Math and Science: Are American Schools sabotaging student success?

[The Backlash Cometh]

Going back to the argument that other countries teach Math and Science more successfully than we apparently do, (which is the reason given that we need to insource so many brilliant minds), I'm wondering, what are American schools doing wrong?

The one thing that I do know for a fact that American schools, even technology schools, are doing to sabotage students, is teaching courses, such as calculus, in class sizes as large as 60 students, maybe more. You have kids who made a 6 on their AP courses struggling because their teachers skip steps in the class sessions. Even if there is a smaller size for the review sessions with graduate students, it's still not enough because of the impersonal atmosphere.

And they know that class size is a problem, because they do make an effort to hand select students and put them in their honor's progams which are smaller and more conducive to success.

The only reason why they have such large classes is money. But maybe it's time that we start grading the effectiveness of colleges to teach higher level math to American students, like we do at the elementary level?

So, my question is, all these brilliant minds that are being insourced. Where did they learn and what method were they taught, and what was their class size?

[Beerboy]

1. Other countries fund education,

while Americans don't. I heard of a survey last year where almost 40% of U.S. college freshman couldn't place the location of the U.S. on a world map.
But we do have the biggest non-nuclear bomb though!:bounce:

[The Backlash Cometh]

3. So the failure of our schools is that they're based on a capitalistic structure?

How very interesting. I think we need to lock down this class size issue. We've been so focused on the elementary & high school grades, that we completely forgot to examine our college level education. You see, some of our elementary & high schools are doing the right things. But then these kids get into college, just to be defeated because the school is more intent on getting money, than teaching a course?

[Beerboy]

10. Failure seems overly harsh and I don't know if capitalism is to blame,

I was merely pointing out that the Government doesn't fund education like it funds the military. It's a pretty wonky issue when it comes to funding/class sizes.

[PDenton]

12. local funding is a problem

It really is. Some of the better public schools in the US are pretty good, but there are also alot where they are in poor neighborhoods and the schools have very little money (before bussing was made illegal, I went to a few). So between the parents that are either on drugs, in jail, or working all the time, they kids have a double whammy against them.

I went to West Springfield Highschool in Virginia, considered one of the best highschools in the US. I was not the best at math but I took all the way up to geometry and got a B in Algebra and also took chemistry in summer school. I was writing alot better stuff in my highschool English class than alot of my peers in junior college, and I felt like junior college was mostly a waste of time, aside from the psychology classes I took. However, that really doesn't mean much to employers... the fact I had a college education in highschool. Employers look at a highschool education now days with disdain. Some highschools and middle schools in this country are indeed in bad shape.

HOWEVER, even in this excellent highschool, in my junior English class, half the class was failing and most kids hated school, even though the teachers were really motivated and very good. We are talking the same school where kids would drive up in the Beemer their parents just bought them. Some of the kids would also show up to class drunk. (me, I had to walk to the bus or occasionally my mom drove me there- I did not have a car as a kid).

[Selatius]

14. Some counties simply can't afford good public schools, because the county is too poor.

The result is uneven quality of education from county to county and from state to state.

I favor how France runs their public education system. All public schools in France are directly funded by the government, and the teachers are government workers. The result is uniform standards can be brought forth nationwide regardless of the wealth or poverty of a particular region in France. This means kids who live in poor areas aren't penalized with lower quality schools simply because the local government can't afford to give anything better because school funding would be a government matter. At the university level, standards are also uniform, so in theory a person who goes to university out in the relatively poor countryside should be on par with a student who attends university in a major metropolitan area like Paris.

The big difference over there with university is that entrance requirements are pretty strict in general, perhaps more so than in American universities outside Ivy League schools, but if you can get past that hurdle, you get your education subsidized completely by the government, no loans to pay back to private lenders. That's the trade-off in French higher education. Your education is provided for free, provided you can pass the entrance exams. If you can't qualify, you can still attend vocational trade schools, since not everybody aspires to university education.

[Thothmes]

37. Federal Schools

I am in full agreement with you. However, as rational as you solution is, probably will never come to pass. The word education does not exist in the Consitution. Education is stricly the perview of the individual States. To get Federal control of the national education system would IMO, require an amendment to the Constitution, assigning that responsibility to the Federal Government. I believe that the government's role in education is a carrot or stick approach. The carrot is federal money, the stick is no federal money.

[The Backlash Cometh]

22. You went to high school in Virginia?

[PDenton]

42. Yes, Virginia

[PDenton]

5. if you can't find the US on a map...

... you should never have reached third grade, much less college. Funding isn't just the only problem. It is also Americans' attitudes. They are more interested in pop celebrities famous for being famous than in reality. You could throw a trillion dollars at this problem and see no results as long as Americans continue their faith-based thinking about the world.

America is a sick, twisted Horatio Alger story. "Wish hard, little Johhny... and you too will one day be an astronaut". If wishes were fishes...

[kineneb]

62. attitude dates back to 17th century "immigrants"

The Puritans did not believe that book-learning was necessary; for them the Bible held everything one needed to know. Also, many of the Europeans who arrived on these shores were peasants, for whom book learning was an alien concept. Schooling was not held in much esteem; for most people, being able to read and do simple sums was enough. Much of that attitude has continued down through the centuries, but now the TV has replace the bible as the source of knowledge.

Meanwhile, back in Old Europe/Asia, where people were not allowed to get education because of their social class, education became very valued. I see this in the different traditions of ethnic groups in the US- in general (warning-sweeping broad statement)- people from Germanic, Jewish and Asian backgrounds tend to push their children to excel in school.

My grandfather was an example: born to a German-Swiss family, he graduated from high school in 1915; while in school, he even studied calculus*! Many rural farm children at that time never went beyond 8th grade. He continued to educate himself throughout his life and insisted that his child (Mom) and grandchildren attend college. (He was very helpful when I got to higher math classes in high school.)

*we will not go into what he did with some sodium and a metal bucket out behind his science class... ;-)

[Lydia Leftcoast]

92. The Puritans actually pioneered the concept of the public school

because they believed that it was important for everyone to be able to read the Bible.

Both boys and girls received basic literacy training.

Only the brightest boys (only the boys in those days) studied anything further, and the curriculum they followed was mind-blowing: Latin, Greek, Hebrew, philosophy, theology, rhetoric, mathematics, and whatever else they needed to qualify for university. Originally, they were sent back to England to study, but with the foundation of Harvard in 1630 and Yale in 1700, most of them stayed on this side of the Atlantic.

