Discussion How could a proper form of educational system look like?

[shionoro]

In this thread, i want to talk about your ideas for the optimal educational system (or just the flaws in our given ones).

How do you think children should be educated?
Should we move back to giving parents more influence, or is it the right thing to give every child the same education so we can tackle harmful trends?

Do you think university should be completely free, or would that just attract too many freeloaders?


I think the biggest problem in education in our time is that schools are supposed to deal with a lot of the problems children brought with them from home (schools are supposed to get proper healthy food for poor children, they are supposed to fight criminal behaviour with children with criminal parents, they are supposed to enable every child to its religious freedom and they are supposed to even treat mental problems a child might have) but we do not really give them the power and budget to do that.

There are a lot of educational concept, sure, but none of it works without well paid teachers who are PREPARED for the tasks we exspect from them.

At the moment, we exspect a lot from our teachers but do not give them the tools to deliver it.

I think what we need in this debate is more honesty from all sides.
Because right now, we are just ignoring problems and acting like they do not exist.

We say that teachers need to do this and that, without acknowledging that they can't.
Or we say children need to do this and that, withotu acknowledging that they are in a system which won't reward that behaviour.

To me, a very first basic step would be to increase the amount of teacher. This does not cost insanely much money, and it is well spent.
It is not the end of it all, but it is a condition to every further reform.

Any political party on any level who does decrease the amount of teachers is one that basically abandons some of its schools.

What are your ideas`? What are your experiences with things in the educational system going wrong?

 

[z.5]

One of my biggest issues with the educational system of the UK (though I imagine it is probably a more widespread issue) is that children appear to be taught to learn rather than being taught to think.

This is especially true in the sciences, where there is a false notion that it is what you know which is important - rather, the method by which you try and find out the answer is often equally (if not more) important than the final answer.

If it were up to me, I'd allow children to use computers to look up information, encourage them to ask others for advice and help, pretty much do whatever people in the outside (outside of school) world do when they are trying to find something out.

Allow the children to design their own questions (obviously to a theme) and have the teachers more there to guide them in the best method to find out how to find the answers.

Learning a series of specific facts, to answer a series of specific questions in an exam, is far less useful than learning how to critically think.

In my mind, schooling should be about preparing children for life, not about preparing children for a series of exams – which could potentially lead to university (and further exams) – eventually to a job.

To be honest, I wouldn't even have exams (at least not in the conventional, sit in silence and work to a strict time, style) - but I understand that I may be in the minority with this mindset.

 

[M3J]

Main issue with education is that it's not about intelligence (for the most part) or actually teaching kids what they need to know (why is trigonometry necessary, or even calculus?). Most exams don't actually test the kids' intelligence, they test the memory. Even if you were a complete dumbshit, as long as your memory is decent you could pass classes decently. I mean in physics all you had to do was memorize the formulas, and some intelligence/critical thinking required was figuring out how to move the equation around to find the answer that leads to the result - like force x mass = acceleration, but we have mass and acceleration but have to find the force.

I think reading/literature is one of the few classes that actually challenge the intelligence/ability to understand, but it also involves a lot of writing and hoping the person isn't an unaware dyslexic. School should be about learning and teaching people how to survive in the real world, but instead it becomes more about memorizing things and cramming our heads full of unnecessary things.

I'd love to talk about learning about tax and shit like that, but let's be real. Who the fuck will remember how to file taxes accurately years later? And I assume classes teach kids how to write checks. But home ec or whatnot should be required, not Social Studies/History. I mean, I love HIstory and all, but taking a class similar to Home Ec taught me how to sew and the best way to wash dishes. Also allow kids to choose the classes they want, making two or three classes required.

Plus, what zimby said.


Also, colleges should be free or at least, pretty cheap. by colleges, I mean a 2-year school, whereas 4+ years, aka universities, shouldn't be expensive or cost an arm or leg if it's not top 10 or prestigious. if not feasible, at least it'd be more preferable to charge people who fail to avoid freeloaders.

