t beat around the bush,” he wrote in an email. “The math section had 60 questions. I knew the answers to none of them, but managed to guess ten out of the 60 correctly. On the reading test, I got 62% . In our system, that’s a “D”, and would get me a mandatory assignment to a double block of reading instruction.

He continued, “It seems to me something is seriously wrong. I have a bachelor of science degree, two masters degrees, and 15 credit hours toward a doctorate.

“I help oversee an organization with 22,000 employees and a $3 billion operations and capital budget, and am able to make sense of complex data related to those responsibilities.

“It might be argued that I’ve been out of school too long, that if I’d actually been in the 10th grade prior to taking the test, the material would have been fresh. But doesn’t that miss the point? A test that can determine a student’s future life chances should surely relate in some practical way to the requirements of life. I can’t see how that could possibly be true of the test I took.”

Here’s the clincher in what he wrote:

“If I’d been required to take those two tests when I was a 10th grader, my life would almost certainly have been very different. I’d have been told I wasn’t ‘college material,’ would probably have believed it, and looked for work appropriate for the level of ability that the test said I had.

“It makes no sense to me that a test with the potential for shaping a student’s entire future has so little apparent relevance to adult, real-world functioning. Who decided the kind of questions and their level of difficulty? Using what criteria? To whom did they have to defend their decisions? As subject-matter specialists, how qualified were they to make general judgments about the needs of this state’s children in a future they can’t possibly predict? Who set the pass-fail “cut score”?
I kind of both agree and disagree. I was always a very good test taker so there's a big part of me that says suck it up, not everyone is cut out for college. But, the other part of me really hates the way material is taught in grade school. Forcing memorization does no one any good. Teach kids the why and then show them the how. Memorizing formulas or obscure word definitions is so far removed from reality, at college, and even moreso in the real world, that it probably does more harm than good. Teach kids the 'why' and they will self motivate.
this.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
Commie Killer
Member
+192|5812

Spark wrote:

Jay wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

interesting, related article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ans … _blog.html


I kind of both agree and disagree. I was always a very good test taker so there's a big part of me that says suck it up, not everyone is cut out for college. But, the other part of me really hates the way material is taught in grade school. Forcing memorization does no one any good. Teach kids the why and then show them the how. Memorizing formulas or obscure word definitions is so far removed from reality, at college, and even moreso in the real world, that it probably does more harm than good. Teach kids the 'why' and they will self motivate.
this.
I like to think being taught the "why" would've completely changed my attitude towards school, but maybe I'm just being a bitch.
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|4783|London, England

Commie Killer wrote:

Spark wrote:

Jay wrote:


I kind of both agree and disagree. I was always a very good test taker so there's a big part of me that says suck it up, not everyone is cut out for college. But, the other part of me really hates the way material is taught in grade school. Forcing memorization does no one any good. Teach kids the why and then show them the how. Memorizing formulas or obscure word definitions is so far removed from reality, at college, and even moreso in the real world, that it probably does more harm than good. Teach kids the 'why' and they will self motivate.
this.
I like to think being taught the "why" would've completely changed my attitude towards school, but maybe I'm just being a bitch.
You start learning the 'why's' in your sophmore year.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
Commie Killer
Member
+192|5812
Never made it that far. None the less, I believe it would have been better if what you were learning was tied in with your degree earlier on. Though that would definitely be difficult for the schools to handle.

Last edited by Commie Killer (2011-12-12 16:09:18)

unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,998|6197|USA

Jay wrote:

I kind of both agree and disagree. I was always a very good test taker so there's a big part of me that says suck it up, not everyone is cut out for college. But, the other part of me really hates the way material is taught in grade school. Forcing memorization does no one any good. Teach kids the why and then show them the how. Memorizing formulas or obscure word definitions is so far removed from reality, at college, and even moreso in the real world, that it probably does more harm than good. Teach kids the 'why' and they will self motivate.
The point is that the tests are a poor influence on the job that kids are going to aim for after the results are processed.

School does a piss-poor job at teaching real-world functionality: problem-solving, organization and scheduling, personal finance, learning skills/study habits and ability to follow instructions, correspondence and talking to people, and personal finance. These should be begun as soon as possible, but are pretty much ignored in favor of recycling the same washed-out crap year after year.

e: and personal finance.
Macbeth
Banned
+2,443|5010

And personal finance
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,998|6197|USA

Macbeth wrote:

And personal finance
Since it's so *@#^% important and ignored on so many levels, it bore saying twice...so I'll say it three times.
nukchebi0
Пушкин, наше всё
+387|5749|New Haven, CT
Your parents should teach you how to balance your checkbook, not a underpaid high school teacher.
Macbeth
Banned
+2,443|5010

Meh personal finance is 25% basic math 25% common sense and 50% self control. I don't think there is really a enough to there to teach a class for..

I agree that our education system needs to be fixed. See my post on the last page.
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,998|6197|USA

If there isn't anything there to teach a class on, then how come there are so many classes/seminars/books for it? Learning how to add and subtract isn't quite the same as personal finance, Macbeth. There's more to it than simply knowing how much money you have in the bank there's planning and real accounting involved. It's a vastly ignored topic and should receive more focus.

nukchebi0 wrote:

Your parents should teach you how to balance your checkbook, not a underpaid high school teacher.
Which would work...assuming your parents knew anything about anything. But if they do, maybe your parents should also teach your other subjects as well, rather than an underpaid high school teacher.