I think our attitude towards education was warped by the frontier spirit of "not holdin' much by book l'arnin'." After the industrial revolution, anyone could get a good job after finishing eighth grade or even sooner, so America never developed a pro-educational mindset.

Even now, the emphasis is on qualifying for a job, not for being well-rounded intellectually.

However, a definite dumbing down has occurred since I graduated from high school nearly 40 years ago. I don't have time to write down the details, but I've compared current and older versions of the same textbooks and supplementary materials, and the newer version is two or three grade levels below the older version in difficulty.

[The Backlash Cometh]

101. If you're not taking AP courses, then you're definitely dumbing

yourself down. I'm shocked at the number of ANGLO kids in wealthy neighborhoods who take the easy track ON PURPOSE, because they don't want to work so hard. Or because they're afraid of jeopardizing their GPA, which is a stupid excuse considering that the grades are weighed. And these same kids will grow up to resent minorities who weren't part of their party circuit.

[Freddie Stubbs]

38. The District of Columbia spends more per student than any state

It must have the best schools, right?

[Bill McBlueState]

72. well, these are two different statements

"Good funding is one thing we need to have good schools"

"Good funding is all we need to have good schools"

If DC spends a lot of money but has crappy schools, that disproves the second statement but doesn't speak to the first.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

93. You need good funding AND a lack of corruption among the people who

decide how the money is spent.

Money does buy some things, or else why would wealthy people in the Twin Cities pay $20,000 a year to send their children to the most prestigious K-12 private schools?

[PDenton]

2. Nothing, Americans are just stupid

I have finally found this out... how could George Bush be re-elected, how could 57 million people be that dumb? Well, the question answers itself.

In all seriousness, Americans just don't value learning or intellectualism. The Left in the US is even guilty of this as well. So much of post-modernism and multi-culturalism is just mushy-headed thinking. People in the US are never suppossed to feel bad anymore about failure, even when they deserve it. Much like our President Incurious George, there are no consequences for failure academicly (Bush spent most of his highschool and college time goofing off and spitting into his dip cup), and parents want to pretend that their kid can excel at something else if learnin' dem numbers is too hard. We are so worried about hurting a kids feelings we just pass them on grade to grade and never force them to learn anything.

[The Backlash Cometh]

4. I'd argue with you, but I live in Florida and know that this anti-intellectualism

is true. It's because they don't want anyone looking at them too critically, when they snooker you.

[PDenton]

8. exactly

Critically analyzing people is bad because we are all suppossed to be equal. Instead of inspiring people to be better, American democracy is inspiring people to be mediocre in every way, including class. Florida is the perfect example; it's full of rude, ugly people who think that equality is a shield for their crass ways (and I live here). People, especially the young generation, walk around in barely any clothing even when they've got a figure that Shamu would envy. The men often don't shave, don't give you any eye contact, sometimes smell bad (deodorant?), etc. I blame the 60's generation, they really turned out a mess on their kids, between their mushy-heady hippy thinking and tugging with their kids between divorces.

In short, Americans have no moral soul anymore. That hard working ethic that Asians have (reflected in their students high rankings) is no accident, it was cultivated for thousands of years and supported by their society and their governments. To quote Tokyo Breakfast "no go to school... no get job... no get BMW 7 series".

[BlooInBloo]

9. lol!

[Bill McBlueState]

73. i like your responses

One could spend ten minutes refuting that post, but in the end, it's really only worth an lol.

[The Vinyl Ripper]

17. As a member of the "60's generation"

I think you are painting with a very broad brush.

Just about every real "hippy" I knew and know are kind, friendly and generous people and usually quite intelligent too.

As for divorce, the more fundamentalist the church, the higher the divorce rate and atheists have the lowest divorce rate of all. Damn few hippies are regular churchgoers and a great many of us are atheists. My wife and I celebrated our thirtieth anniversary this year and are greatly enjoying our grandchildren.

As to what people wear. I used to live in Florida, it's very hot there and wearing more clothes than you absolutely have to is uncomfortable. Also in a climate like Florida where you can break into a sweat at six am standing in your yard, maintaining zero body odor is an impossible chore for most men. Women may "glisten" but men sweat and sweat stinks.

And your comment about "a figure Shamu would envy" is pretty damn bigoted against those lacking a svelte figure.

One more thing: If the nation had listened to the "mushy headed" dirty fucking hippies, we wouldn't be in Iraq right now.

[awoke_in_2003]

20. Hmmm, I am a product of the 60's

born in 68. Both parents were hippies. Both parent stressed education, especially higher education. As was stated by someone else, the hippies usually thought more about what was going on and questioned everything. The hippies did not kill education in general and math specifically. Poor funding and electronic calculators did that. For example, I went to taco bell, my bill was 10.86. I gave the counter person 11.11. She looked at me like i had 3 eyeballs. I told her, just punch that into your register and give me a quarter. Kids today are taught how to pass a test, not to think about the questions on them. And now that I am taking college level math courses, it is extremely evident what bad funding and calculators have done to this generation.

[AngryAmish]

66. Who is smarter? Someone working at or eating at Taco Bell?

[The Backlash Cometh]

21. We live in different Floridas.

No where in Florida do I see any signs of the kind of liberal concept called "equality." Instead, I see every sign of people with money using it to distance themselves from anything even remotely affiliated with "diversity." They use that money for white flight into private schools, or inside gated communities. Better yet, move into a gated community zoned for a public school which is steep with other people that think like you do. The schools are self-segregated. Minorities rarely mix with whites at all.

Most divorced people I know, would call themselves conservatives. And I would say my neighbors were the kind of people who partied through college, then when they went into the workforce, blamed their lack of preparation on minorities who got ahead, just because they were minorities. And, yes, those neighbors did eventually become very hard working. Hard working at making the Rotary Club meetings every Friday morning where they could rub elbows with other business partners to figure out how to undue any government regulation that helped the public, but hurt business.

And those Asian students? I guarantee that none of their parents are willing to buy into the crap that a child is a full mature adult at the age of 18. They will stick with their kid until he graduates, gets a job, then gets married. Not at all what American kids are hearing. They are told that they are on their own by the age of 18, and cash strapped parents are relying on that to be rid of the financial obligation.

[PDenton]

44. you make some good points

I guess it depends on where you live in Florida. There are some gated communities around. Generally though they dress like everybody else, they just have designer labels. Even rich people in the US often have no class, it's endemic to the culture.

I guess you could call me an elitist, I don't like rubbing shoulders with the commoners, and I'm a bit of a mysanthrope. I like interesting people and you don't find that out in Florida 'burbs. I see alot of dumb, stupid middle class slobs every day. What is sad is many of them have good jobs. Some of the dumbest people in the world and they've got good jobs, but no class. They've got their pudgy wives and two or three kids and it is enough to make you toss cookies.