 

[Reebi]

In this day and age, exams are useless because if I don't know something at work I can use my resources to do so. Plus, there isn't enough time in the semesters to gather and process all the information they give. Mistakes are fine as long as one knows how to deal with them and prevent them from happening. Schools teach you to obtain a perfection that isn't realistic. Only doctors should be a walking textbook but how many people end up as such?

 

[Sakazuki]

Well, I will share my experience as a teacher (E.P). It mau be long, but I hope it's worth of your time.

Here on Brazil or educational system sucks. A lot. Teachers aren't well paid (the ideal wage should be of R$ 4000 and most doesn't receive even R$ 2,500), our public schools have really bad infraestructure and most students doesn't respect us (ok, this is a problem in the whole world, probably). As a E.P teacher, I suffer because the system thinks that E.P is the same as sports (related, not the same thing) and there is only one sport: soccer. Every day, every class, all the students they will have to play soccer. In public schools, this means to play it in a court with problems (without roof, with holes sometimes).

Brazil is a rich country with a poor population. To ve a soccer player is the dream of many poor childs, as this means to have successful financial live. At least they think, as most will never be professional, and even fewer will have a comfort life. Still, they bet everything, and forger about the other subjects.

@zimbardo said above that he thinks "that children appear to be taught to learn rather than being taught to think". Well, there is a debate about that in the study if pedagogy. I believe that from the 5 years to the 15, we have to receive the fundamentals. This means that we will receive knowledge developed before our time, that will help us to do a more sofisticated thing, that is to think with independece. It's very, very rare fact to see a young person with less than 16 with contributions to our knowledge our pratice of interest for the human kind.

@M3J said that he doesn't see a reason to teach things like trigonometrics our calculus. Well, most of my students thinks like him. Not only this can be applied to math, but educational physics and the pratice of sports have fundamentals.

When I coach soccer and basketball teams, I order my athletes to dribble a traffic cone with the ball. Like, 100 times, utill he doesn't loose the ball whille running and with a decent time. But hell, he will neve dribble a cone in real match. The opponent player will not be static, wainting to be dribbled. But when they do this, their brain and body learn how to do this, better and better. They're receiving the fundamentals that will be the difference when they be in court.

With math is the same thing. When a student learn trigonometrics or carculus, he is receivinf the fundamentals of logic that be of use in tge future, or, at least, will have a logical way of thinking. They are the cones that our mind need to dribble to achieve something.

Well, I started a plan last year much like the Coach Carte film. I train every student in the fundamentals os E.P, I don't care uf he likes to do any physical actitivity or not, and I do this before they start to run after a ball - cause they don't run aftet a ball anymore. First, I try to see what kind of sport thet are prone to pratice, and only after this I will teach the fundamentals of any sport.

To be in the school team (any team), the student will have to attend classes (another big problem, school evasion), have grades that are above the average. I had serious problems with this, but most of the athletes that remained are better now, and the school that I work for have better results in sports that before.

We must hear the kids, try to understand their problems a propose a solution to them, still, we can't forget that we are responsible for a very important share of tgeir lives.

 

[z.5]

Well, I will share my experience as a teacher (E.P). It mau be long, but I hope it's worth of your time.

Experience beats my rampant guesswork 9 times out of 10 - and don't fret the long posts, if something is worth saying, it's worth saying all of it.

Every day, every class, all the students they will have to play soccer.

Knew there was a reason you guys were so damn good at football...

I believe that from the 5 years to the 15, we have to receive the fundamentals.

Well, with this point I don't disagree.

A strong background in mathematics and the abilities to read and write, are highly useful, for example, in the wider world.

But just because you are learning the fundamentals doesn't mean you should have to learn them in such a restrictive manner.

My ideas don't exclude the teaching of said things, in fact they are a necessary prerequisite and should be taught in parallel.

This means that we will receive knowledge developed before our time, that will help us to do a more sofisticated thing, that is to think with independece. It's very, very rare fact to see a young person with less than 16 with contributions to our knowledge our pratice of interest for the human kind.

But here is, perhaps, where we disagree.

I don't think that the current way of teaching (again, for clarity, as in the UK - I can not speak for Brazil [for example]) isn't ideal for teaching
sophisticated/independent thinking.

