Moderators: Three Stars, dagny, pfim, netwolf








Godric wrote:These days intelligence wills out.
Google, Wikipedia, YouTube, and book torrenting basically give anyone with the capacity a free 6 figure education
Schools suck and are worthless


count2infinity wrote:Godric wrote:These days intelligence wills out.
Google, Wikipedia, YouTube, and book torrenting basically give anyone with the capacity a free 6 figure education
Schools suck and are worthless
Same was said in Good Will Hunting, but yet the jerk at the bar has a point. At the end of the day, he'll have the degree. Without that stupid piece of paper, your knowledge is almost useless as far as getting your foot in the door.

columbia wrote:To change the subject slightly:
I went to a pretty good suburban district and I imagine that the quality of education there hasn't wavered in the last 50 years.
Why is that? I would say:
1. The inherent ability of the students to learn.
2. Their interest in learning, as instilled into them by their parents.
3. Their parents taking a large interest in the educational process and making sure that the kids are progressing each year.
4. Good teachers.
I don't know how you can have "good schools" without 1-3 above.
Are the "bad schools" any worse than they were 50 years ago or are there just more students going to them?


columbia wrote:To change the subject slightly:
I went to a pretty good suburban district and I imagine that the quality of education there hasn't wavered in the last 50 years.
Why is that? I would say:
1. The inherent ability of the students to learn.
2. Their interest in learning, as instilled into them by their parents.
3. Their parents taking a large interest in the educational process and making sure that the kids are progressing each year.
4. Good teachers.
I don't know how you can have "good schools" without 1-3 above.
Are the "bad schools" any worse than they were 50 years ago or are there just more students going to them?

columbia wrote:I would think so. If anything, it's probably increased.





columbia wrote:The kids in my HS that were in the remedial classes largely lived on the other side of the tracks:
Low income families, single parent household, parents who hadn't gone to college, parents who didn't give a ****, etc.....it wasn't really a surprise.
Now apply that to entire poor, urban areas.....and people want to blame the system and the teachers for low achievement?

count2infinity wrote:columbia wrote:The kids in my HS that were in the remedial classes largely lived on the other side of the tracks:
Low income families, single parent household, parents who hadn't gone to college, parents who didn't give a ****, etc.....it wasn't really a surprise.
Now apply that to entire poor, urban areas.....and people want to blame the system and the teachers for low achievement?
At the same time there are far too many teachers in those areas that are just lousy teachers. Why are they there? Because it's likely the only place they could get hired. Where do the "good teachers" want to go? Where there's more money and a better district. I can pretty much guarantee that if you gave a teacher a choice between a nice suburban school district vs. a poor inner city school they'd pick the first.


count2infinity wrote:I understand that you generally make less in a more rural school than urban area school, but it's not necessarily always about how much you make, but what you have. Do you have supportive parents? Do you have the equipment to fully convey your message to your students? Do you have the ability to teach nice elective classes? Do you have a class that is 30 students or 20 students (especially important in a lab based class)? Many good teachers are driven away from where they're needed most.

columbia wrote:The kids in my HS that were in the remedial classes largely lived on the other side of the tracks:
Low income families, single parent household, parents who hadn't gone to college, parents who didn't give a ****, etc.....it wasn't really a surprise.
Now apply that to entire poor, urban areas.....and people want to blame the system and the teachers for low achievement?

Pavel Bure wrote:count2infinity wrote:I understand that you generally make less in a more rural school than urban area school, but it's not necessarily always about how much you make, but what you have. Do you have supportive parents? Do you have the equipment to fully convey your message to your students? Do you have the ability to teach nice elective classes? Do you have a class that is 30 students or 20 students (especially important in a lab based class)? Many good teachers are driven away from where they're needed most.
Man class size is such a huge factor. The difference from even 25 to 20 kids is huge. So much more can be accomplished with a smaller class size. Equipment to fully convey a message is huge as well. I'm currently in a school that doesn't have smart boards, can't access YouTube, and still uses over head projectors with transparencies. Of course I've also seen the schools that had Smart Boards and not used them which is maddening because the kids LOVE them when they're allowed to use them and the teachers aren't fully trained in what the technology can do.


Users browsing this forum: Idoit40fans, KennyTheKangaroo, Spangler, Tim Thomasen and 8 guests