And Florida isn't that hot. No hotter than the southeast in general. The humidity is no excuse for running around your whole life dressed like a beach bum.

[The Vinyl Ripper]

48. "Class"

Has nothing whatsoever to do with how you are dressed.

If you get into a severe car accident and are trapped, who do you think is more likely to stop and try to render aid.

Someone in a three piece suit and tie with impeccable coiffure and a fresh manicure driving a BMW 7 series?

Or a construction worker driving a pickup truck?

[PDenton]

58. in that situation

... MAYBE the construction worker.

I wasn't trying to attack working class in general but there is something to be said for being conscientious about ones appearance.

My grandpa, a former short-haul truck driver and machinist, never had two coins to rub together but he never dressed like a bum when he was in public. He was a poor guy but he had "class". Sometimes I think the younger generations are missing out on that.

[The Vinyl Ripper]

61. The reason I asked the question was this..

I used to work construction, and one day we were headed back to the jobsite after lunch. We came upon a severe car accident that had only happened a minute or two before we got there. The poor woman had wrapped her car around a telephone pole so severely that the car wasn't touching the ground.

No cellphones then, so one of us drove to a phone while the other four of us tried to help the woman. She was trapped in the car and obviously seriously injured, four big guys working like maniacs to try to get the car door open. Vein popping, tendon tearing efforts were to no avail, but we tried.

Meanwhile the cars were flying by, a few stopped but not all that many.

It took the rescue team over two hours to get the woman out of the car, the longest time it had taken that county rescue team to get someone out and they still lived. A couple of us cried when we found out the woman was going to make it and later her husband visited each of us and thanked us personally for our efforts.

My dad was a natty dresser and always had his shoes shined. I haven't shined my shoes in probably thirty years.

I try hard not to judge people based on their looks since I don't like it when others judge me on such shallow criteria.. I basically look like Homer Simpson and trying to dress me up is like putting lipstick on a pig.

[PDenton]

65. OK... if you can't look good...

... you can at least be friendly. Some people have problems even with that.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

94. Similar experience

When I was a teenager on a family trip through northern Minnesota, we got a flat tire somewhere on the Red Lake Reservation.

My dad was perfectly capable of changing a tire, but as we were standing by the side of the road, I was struck by the fact that four different carloads of Ojibwe stopped and asked if we needed help.

No one else did.

Since the white population of northern Minnesota (including relatives from both sides of my family) is very racist against Native Americans, it occurred to me that the parable of the Good Samaritan could be recast in Midwestern terms as "The Good Ojibwe."

[The Backlash Cometh]

51. I don't think we could hang.

I don't care for arrogant people of any political leaning. Would you call yourself a liberal? Libertarian? blue dog? what?

By the way, I'm a pudgy housewife of a middle class slob. Nice to meet ya!

[PDenton]

59. I define myself by what I'm not

... I'm not a Republican. Maybe if the Republican party changed their tune alot, I could support a Republican candidate, but not at the moment. Other than that, I'd like to see intelligent candidates and politicians. I don't even care about their positions, I just want to find ones that have some other arguement beyond appealing to feel-good platitudes one way or the other.

Well, here's my beef with the suburbanites. They are causing their own problems by living in suburbia in 3,000 square foot McMansions. The average American is neither smart enough to connect myriad of bad choices they have made, and even if they do see through the mess, not brave enough to lift a finger to make it an issue... instead they externalize their problems to somebody else. People do have responsibility in how they live and consume resources.

The liberal ones expect the government to bail them out through higher CAFE fuel economy standards and stricter building codes (blame corporations because they live 20 miles from work and choose to live in large houses) - the conservative ones want to blow up another Middle Eastern country for oil, drill out another pristine wilderness or cut fuel taxes. None of the options are a real solution to any of the probblems Americans as a society are facing. The kinds of problems America is facing requires rethinking what exactly "the American dream" is suppossed to be, and if we are indeed entitled to cutting down more wilderness to build more suburbs and roads, more bombs for oil, and so on. I guess you could say if any issue motivates me in my choice of party or ideology, it is environmentalism/sustainability. The Republican record on the environment is poor, even though Richard Nixon did create the EPA.

[The Backlash Cometh]

60. Well, I'm glad you replied.

I have a beef with suburban life too - similar but not the same thought process as yours. First, it hardly matters where you live for some occupations that do a great deal of traveling. Many corporations are getting away from a central work place. So, you work wherever you can plug your laptop.

If you're going to raise children that love the environment, then you want to raise them in the suburbs where you have a chance to see wildlife and they can grow to appreciate it. Otherwise, they grow up like Woody Allan who gets panic attacks the minute he steps out of the city. You can even add and enhance wildlife these day by making your backyard more wildlife friendly. Your neighbors may hate you for it, but, what else is new?

Not all houses are McMansions, but I agree that those that are, make it harder on everybody else because energy is ultimately, a finite resource.

But, yes, there is a lot that is wrong with our suburban lifestyles, and it all boils down to the self-serving networks that crop up and the transient nature of our neighbors and neighborhoods.

[PDenton]

64. suburb or big city is not the only choice

You can live in small towns or small cities and not end up neurotic like Woody Allen. In my experience suburbs have all the disadvantages of rural living (with none of the advantages), with none of the benefits of living in a city. My uncle lives in a city, Tulsa. He's got a 1200 square foot 1920's house, that actually has a backyard. His electric bill is about 130 dollars a month. It doesn't look like city living but he only has to walk a few blocks to a grocery store and he is right next to a university.

People don't need to see wildlife up close to have an appreciation for the enviroment, in fact it is better for the environment if people don't see it up close. Very often some of the most environmetally descructive developement is being done by people just wanting to "get away from it all". The corollary, some of the most pristine wilderness on earth teeming with wildlife, is right in the middle of the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone. Lots of deer, wolves, and bears, because humans are afraid/unwilling to live there (and perhaps with good reason).

[The Backlash Cometh]

69. I see where you're headed.

A small town is ideal, as long as it's a town that appreciates educated people or people who don't fit in the square pegs. Not all do, and you get that small town mentality which fits like a tight shackle because people tend to peg you, for life.

Many suburbs are headed towards a towncenter concept, but I laugh, because I see them try and fail. It comes up sadly short because, what they really want is too high real estate for most small businesses, and all you really end up with is high density condos, office buildings a grocery store and a couple of restaurants. Where is the recreation? Where are the bowling alleys? Where is the putt-putt golf? Where are the usuable parks which do not require reservations which are within walking distance of the houses? Where is the dog park within walking distance of the house?