It teaches you to learn lists of facts, but gives you little grounding on how to use those facts in everyday life.

You'd be amazed how few people enter university with the ability to critically think (it is, in fact, one of the first things which has to be taught to researchers).

Also, there is a possibility that the reason why we don't see so many 16 year old PhD's is related to the fact that they are taught in this way - circular reasoning?

I dunno...

@M3J said that he doesn't see a reason to teach things like trigonometrics our calculus. Well, most of my students thinks like him. Not only this can be applied to math, but educational physics and the pratice of sports have fundamentals.

I don't believe @M3J actually thinks that - rather I feel it is a case of him badly expressing himself
(as usual )

but I will allow him to tackle your points by himself.

--- Double Post Merged, May 19, 2017, Original Post Date: May 19, 2017 ---

On a 2nd reading, it sure does sound like @M3J was dismissing those skills as useless...

But I still hold out that he was merely being facetious.

 

[Kato756]

@Sakazuki , glad to meet a fellow brazillian manga reader teacher, tho my area is history and I am just starting

To all the other fellow members in this thread, I belive that all the issues you have brought up are great, but I often find myself struggling with what I believe to be a even more basic question: How do we provide something of quality to so many different people?

Every kid is different, diferrent background, family, motivations, likes and dislikes, beliefs, etc, and all that has a impact, strong or small, on their learning capacities. This is not even taking into account different communities and cultures, which in Brazil is something you will very often find yourself fighting with: Public Schools set appart just 2-5km away from a Private Schools will be a whole different world, not even taking into account school conditions.

So whats the aswer? Come up with different teaching methods (talking about the whole system, not the teacher particular tendencies) tailored to every school? If so, how do you guarantee that all of the people of the country will recieve the same level of education, and that they will be able to stand on even grounds in college entrance texts (I am not even tackling the issue of how to enter colleges yet)? Even then, even if we tailored it school by school, and even if every single one of those schools only had 40 students, that is still 40 different people that will not necessarily adapt at that´s school teaching method. So could they choose the other schools? But how do you know that whatever he learned in his first school will be enough to make it into the other? What about transportation?

See? The questions never stop. I am not saying this is a impossible task, no no no, I belive the aswer is already withing our grasp, with all of our tech and talk and study, and that sooner or later we will find it, but please, don´t think that it is just as simple as "Regular School sucks, children should learn what they want!"

Also, I am all for teaching Politics and Taxes, but do you guys remember when you were kids? I am not saying that it won´t work, but I don´t believe it will be the savior of education as some people parade it.

 

[Sakazuki]

Experience beats my rampant guesswork 9 times out of 10 - and don't fret the long posts, if something is worth saying, it's worth saying all of it.



Knew there was a reason you guys were so damn good at football...


Well, with this point I don't disagree.

A strong background in mathematics and the abilities to read and write, are highly useful, for example, in the wider world.

But just because you are learning the fundamentals doesn't mean you should have to learn them in such a restrictive manner.

My ideas don't exclude the teaching of said things, in fact they are a necessary prerequisite and should be taught in parallel.


But here is, perhaps, where we disagree.

I don't think that the current way of teaching (again, for clarity, as in the UK - I can not speak for Brazil [for example]) isn't ideal for teaching
sophisticated/independent thinking.

It teaches you to learn lists of facts, but gives you little grounding on how to use those facts in everyday life.

You'd be amazed how few people enter university with the ability to critically think (it is, in fact, one of the first things which has to be taught to researchers).

Also, there is a possibility that the reason why we don't see so many 16 year old PhD's is related to the fact that they are taught in this way - circular reasoning?

I dunno...


I don't believe @M3J actually thinks that - rather I feel it is a case of him badly expressing himself
(as usual )

but I will allow him to tackle your points by himself.

--- Double Post Merged, May 19, 2017, Original Post Date: May 19, 2017 ---

On a 2nd reading, it sure does sound like @M3J was dismissing those skills as useless...

But I still hold out that he was merely being facetious.

The problem is that here on Brazil, we only have soccer. We remember volley only in the summer olympics, and all the other sports, only if its gold medal. Bronze, or silver? Meh, you're a big L.