I'm just saying that the curriculum needs to set its priorities straight.
Macbeth
Banned
+2,443|5010

There are plenty of classes, books, and seminars for the dumbest stuff, dude. Go to your local community college and pick up a course catalog and turn to the seminar sections. They have seminars on stuff from giving interviews and writing CV's to building relationships and making friends. The availability of classes for something humans can learn through natural experience and with a bit of intelligence doesn't qualify it for school teaching status.

Besides there are already classes offered in high schools that touch upon that. My high school offered multilevel accounting and bookkeeping classes. They were cut down to single level because of lack of interest though.
Ilocano
buuuurrrrrrppppp.......
+341|6092

nukchebi0 wrote:

Your parents should teach you how to balance your checkbook, not a underpaid high school teacher.
That's what that Home Economics elective is for.  My class had plenty of hot girls with little brains.

As for Ken's article, I suspect that guys success had nothing to do about his own education, but his pre-existing circle of contacts and influence, which significantly has a greater impact on ones success than any academic achievements.
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|5836|'Murka

If I relied on my parents to teach me personal finance, I'd be fucked. Neither of them had them had the slightest clue when it came to money matters.

The only example they served was what not to do...in so many ways.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|4783|London, England

FEOS wrote:

If I relied on my parents to teach me personal finance, I'd be fucked. Neither of them had them had the slightest clue when it came to money matters.

The only example they served was what not to do...in so many ways.
My mom taught me how to maintain $10,000 in credit card debt and to rotate the balances between new card offerings as often as possible in order to keep interest payments down. She also taught me that taking out a home equity loan to buy a car is a smart move.

I love my mom, but she's retarded with finances.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,998|6197|USA

Macbeth wrote:

There are plenty of classes, books, and seminars for the dumbest stuff, dude. Go to your local community college and pick up a course catalog and turn to the seminar sections. They have seminars on stuff from giving interviews and writing CV's to building relationships and making friends. The availability of classes for something humans can learn through natural experience and with a bit of intelligence doesn't qualify it for school teaching status.

Besides there are already classes offered in high schools that touch upon that. My high school offered multilevel accounting and bookkeeping classes. They were cut down to single level because of lack of interest though.
There are plenty of classes, books and seminars for the rest of it too. By your logic, we should shut down all schools due to redundancy.

What I say when the curriculum should get its priorities straight is that classes like these should be required, not extracurricular. Unless you're a rich trust fund babyman, these are things you're going to need to know that, chances are, your parents have no business teaching you with what little they know.
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|4783|London, England

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

There are plenty of classes, books, and seminars for the dumbest stuff, dude. Go to your local community college and pick up a course catalog and turn to the seminar sections. They have seminars on stuff from giving interviews and writing CV's to building relationships and making friends. The availability of classes for something humans can learn through natural experience and with a bit of intelligence doesn't qualify it for school teaching status.

Besides there are already classes offered in high schools that touch upon that. My high school offered multilevel accounting and bookkeeping classes. They were cut down to single level because of lack of interest though.
There are plenty of classes, books and seminars for the rest of it too. By your logic, we should shut down all schools due to redundancy.

What I say when the curriculum should get its priorities straight is that classes like these should be required, not extracurricular. Unless you're a rich trust fund babyman, these are things you're going to need to know that, chances are, your parents have no business teaching you with what little they know.
It's ultimately pointless. People know the odds of winning the lottery and they still drop hundreds of dollars a week. Yeah, it would be nice to teach kids how to balance a checkbook or not get ripped off on a car loan, but I'd rather learn that kind of thing on my own personally, not from someone who probably struggles with it themself.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,998|6197|USA

That's what a syllabus is for.
TimmmmaaaaH
Damn, I... had something for this
+725|5864|Brisbane, Australia

Jay wrote:

It's ultimately pointless. People know the odds of winning the lottery and they still drop hundreds of dollars a week. Yeah, it would be nice to teach kids how to balance a checkbook or not get ripped off on a car loan, but I'd rather learn that kind of thing on my own personally, not from someone who probably struggles with it themself.
I would argue that unless someone is a gambler (ie has a mental condition that education will not fix) and still drops hundreds on lotteries they do not know the odds. (edit: this is assuming they cannot afford the hundreds of dollars. If they can then whatever, doesnt matter).

Legislation doesnt help things like this, only reducing apathy and ignorance - and that starts by encouraging learning at a young age so that people grow up wanting to learn things and not have to be forced to. At least in the system I went through in Australia, the method of teaching was not conducive to encouraging learning. Most people leave school "done" with learning other than what they do at uni for their "career".

Last edited by TimmmmaaaaH (2011-12-13 00:51:47)

https://bf3s.com/sigs/5e6a35c97adb20771c7b713312c0307c23a7a36a.png
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|5836|'Murka

Lottery and keno: taxes on people who do not understand math.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2022 Jeff Minard