The key is "within walking distance." You see, developers have screwed us all up in the suburbs by using every inch of available space on residences, and hardly nothing on recreation areas. So, you don't really get to know your neighbors much, especially if their whole reason for existence is to gobble up what's left of the easements in a HOA.

[PDenton]

74. those are called new urbanist developements

Some are more authentic than others. Some are little more than a strip mall with condos nearby. Others are the real deal. Right now they are being sold to people who don't relish putt-putt golf and bowling alleys as recreation... but who knows, they might eventually make ones that do cater to that. Right now it is mostly focused on upper-crust retirees and young professionals. Orlando has two locations like that, Baldwin Park and Avalon Park, but in general they are swamped by conventional developement and suburbs. Florida does have alot of old-time towns, too, like Winter Park, downtown Orlando, Sanford, or Lakeland, where you can walk to alot of places and there is some recreation, but usually things like theater or art related stuff. The city might not be best for somebody who wants an Ozzie and Harriet life though.

[The Backlash Cometh]

82. These concepts are not unique.

There have been wonderful plans that went belly up for one reason or another. And you're right about the lack of emphasis on recreation in these areas. Professionals and retirees. Exactly. That's who they're planned for. That's why schools are such afterthoughts. And they wonder where the families with children have gone. I think I too will be bound for North Carolina when it comes time to retire. But before that, I hope to live in at least two other states. Just so I can give the USA a chance to redeem itself in my estimation.

[PDenton]

84. oh they have schools

The schools in Baldwin Park, Celebration, and Avalon Park are all pretty good, among the best in the metro area here in Orlando. And they do have some parks nearby within walking distance where kids play. Avalon Park in particular has alot of families moving in there, it's not that different from a suburb, the street layout is just different and they have a nice downtown area. I'd guess for recreation kids are doing school related activities, Scouts, that sort of thing.

I grew up in my early teenage years in the UK living in a small town house only about a mile from the downtown in a small town/large village. I did not miss much, and I got far more exercise than I ever did living in an American suburb.

[SayWhatYo]

100. lol...

[SayWhatYo]

99. umm..

[Selatius]

16. There is a very strong vein of anti-intellectualism and resentment of smart people, but...

when you're talking about politics, you want your politicians to be nerds at economics, nerds at the study of civil liberties and law, and nerds at international diplomacy, so that your son doesn't get killed in a war like Iraq for no reason. If you're going to put a man on the moon, you better pray to God a science nerd built the rocket, and if you want to cure diseases, you better treat the science nerds with respect, or they might just go to another country and help them find the cure instead of your country.

We should consider the last six years as a grand experiment. The experiment is we should elect somebody we would want to have a beer with. Well, shit, that's turned out into a world of hell. People made fun of Al Gore because he was too wooden and frankly geeky. Look what that has brought America. I want what the Republicans call "intellectual elitism" or snobbery because they at least know what they're doing. George W. Bush is the epitome of "Shit, it's on fire! Maybe I can put it out with gasoline!"

And if someone thinks nerds are dumb and not worthy of your vote because they don't have the same social values on abortion or gays or because they don't have the social graces of the debutante frat boy who drank and pissed away his college education, then maybe that somebody should look in a mirror to find a dumb ass.

[The Backlash Cometh]

23. It's all about networking with Republicans.

They want someone warm and fuzzy that they can bond with immediately, and get an understanding quickly, so they can cut deals and screw everybody else over, as quickly as possible.

[sense]

78. Bush Elected????

He was appointed by the Supreme Court. Re-elected only with the help of electronic voting and voter suppression by the administration.

[BlooInBloo]

6. No funding, the stupid teaching the stupid, no societal interest in intelligence...

... are the problems...

My class sizes were smallish in high school - certainly none were over 35. In college, many of my 100-200 level were auditorium-style, while 300-400 were almost always 15 or fewer (I was a philosophy/math geek). My last high school math class was pre-calc, which I flunked - the school had a rule about unexcused absences and passing - stupid 7-11 video games - lol! With all of my absences (approx. 1/3 of the semester), I still picked up enough of the topic to (a) get B's on all the tests, (b) minor in math in college, and (c) get an M.S. in math in the course of grad school. Math at the high school level is not rocket science - it's just taught by idiots, heard by idiots whose parents are idiots.

Ex idiocy, idiocy fit.

The solution begins with people actually caring about actual knowledge. It's all downhill after that.

[The Backlash Cometh]

25. When did you graduate?

You know, with all the Lockheeds and NASA employees in the area, Central Florida would have a pretty good base of young students who would have an aptitude for all those courses you skipped out on. There are magnet programs for those who are inclined to develop those math skills, but once they graduate, they move on to college where they hit auditorium style classes, and all that base is gone to shit.

The only problem I see with the math courses and teachers, is that there is a strong undercurrent of conservatism, as if they want to make sure that the students who get ahead in those classes, won't make waves in whatever private sector job they end up in.

[BlooInBloo]

46. There's nothing in the least wrong with lower level college courses....

... being taught wholesale. Retail is nice, but not necessary at that level.

Tacking on the word "magnet" doesn't magically change anything. Employees with degrees in education aren't any smarter or better-informed than they were before the word "magnet" appeared.

[The Backlash Cometh]

52. Very odd, indeed BIB.

We've talked before and you displayed some very high academic credentials, but now you seem to be arguing the exact opposite of what you said before.

[BlooInBloo]

79. Not sure where I've displayed "the lord giveth, the lord taketh away" behavior. Hint?

[Catshrink]

43. Excuse me, but I am not an idiot.

I teach HS. I've worked hard to prepare a set of lessons and activities that are challenging and meaningful. I spend summers taking graduate course to get better -- and many Saturdays at seminars doing the same.

But, I assign homework, and the kids don't do it. It isn't much -- 20 minutes tops -- and yet it doesn't get done. "I forgot" seems to be the number 1 excuse. These are college bound kids. 75% of the kids will make no effort outside of class to do anything -- thankfully, the other 25% try, work hard, and keep me going.

[BlooInBloo]

45. I didn't say you were; I made an aggregate statement. I also know how hard teaching is.

[Catshrink]

57. And your aggregate statement

is offensive to the 95% of teachers in the profession who work their butts off every day. The job is hard enough without blanket insults that just serve to lower morale -- which is very low already due to pressure from NCLB, etc.

I agree that some teachers shouldn't be in the classroom -- but they are few and their shortcomings shouldn't be used to diss the entire profession.