I understand your point, and can't say that I disagree, but in your country, you have a hell of a educrional system. Way better than ours, just see how many Nobels, Fields Medalists and golden medals in olympics you produced.

Here we "don't" have the money (actually we have, but somehow it goes to politicians pockets). I think that you're talking about a next step when a country already have a good educational system

--- Double Post Merged, May 19, 2017 ---

@Sakazuki , glad to meet a fellow brazillian manga reader teacher, tho my area is history and I am just starting

To all the other fellow members in this thread, I belive that all the issues you have brought up are great, but I often find myself struggling with what I believe to be a even more basic question: How do we provide something of quality to so many different people?

Every kid is different, diferrent background, family, motivations, likes and dislikes, beliefs, etc, and all that has a impact, strong or small, on their learning capacities. This is not even taking into account different communities and cultures, which in Brazil is something you will very often find yourself fighting with: Public Schools set appart just 2-5km away from a Private Schools will be a whole different world, not even taking into account school conditions.

So whats the aswer? Come up with different teaching methods (talking about the whole system, not the teacher particular tendencies) tailored to every school? If so, how do you guarantee that all of the people of the country will recieve the same level of education, and that they will be able to stand on even grounds in college entrance texts (I am not even tackling the issue of how to enter colleges yet)? Even then, even if we tailored it school by school, and even if every single one of those schools only had 40 students, that is still 40 different people that will not necessarily adapt at that´s school teaching method. So could they choose the other schools? But how do you know that whatever he learned in his first school will be enough to make it into the other? What about transportation?

See? The questions never stop. I am not saying this is a impossible task, no no no, I belive the aswer is already withing our grasp, with all of our tech and talk and study, and that sooner or later we will find it, but please, don´t think that it is just as simple as "Regular School sucks, children should learn what they want!"

Also, I am all for teaching Politics and Taxes, but do you guys remember when you were kids? I am not saying that it won´t work, but I don´t believe it will be the savior of education as some people parade it.

Please, tell me that you use manga ad material for your classes, I used Slam Dunk to mine, and it worked.

Well, I know that a lot of teachers will disagree with me, but the solution can be given in three words: know your student. This is quite hard, I know, when we have classes with 30+ different people. How to approach each one and understand their needs?

My personnal method is: first, I do my classes in the way that I think I should do. The I will see the ones that understood and the ones that did not. This the group that really needs me, and I need to understand why they didn't. Well, my classes involves students moving, not behind their desks, so I must watch if they are doing their exercises correctly, if their body is capable of doing this kind activity, etc. Mainly, the problem is motivation.

Remember that I said that I use mangas? Well, I discovered that a very lazy student of mine loved comics. I started to talk with him and learned about it, that he liked to read, etc and believed that physical education was meaningless. Well, I introduced to him some books about sports as culture and one example was Slam Dunk.

He didn't dyed his hair red, but started to pratice with the rest of class, and is now better at some activities, albeit he is not fond of sports.

 

[z.5]

How do we provide something of quality to so many different people?

I am of an opinion that even the most fundamental level of education is beneficial.

As you say, it is a difficult thing to ensure that all children will leave school with a good grounding in the necessary information for their future.

So whats the aswer? Come up with different teaching methods (talking about the whole system, not the teacher particular tendencies) tailored to every school? If so, how do you guarantee that all of the people of the country will recieve the same level of education, and that they will be able to stand on even grounds in college entrance texts (I am not even tackling the issue of how to enter colleges yet)?

Well, who knows - that is, I guess, the point of this thread.
To solve all the world's problems (at least as far as their children's education is involved).


But on a serious note, I don't think it is possible to have all the children 'receiving the same level of education' - better schools will often turn out better students.
Don't think this is isolated solely to Brazil - the UK, USA and other countries also have this fundamental problem.

It will always be the case that if a parent is willing/able to spend more money on their children's education, their children will receive a better education.

This means, it is far less likely that a child from a poorer background will be able to stand on an even ground with a child from a richer background, in college entrance tests.