[Quantess]

76. It's very convenient to always blame the teachers.

Teachers are an extremely hard working and underappreciated group. I know, because I briefly taught high school.

I would say a bigger problem is the lack of discipline in the students, themselves. And shallow, unintellectual attitudes. Not all of them of course, but way too many. The lousy attitude is contagious.

And of course, all the bureaucracy makes everything worse. At my school, we called NCLB "Now Clinton Looks Better".

[The Backlash Cometh]

85. And it's a lot harder now that both parents work. Who's left to make sure

the kids do their homework? Or who's going to volunteer at school?

All these responsibilities have been dumped on the teacher. I had a friend who created her own problem with her hyper-active son. She was an ultra-power mom who probably should never have had children, but since she did, she should have taken drugs to settle herself down because she was so critical of everybody, she talked herself into a divorce. She was never happy about anything and her son was raised in that environment. He almost burned my back yard down, that's how out of whack things were for him. Anyway, she found a way to blame everything on the school. I watched the whole thing develop, and in the end she wanted to blame the black principal for all her kid's problems because the child, who was reading full chapter books in the fourth grade, by middle school, was found to have a learning disability. She blamed it on the middle school, and not the elite elementary school she insisted he attended because of the status.

[The Backlash Cometh]

53. It is hard work to instill good study habits in kids.

Parents and teachers have to work together to get the point across with some kids. I really don't know how parents who both work can do it. I had to take my son to a university library and teach him how to use the catalogs, the old fashion way, periodicals and all. The teacher can't do it all.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

95. I hope you give the ones who don't do their homework a zero for the day

:evilgrin:

I always found that to be an effective motivator.

[The Vinyl Ripper]

7. The "brilliant minds" are not being insourced for their "brilliance"

They are being insourced due to the fact that they are cheaper.

Listen to a sports talk radio show sometimes. A lot of the people that call in have prodigious memories and engage in sophisticated analysis, they aren't stupid by a long shot.

But it is considered "unmanly" to be too interested in learning for the sake of learning so these men concentrate their not inconsiderable talents on something so trivial as sports statistics.

[PDenton]

11. I don't think it's a coincidence

That America was a great country, world power and technology leader when baseball was popular. Lots of statistics, even a bit of math involved in the study of the statistics. It is definitely a more intellectual game than say, football or basketball.

Another comparison... when was the last time the US had a really high-level chessplayer? I can't think of any. The last one was Bobby Fischer, the son of immigrants. Before that it was... Paul Morphy, New Orleans in the early 19th century? England and Russia seem to church out more high-level chessplayers.

[The Vinyl Ripper]

18. The national game of Iran is chess

Which makes me wonder when they are going to checkmate Dumbya..

[Beerboy]

13. For the most part,

unless someone is making money off their interest in sports, they're for the most part morons. And I don't know what to make of the chicks following and losing money on sports. It all kind of points to a serious lack of funding for education in general. That's probably the most important factor as to why kids in the U.S. are falling behind their peers in other countries, because the priorities in funding are way out of whack.

[The Vinyl Ripper]

15. I think professional sports are pretty stupid..

But that doesn't mean that everyone who enjoys sports is stupid.

IMO, it's more the culture than the funding.

My family keeps telling me I need to go on "Who Wants to be a Millionaire" or whatever the latest equivalent is. I know almost nothing of sports and little about popular culture but a great deal of history and the sciences.

Other than shows like that I really can't think of anything in the popular culture which celebrates learning, education and intelligence.

[NewJeffCT]

19. Countries like China & India have huge class sizes

and they kick our asses when it comes to math & science. The teacher usually is up there by themselves, no assistant or aide or anything - so I don't think that is the problem.

I think our top public schools are still excellent, but the problem is the middle has been eroding. I live in a fairly wealthy town here in CT and people have been taking their kids out of some local prestigious private schools and putting them into public schools. It's a lack of funds at both the federal & local levels, plus anti-intellectualisim that is hurting our other schools.

[MadHound]

24. So, are you willing to pay for a higher quality education?

I see people whine and moan about how bad our schools are, how they are overcrowded, how poor teachers do, how there is a lack of proper materials, etc. etc. ad nauseum.

But when it comes to ponying up for school, time in and time out, people vote to keep the schools underfunded, teachers underpaid, and students given the short end of the stick.

So my challenge for everybody is to raise the funds for their local schools. Raise them to the point where every classroom has only twenty students. Raise them to the point where schools have all the space and material she needs. Raise them to the point where teachers' salaries are doubled.

When you do so, that is when you will start seeing quality education return to your schools. Until, no matter how much people whine and moan, the quality of schools is going to continue to decline.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

26. To those claiming it is a funding problem

what do these charts say about expenditures on education? We keep throwing money at the problem...and we get nothing in return. Folks, this is not a money problem...there is something else going on here...we may not spend the most per student on average, but we are close...so why don't we have the best education system (or better)?

sP

http://www.ed.gov/about/overview/fed/10facts/edlite-chart.html#1

[The Backlash Cometh]

28. What I see, since Republicans took control of certain colleges, is growth.

They are expanding. It's all about who gets those construction contracts, and it's all about rewarding the Regents with bonus money. The teachers are stuck with the larger class sizes, as the enrollment rises.

That's where all the money went.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

30. in the city of ATL they spend nearly $13K/student/year

and the infrastructure is falling apart...that money is going to something (agreed) but it is more likely the bloated overhead of the school structure...namely administrative. Teachers' classes in most places in GA have not climbed all that much in size (there are laws that limit how many students can be in a classroom), so that isn't it. Heck we had 30-33 per class when I was in over 20 years ago...

sP

[The Backlash Cometh]

31. Does that class size limitation apply to public colleges in GA?

[ProdigalJunkMail]

32. not at all...but heck, we gotta get the kids READY for that level

first. While I see your point at the upper levels of education, it seems to me that the foundation is crumbling (or already has). I don't see college level as being where most of the failures of our education system exists. Yes, there is a ton of capital expenditure at that level for buildings and the like, but those DO have the opportunity to provide a major benefit to the school in the terms of research facilities, new libraries, additional housing resources and the like...and as colleges swell with people (some qualified, some not) they have to make room...

sP

[The Backlash Cometh]

33. But why allow a college to grow, if it can't show that it's properly educating

the kids?

[ProdigalJunkMail]

34. there are a couple of things i would say to this...

but first, i must share that i am disappointed with my oatmeal this morning...i cooked it too long or something...ok...back to the topic.

1) We put too many people into colleges and universities in the first place. Like it or no, not everyone needs to go to school past high school (and some not past the 10th grade). The explosion of growth is related to this idea that the only way to have a good life is to make sure you go to college. This has resulted in HUGE dropout rates for frosh and soph years and many MANY more that just squeak by to get their degree and then go on to work in some middle management job...we need to make some adjustment SOMEWHERE to actually tailor a person's education to their actual career path. I am an example of this. I went to school...and wanted to teach history in high school. Now I am in the computer networking business. NO college could have prepared me for where I am...they don't adapt fast enough to keep up with the technology. But I was a waste of a seat in LOTS of classes that taught me information that I have never used since.

2) Class sizes at different levels are generally driven by motivation or lack thereof. In elementary, small classes because many children need that teacher to guide them through the learning process. Larger classes in high schools (but still hopefully under control) as the student develops their own learning habits and style. By the time one gets to college level, that learning style and those habits should be ingrained well enough that even HUGE lecture-hall classes should be ok. I would say that access to tutors and assistance should be there, as well.

OK...back to trying to fix my oatmeal...oh, and thanks for a great topic this morning!

sP

[The Backlash Cometh]

35. Here's where I find a problem with some of your points.

First, what is often taught in college is a skill which has universal application, even though the actual degree is not specifically in a certain field where you can jump in and get a decent job with a decent salary. For example, if you take a Behavioral Science degree, you will learn research skills and critical thinking which defines every decision you make from that point on, because it teaches you how to gather information, and how to make decisions deductively. If you take a Legal Studies degree, you will learn something of the same, only even more refined. Neither degree alone will get you far, as far as a career is concerned, but the person is now capable of escaping a life of Sheeplehood.

Also, some of those drop-outs ARE caused by teachers failing to connect with students. For example, I went to a pretty good school for my baccalaureate, and just took two business classes to see if I could handle a change in my major, since everybody else seemed to be a business major. I had two of the most horrible teachers imaginable for both courses, and people still talk about their deficiencies thirty years after the course was taught. One was a micro-economics class. After graduation, just for shit and giggles, I took the macro at another campus. It was an auditorium style class, but the teacher knew his stuff or maybe I just learned by then, to recognize what was really important data because of my research and critical thinking skills that I learned in the other college. I got an A. One of the few A's in the class and the macro teacher recognized me by sending me a letter saying that if I wanted to pursue a degree in Economics or Business, he would be happy to mentor me.

It was too late, of course. I had already taken another road, and didn't have the time for a second degree.

So, it's wrong to assume that every student who dropped out, did so by their own failing.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

39. please don't assume i think ALL dropouts are personal failures

of the student involved...i KNOW there are bad teachers out there. I would LOVE to continue to discuss, but my day has officially begun! I will try to check back around lunch-ish EDT.

Chat with you then...

Thanks for the discussion!

sP

[The Backlash Cometh]

40. Thank you, too. For dropping in.

May you have an enjoyable day.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

96. Administrative bloat is a huge rat hole for educational funds

Unless you have strict controls, each administrator has an assistant who needs an assistant who needs an assistant. Or else somebody decides to create a cushy job for a friend in the form of a whole new department to handle something that used to be handled by one secretary.

[BlooInBloo]

47. I've said it, but nobody likes it. So it will continue.

[PDenton]

71. It used to be that people wanted a great leader

... not a drinking buddy.

Most Americans don't understand what the president is. He (or she) should be like an elected monarch (a "decider" of course), representing the best in us. He should be a little better than the average guy, there isn't any shame in that. Instead we get Bush, who represents the most mediocre aspects. Maybe even the worst aspects.

It would be like if the Brits got, instead of Tony Blair, they got a foodball hooligan from the East End.

[sense]

81. Dumbing Us Down... It's working very well.

[MissB]

49. A good chunk of the money alloted per student in our state

has to be spent on teacher benefits. Now, the teachers definitely deserve to have medical/dental insurance and retirement benefits.

Just imagine how much more money could be spent in the classroom if we had universal health coverage. The costs of health insurance for our school district has skyrocketed in recent years.

[PDenton]

68. maybe money is not going where it is needed?

Too much spent on advantaged students and too little on disadvantaged students? Is it a possibility?

The US has a large minority population, some of these minorities do not have a good record helping their kids get an education, for any number of reasons- they have broken families, a parent in jail, a single parent working, etc. Because of local funding of schools primarily, these kids are not getting the same amount of funding as the rich schools.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

80. more likely too much is being spent on administrative BS

i think that is the more likely demon here...

sP

[spindoctor]

27. Well, my thoughts as an insourced "brilliant mind"...

Education is overrated. In the field you use very little of what you are taught in school and college.

The problem is not with the schooling in the US, the problem is with corporate mentality. Corporations are forced to bend over to the stock holders and think short-term profits only. So they downsize experienced workers instead of schooling them. They don't hire trainees (nor are Americans very willing to start at trainee level) but instead turn to people who have gathered specific experience abroad. There is no knowledge management what so ever because this is not viewed as an investment but as a cost.

Also, there is too much emphasis on which college you attended. In Europe there is no "Ivy League". With the exception of Cambridge, Oxford and the Sorbonne, there are no real "famous" universities, so basically every university is a community college. I'm assuming it is no different in Asia.
In the US it is unthinkable that a "brilliant mind" (I just keep using it. lol) does not have its choice of school and scholarship. This doesn't seem to apply to foreigners.

So to answer your question, I didn't attend any special college and the education that I got is mostly backdated. I am hired for my experience and specialization, not for my degree.

[The Backlash Cometh]

29. How much money and time would it take to train an American to have

your qualifications? It's boiling down to US corporation's laziness in training our people?

Seems to me with all this partnering crap going on with our schools, that our corporations should atleast ensure that the curriculm will give the students the background they need to get hired.

[spindoctor]

36. It's experience, not schooling

There is no substitute for experience. The old saying is that an expert is someone who has screwed up in every aspect of the field.
You can't train for that, you just need to give people a chance and enough time. It's hard to put a number on how much time exactly.

It appears to me that corporations aren't willing anymore to make commitments to their staff. And to be fair, the same is probably true for the employees. An entry-level knowledge worker starts at a company to gain experience, then leaves for more money when he feels that his value has gone up enough.
But knowledge management is all about building and retaining specific skills, knowledge and experience in a company. By encouraging and rewarding personal growth, you create a mutually beneficial environment and long-time relationships between corporations and employees.

This is widely understood but there is still a large gap between theory and practice.

[The Vinyl Ripper]

41. One kind of minor point.

Employees leave companies for more money because within a particular company there are usually few chances for internal promotion, the company looks outside for someone with "experience" in exactly the skillset they want rather than allowing an existing employee to train up to speed.