I doubt my plan would even fix this issue, as it is probably something far more insidious.

Even then, even if we tailored it school by school, and even if every single one of those schools only had 40 students, that is still 40 different people that will not necessarily adapt at that´s school teaching method.

I am not sure that it should be 'tailored' to each school - but I do feel that teachers should have more freedom in what and how they teach (obviously with limit - if they begin to teach racist/sexist/religious ideologies to children then I would say that they aren't [and shouldn't be] doing their job).

Fact is that it is unlikely that all of the children can adapt to the school's current teaching methods either.

Children all learn differently - and I do understand the practical challenges of individual based teaching methods tailored for every single child.

So could they choose the other schools? But how do you know that whatever he learned in his first school will be enough to make it into the other?

That is where I feel my method would have advantages (it isn't even the case where, currently, leaving one school with knowledge 'A', 'B' and 'C' enables you to cope with the requirements of the new school).

By teaching skills and a way of thinking, you generate students who have the ability to flexibly adapt to the new school.

These skills and this way of thinking should be universally applicable.

What about transportation?

What about it?!?

I am sorry, but I don't see the relevance...

I understand your point, and can't say that I disagree, but in your country, you have a hell of a educrional system. Way better than ours, just see how many Nobels, Fields Medalists and golden medals in olympics you produced.

Here we "don't" have the money (actually we have, but somehow it goes to politicians pockets). I think that you're talking about a next step when a country already have a good educational system

Well, I get what you mean about the importance of money - but I personally feel that Nobel prizes (for example) aren't overly relevant to this particular discussion.

If we were to target the things you bring up, then the discussion would be much more closely related to governmental and political matters (and we do have a whole batch of threads - and a whole forum - just for those precise topics).

My qualms are more to do with compulsory education - rather than higher education.

I do have some issues with higher education, but these tend to be more related to administrative matters than necessarily to educational ones.



On a side note, it would be interesting to hear from you both about what you feel is right/wrong about the educational systems you guys work in (and I don't just mean resource wide - though this may well be a limiting factor for a child's upbringing).

Are there any ways you feel that the systems could practically or realistically be improved?

 

[Reebi]

Well, I will share my experience as a teacher (E.P). It mau be long, but I hope it's worth of your time.

Here on Brazil or educational system sucks. A lot. Teachers aren't well paid (the ideal wage should be of R$ 4000 and most doesn't receive even R$ 2,500), our public schools have really bad infraestructure and most students doesn't respect us (ok, this is a problem in the whole world, probably). As a E.P teacher, I suffer because the system thinks that E.P is the same as sports (related, not the same thing) and there is only one sport: soccer. Every day, every class, all the students they will have to play soccer. In public schools, this means to play it in a court with problems (without roof, with holes sometimes).

Brazil is a rich country with a poor population. To ve a soccer player is the dream of many poor childs, as this means to have successful financial live. At least they think, as most will never be professional, and even fewer will have a comfort life. Still, they bet everything, and forger about the other subjects.

@zimbardo said above that he thinks "that children appear to be taught to learn rather than being taught to think". Well, there is a debate about that in the study if pedagogy. I believe that from the 5 years to the 15, we have to receive the fundamentals. This means that we will receive knowledge developed before our time, that will help us to do a more sofisticated thing, that is to think with independece. It's very, very rare fact to see a young person with less than 16 with contributions to our knowledge our pratice of interest for the human kind.

@M3J said that he doesn't see a reason to teach things like trigonometrics our calculus. Well, most of my students thinks like him. Not only this can be applied to math, but educational physics and the pratice of sports have fundamentals.

When I coach soccer and basketball teams, I order my athletes to dribble a traffic cone with the ball. Like, 100 times, utill he doesn't loose the ball whille running and with a decent time. But hell, he will neve dribble a cone in real match. The opponent player will not be static, wainting to be dribbled. But when they do this, their brain and body learn how to do this, better and better. They're receiving the fundamentals that will be the difference when they be in court.

With math is the same thing. When a student learn trigonometrics or carculus, he is receivinf the fundamentals of logic that be of use in tge future, or, at least, will have a logical way of thinking. They are the cones that our mind need to dribble to achieve something.