[sense]

83. Yes!

You get no real world experience being cooped up in a classroom 6-7 hours a day, 5 days a week, for 12 years. All you get is socialization by your same age peers (how scary is that) and whatever pablum is being presented by a "teacher".

[PDenton]

67. most people in Europe

do not go to college. Even professionals. Alot of people do go to what are essentially "community colleges" to get technical degrees. Americans are in love with this idea of going to college being a ticket into the American Dream. Of course, with so many blue collar jobs shipped overseas, maybe this is the only real option now days.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

97. However, their secondary schools are more demanding and

students can start taking vocational courses alongside their academic courses starting at age 15 or 16.

[MissB]

50. Our district provides small classes.

Even with smaller classes in our district, I still have an issue with the way that math is being taught in the younger grades. The teachers have many resources at their disposal but only a few of them have been taught how to differentiate their instruction. I have had to keep a constant eye on my children's math instruction to make sure that they're being challenged.

The teachers try very hard. They are all very willing to work with the parents and the kids. We are able to make sure that they have additional resources when needed. However, I'm still not 100% satisified with the instruction. I may just be a pain in the ass, but when you have a small group of kids in each class that are doing math at a level above their peers, perhaps those kids can also handle the "why" - the proofs - behind the math and not just the basic rules.

Sigh. I just keep pulling resources at home to supplement, and share them with my fellow parents.

[The Backlash Cometh]

55. kick

[mainer]

54. I think it's a cultural problem in the U.S. We worship "regular guys."

That's how Bush got elected. Americans wanted a President they could "have a beer with." They rejected Gore the wonk because he reminded them of the "smart kid in class."

I saw this when my boys were in school. If you were a nerd, the other kids made fun of you. The thing to be was a jock. It was almost a point of pride for boys to be the smart-alecky dumbass. The girls, thank heavens, didn't seem to have that attitude, which may be why so many more girls get into college than do boys.

The country that worships stupidity gets what it deserves.

[The Backlash Cometh]

56. anti-intellectual, which is not the same thing as anti-elitism.

One has to do with education, the other with snobbery.

[kineneb]

63. see my post above,#62 for some history

that anti-intellectualism arrived with the first European settlers. Damned Puritans.

[mainer]

70. I think this is a more recent development

Certainly in Boston during the 1800's, there was a flowering of intellectualism, and a strong belief in education with the transcendentalist movement. Perhaps the disdain for education is regional?

[The Backlash Cometh]

87. I think something is going on regionally.

It's okay to have a diploma, in fact, they expect you to. They just don't like critical thinkers. They want followers, or people who will follow a corrupt decision easily and not give them trouble.

[Progressive_In_NC]

75. Kids need to fail again; but they also need more one-on-one instruction

Kids flat out need to be allowed to fail again in this country. My neighbor is teaching math at a local high school in Raleigh (algebra and algebra II) and she will count the question right if the kid shows his work but got the wrong answer. What if I were an accountant and I lost $50,000 bucks for my company; but I showed my work and I kind of did that part right?

They also give grades on 1-4 scale and EVERYBODY gets a 3 (performs on grade level) with an occasional 4 (performs above grade level). What does that mean?

It means the kid doesn't know where he/she stands except that they can do work for their grade level. When I got my grades, I knew I earned that 93 (to get an A-) because I could calculate it based on my grades. Now it's less clear what the grade will be until you get your report card.

I really think that kids need more one-on-one instruction time, but a lot of high school classes in our area are 40 kids strong to 1 teacher (15 years ago my Algebra II class had 25 in it and it was overcrowded). That's just not good if you ask me.

[The Backlash Cometh]

88. You want to get sick?

Do you think that people working in banks in the loan department figure things out to the penny? Think again. I often wonder if someone at the top realizes that things get estimated to the thousands sometimes, and if they've figured out a way to siphon the money.

[sense]

77. AP Scores and more.

AP Scores are from 1-5. There is no 6.

Most schools do not have Honors programs or Tag programs. When students are separated due to something more meaningful than their age, it isn't to ensure that any one group of students succeeds. It's done (rarely, unfortunately) and for the purpose of providing the best level and pace of instruction for each student.

Read the The Underground History of American Education and/or Dumbing Us Down: The Hidden Curriculum of Compulsory Schooling, both by John Taylor Gatto. Or try The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America, How Children Learn or Einstein Never Used Flashcards. Here's a website for a History Tour of Public Education. http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/historytour/history1.htm

As adults we all need to educate ourselves about the real purposes behind NCLB and other programs designed to ensure that more and more of the hoi polloi remain as ignorant as possible.

The only money this is about is the old money of the extremely rich. They are very interested and invested in producing an easily controlled, massive underclass. They are succeeding rather well.

WAKE UP!

[The Backlash Cometh]

89. Don't know why the number 6 stands out in my mind.

Thanks for the correction.

[woo me with science]

86. some ideas

Many of the countries that are outdoing Americans on tests actually have larger class sizes than ours, so class size is probably not the most significant factor. That being said, I agree that smaller class sizes are better.

In America, everybody goes to school, so you may have a wider mix of motivation levels and abilities than in some other countries.

American teachers are very restricted with regard to the discipline they can impose on students. Fill a classroom with unmotivated students, many of whom have not learned self-discipline at home, and it makes it very difficult to teach some classes.

I also think that American teachers are often reluctant to require the sustained dry effort and mastery of basic facts and skills that students in other countries are given. Particularly in the areas of math and science, such "drilling" is necessary in order to give students the foundation (full, automatic mastery of basic material) that they need in order to comprehend higher levels of study. If a student never reaches the point at which mathematical calculations and conversions are automatic to him or her, that child has little chance of succeeding in higher-level math and science classes.

The recurring argument you see here at DU all the time, about whether teachers should teach basic facts versus teaching
"higher-level thinking skills," is a red herring. Cognitive psychology has shown over and over again that students need BOTH. It is impossible to learn to think critically if you do not also have a solid reservoir of basic facts and skills from which to make those higher-level connections. This is true not only in math and science, but also in the humanities. You cannot have an intelligent discussion of history if you do not have a basic factual understanding of what happened when and where, and who was involved.

We see over and over again on DU the vehement claim that teachers should not waste time drilling students on rote facts and skills (for example, in preparation for standardized testing) when that time could be used to teach "higher-level thinking" instead. However, these arguments are followed over and over again by outrage when students cannot find their own country on a map, can't calculate change at the store, believe that Lincoln and Julius Caesar lived at the same time, or can't formulate and punctuate a sentence.

I am not sure how much self-discipline and sustained effort teachers in the United States require of their students. There is a sense in this culture that good teaching and learning should be fun. Teachers find themselves in constant competition with You-Tube and video games and under constant scrutiny by parents who want their children to be enthralled with learning. Yes, the best teachers can inspire and entertain their students. However, a solid mastery of any subject also requires discipline and the ability and willingness to sustain effort even when the lesson is not scintillating and fun.

There is a famous study in developmental psychology, in which researchers tested children's ability to inhibit impulses and delay gratification. It was a very simple study. Individually, the children were told that they could have one marshmallow or piece of candy if they ate it right away. However, they could have TWO pieces if they waited for the examiner to leave the room and return later. Some children waited and developed strategies for waiting, such as distracting themselves or talking to themselves about how nice it would be to receive TWO pieces. Others could not wait and gobbled the one piece immediately. The researchers then followed up on the study participants after they reached adulthood. There was a large and significant correlation between the ability to delay gratification as a child, and success in adulthood, measured by employment success and stable relationships. In short, kids who could control their impulses and work for a future payoff did better in life.

Effective teaching is not just the skill of making lessons fun and interesting, but also the skill of teaching students to cope and persevere when the lesson isn't inherently fun. Learning science and math requires sustained effort and the ability to work through boredom, confusion, and challenge. I suspect that these issues have something to do with the dismal test scores of American schoolchildren.

[The Backlash Cometh]

91. Not to mention that you never know what's going on in a kid's life at home.

Kids are inclined to pay attention less, if school doesn't seem to have any relevance to their future, or if they are too worried about something that's happening at home to concentrate on what's happening in school that day.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

98. Judging from the tutoring I've done

the schools are doing pretty well in teaching the kids basic literacy. When I tutored street kids for their GEDs, they could all sound out words. Every last one of them.

What they could not do was draw inferences from what they had read.

I'm a firm believer in teaching facts, but students also need to discuss these facts intelligently, to distinguish facts from opinions, to learn what makes a sound argument, and to write supported opinions using different techniques.

[The Backlash Cometh]

102. Sometimes these kids, all they need is permission to think beyond

their allowed hemisphere. I didn't realize how much my Catholic upbringing taught me to overly censor my thinking and decisions. Sometimes I would think the question was a test to see if I could tell where to draw the moral or ethical line.

Well, let me tell you, it took just one week of management training to break me of that bad ugly habit. Ethics, puh!

But seriously, children, especially those raised where strict obedience is expected, may have trouble free associating, because they're too busy censoring themselves to avoid getting in trouble.

[smalll]

90. I blame the "graphing" calculators -

It's not merely allowed now, it's encouraged and taught. Kids are doing simple pre-Algebra stuff in our school with these monstrosities in hand. It seems to me that perhaps people need to get a FEEL for numbers and how they work by doing their own calculations. It's kind of like trying to speak a foreign language by carrying around a translation dictionary all the time as a crutch, and darting into its pages a few times each sentence to look up a word. You'll never learn the language that way (plus, the sentences you come up with will be hardly idiomatic, or even sometimes anywhere close to what you want to say. Rather similar to whopping-wrong answers kids come up with calculators.)

[The Backlash Cometh]

103. You're absolutely correct.

[BlooInBloo]

104. Oh bullshit. If the teachers both understood the topic well, and cared enough...

... they would find that it's trivial to write excellent exam questions for which a calculator of any sort gains the student nothing.

Calculators are fine. The idiotic method of "teaching" the topic is the problem.

(Note: I assume the teachers care, hence I conclude that they simply don't have a decent grasp of the topic. I have independent reason to reach that conclusion besides.)

[MedleyMisty]

105. I'm not a math whiz

but I was playing chess at two and reading Agatha Christie and Orson Welles in second grade. Spent third and fourth grade researching the Holocaust and reading stuff like Treblinka and For Those I Loved, which sparked a lifelong interest in the Nazis and how they came to power. When I make comparisons between the neocons and the Nazis, I know what I'm talking about.

In fifth grade I was retested for the academically gifted program and the dude wrote a little summary of the results in which he said I was working at a college level and beyond and had the abilities and the temperament to go far with my life.

I read a comment earlier in the thread about it being "unthinkable" that a brilliant mind in the US would not have its pick of schools.

Maybe if the possessor of the brilliance was lucky enough to be born to rich parents as well as getting good genes. My parents worked in mills and my father died a month after my seventh birthday, so there wasn't the money and/or the opportunity for homeschooling or radical acceleration or anything more than the lackluster AG program and honors/AP classes at the local public schools - I refused to join the Honors Society because everyone else in it was stupid. I mean, they were freaking 18 year olds about to graduate high school and I had to explain the words angst and exonerate to them.

But luckily I did get to take the SAT in 7th grade and my verbal score qualified me for Duke's TIP program - the son of the owner of the company I work for also went to TIP, which is why I think I got the job. Which is just taking pictures of rental properties, but hey, I get a lot of autonomy and lots of time alone to think so whatever.

Worked at Arby's after graduating from community college because the A.A.S. in information systems was useless. Almost killed myself but my husband let me quit just in time.

The point of this personal anecdote is to show that it has a lot to do with social Darwinism, a wrong idea of what constitutes equality, horrible inequality in society and yeah, capitalism. Of the completely unfettered and brutal American variety.

People think that if you're intelligent you'll have all these external achievements no matter what. I don't get why people are so focused on external stuff and only think you're worth anything if you have some corporate job and make way too much money, but anyway...they seem to think that smart kids are perfectly okay just left to their own devices and even if they grow up in poverty and are never challenged at school they'll grow up to be rich and "successful". Like it's just magical and that your nurturing and how well you did in the birth lottery has nothing to do with it.

That's where the wrong idea of equality comes in. Education based on ability rather than age is snobbery, don't you know? I guess some people have a major inferiority complex and a tendency to value people based on IQ and they project all that on to other people and come up with the idea that smart people think that they're better than others and they need to be taken down a peg or two and forced to read simple books about Jack and Jane and Spot in school when they're reading War of the Worlds at home. There's all this stigma attached to intelligence in both directions. Why not just recognize that intelligence is just another difference just like skin pigmentation and reproductive organs and that it does not mean anything about the individual's value or worth? Equality is everyone having an equal opportunity to get the education that they need, not forcing everyone to be the same tapioca pudding.

I really need to get back to work and the issues with rich schools and poor schools and stuff like that has already been covered, but I will probably come back to this thread later to expand.