Well, I started a plan last year much like the Coach Carte film. I train every student in the fundamentals os E.P, I don't care uf he likes to do any physical actitivity or not, and I do this before they start to run after a ball - cause they don't run aftet a ball anymore. First, I try to see what kind of sport thet are prone to pratice, and only after this I will teach the fundamentals of any sport.

To be in the school team (any team), the student will have to attend classes (another big problem, school evasion), have grades that are above the average. I had serious problems with this, but most of the athletes that remained are better now, and the school that I work for have better results in sports that before.

We must hear the kids, try to understand their problems a propose a solution to them, still, we can't forget that we are responsible for a very important share of tgeir lives.

Maths is so useful as an adult. Bills, expenses, taxes, etc. are a requirement and in order to be finacially stable one needs to know maths. Plus, depending on the job certain equations are a must. Knowing the advance skills makes it easier in life.

 

[z.5]

Maths is so useful as an adult. Bills, expenses, taxes, etc. are a requirement and in order to be finacially stable one needs to know maths. Plus, depending on the job certain equations are a must. Knowing the advance skills makes it easier in life.

Not really sure you wanted to quote him there - he appears to be arguing for the usefulness of mathematics.

But aye, maths is one of the most easily applicable skills (to real life) which is taught at schools - I mean, it is the language of the universe, after all.

 

[Reebi]

Not really sure you wanted to quote him there - he appears to be arguing for the usefulness of mathematics.

But aye, maths is one of the most easily applicable skills (to real life) which is taught at schools - I mean, it is the language of the universe, after all.

I'm not arguing, just adding to the point Schools have useful knowledge I just think the way it's taught could be better.

 

[z.5]

I'm not arguing, just adding to the point Schools have useful knowledge I just think the way it's taught could be better.

Well, out of all the subjects taught - I feel that mathematics is actually one of the better taught subjects.

Perhaps it could be given some more relevant examples/tasks within a classroom - but it is one of the few subjects which is truly multidisciplinary (as in, you will use maths in many of the other classes also - so its practicality can be easily demonstrated in a variety of contexts).

 

[Sakazuki]

I am of an opinion that even the most fundamental level of education is beneficial.

As you say, it is a difficult thing to ensure that all children will leave school with a good grounding in the necessary information for their future.


Well, who knows - that is, I guess, the point of this thread.
To solve all the world's problems (at least as far as their children's education is involved).


But on a serious note, I don't think it is possible to have all the children 'receiving the same level of education' - better schools will often turn out better students.
Don't think this is isolated solely to Brazil - the UK, USA and other countries also have this fundamental problem.

It will always be the case that if a parent is willing/able to spend more money on their children's education, their children will receive a better education.

This means, it is far less likely that a child from a poorer background will be able to stand on an even ground with a child from a richer background, in college entrance tests.

I doubt my plan would even fix this issue, as it is probably something far more insidious.


I am not sure that it should be 'tailored' to each school - but I do feel that teachers should have more freedom in what and how they teach (obviously with limit - if they begin to teach racist/sexist/religious ideologies to children then I would say that they aren't [and shouldn't be] doing their job).

Fact is that it is unlikely that all of the children can adapt to the school's current teaching methods either.

Children all learn differently - and I do understand the practical challenges of individual based teaching methods tailored for every single child.


That is where I feel my method would have advantages (it isn't even the case where, currently, leaving one school with knowledge 'A', 'B' and 'C' enables you to cope with the requirements of the new school).

By teaching skills and a way of thinking, you generate students who have the ability to flexibly adapt to the new school.

These skills and this way of thinking should be universally applicable.


What about it?!?

I am sorry, but I don't see the relevance...


Well, I get what you mean about the importance of money - but I personally feel that Nobel prizes (for example) aren't overly relevant to this particular discussion.

If we were to target the things you bring up, then the discussion would be much more closely related to governmental and political matters (and we do have a whole batch of threads - and a whole forum - just for those precise topics).

My qualms are more to do with compulsory education - rather than higher education.

I do have some issues with higher education, but these tend to be more related to administrative matters than necessarily to educational ones.



On a side note, it would be interesting to hear from you both about what you feel is right/wrong about the educational systems you guys work in (and I don't just mean resource wide - though this may well be a limiting factor for a child's upbringing).

Are there any ways you feel that the systems could practically or realistically be improved?

Here on Brazil we have a lot of problems, some subjectives, other are about methods, let's see if @Kato756 will agree with me.

First, our education is only part time, students spend only 5 hours a day at school. After school, the majority doesn't have any classes, even for sports.

Second, our subjects doesn't prepare the students for the adult life. We don't offer any subjects that teaches about domestic economics or that gives insight about what career the student may choose.

Third, the infraestructure is very poor, not only in schools, but we don't have great centers of science, bubliotecs or museums.

Fourth, portuguese is language that may be too formal, more than the common language that we speak daily, and this works like a wall to the knowledge.

You said in a comment about the teach of math is one of the best, at least in UK. Well, here most students are very, very afraid of math as whole, and studies says that the brazilian student have one of the worst grades in math in the world.

It's quite hard to propose solutions to a country that have deep problems in the educational system, has a continental seize and political problems like us. Still, I believe that every teacher can be the change that we need, working without waiting the system to help us.

 

[z.5]

It's quite hard to propose solutions to a country that have deep problems in the educational system, has a continental seize and political problems like us. Still, I believe that every teacher can be the change that we need, working without waiting the system to help us.

So longer school days, extracurricular activities, speaking in a more colloquial tongue, more books in classrooms?
Things like this?

I get that 3 of these 4 will need more resources/money and that is a huge limiting factor - but trying to get the teachers to speak in a less daunting way should surely be feasible.

I wonder if there would be any good way to make mathematics (to pick on an individual subject) less daunting - maybe make it more relevant to them?

For fear of turning them into gambling addicts - mathematics could be shown to be very interesting if you had them predicting matches (giving odds for each side), following a player's progress/stats (show how this changes over time - plot on graphs and make future predictions/past predictions relative to trend lines)... I dunno.

I do remember that maths always seemed quite abstract to me at the time (though, now I see how integrated it was throughout my education).
I couldn't give 2 shits about how many beans Rajvinda had, or about how tall Pedro's tower was...

 

[M3J]

But training with cones makes sense because you're teaching the players to dribble, giving them a start. It's like how you need to teach algebra before moving onto geometry, trigonometry, and even physics. Stuff like trigonometry doesn't do that, it's just a more advanced skill that doesn't need to be taught, unlike geometry. When have we or can we use trigonometry?

 

[Nemispelled]

Here are changes that I would make to U.S. educational system to make it more efficient:

• Less homework -- and more time for students to study/practice on their own.
• Better use of actual school hours
• Let students choose their focus in their academic studies -- so "irrelevant" courses should be omitted from the curriculum
• Independent study should be of equal value compared to cooperation/teamwork
  • I don't necessarily mind group projects & team activities, but the idea that "students need to learn how to work together and compromise on certain decisions to better adapt in the real world, adult-working environment" is kind of BS to me... These so-called "team-building activities" at public schools don't really help...
    • Everyone should already understand/know how to cooperate with others in the workforce, this doesn't need to be taught.

• Students who prefer to concentrate in music or art/entertainment should be allowed to pursue their own major/focus, instead of being forced to take unnecessary courses or subjects that they are uninterested in learning about
• Sports and extracurricular activities should be separated from school/academics -- Different specialized institutions should be created to better help people who want to achieve their specific goals in life

• High schools should better prepare students for college/universities (ex. curriculum, schedules, etc.)
  • In other words, school systems and different levels of education should better correlate with one another
• Standardized tests/exams should better reflect what is being taught at schools... not what students should randomly know in the world of academics
• Schools should teach subjects/topics more thoroughly, instead of trying to rush/cram through lessons
• U.S. schools should put more attention on "what students learn" instead of "superficial achievements & recognition"

 

[M3J]

School shouldn't start at 8 fucking o'clock in the freakin' morning. Nine or ten would be much better.