Joshua Hernandez9 said:Just now.
Look, kids don't need to soak up every single bit of data—it's just not how it works.
Kids need to learn how to actually think—and more importantly, how to hunt down the right info on their own.
Some stuff you gotta lock in because it’s the foundation—but other things? Total waste of brain space to memorize.
Plus, elementary school should basically just be the training ground for lifelong learning—period.
4th and 5th grade isn't about pigeonholing kids early—even if things like elective coding or art classes feel like they’re pushing them toward a career path. It’s really just about building that core knowledge base and helping them develop actual thought and language through decentration.
Yeah, I'm with you—they're the ones who dropped the ball here.
And they deserve to take the hit.
Incompetence and zero motivation are the main culprits.
Spot on!
Whenever someone tries to criticize the education system, the faculty immediately teams up to scream, "We're professionally trained for this!"
Yeah, right.
There's no point in using "we"—it's not a collective effort.
Back when I was in college, there was this girl, Violet, who spent her entire education just focusing on her makeup, hiding under her desk.
Her dad was some bigshot executive, so thanks to him—and the fact that teachers got bored looking at her—she somehow coasted through and grabbed a degree.
I remember she couldn't even name the parts of a flower.
Now, I'm working in a school with someone who actually thinks Shakespeare was Italian.
So—no, finishing school and getting a piece of paper doesn't mean you're actually qualified.
(Which brings the whole value of the education system into question again)
Oh, I know how.
Just look at the reading lists in elementary schools (mostly garbage texts) and the way they handle the few decent ones, and it’ll be obvious.
(The reason here is different: it mostly comes down to the staff. When a school organizes a trip to a book fair, half the teachers hijack the bus and stop in Chicago on the way just to visit relatives—using free transport for a road trip. The ones who actually make it to the fair just buy cookbooks or celebrity memoirs. The actual reading lists have great texts, but you need someone who actually knows how to work with kids to analyze them.)
says:
Sure, it’s not just on the educators—but let’s be real, knowing that most teachers are underpaid, undervalued, and basically treated like garbage doesn't exactly help their drive to actually do a good job.
Hold up, I'm gonna have to disagree there.
Why would anyone pay you a premium if you aren't pulling your weight?
Back when I lived in the States, salaries used to fluctuate—there was one stretch where we were actually making decent money (for about a year). The quality of the work didn't change one bit.
There was this proposal floating around to move toward merit-based pay—basically, testing all the kids six or seven times a year to track individual progress, then using those scores to determine how much each teacher gets paid.
The teachers went on a massive strike against it, so the whole thing died in committee.
Shame.
Exactly. It feels like we’ve finally managed to peel back the layers and actually hit the core of the issue.
Fourth and fifth grade shouldn't be about pigeonholing kids into specific career paths—though, let's be honest, having electives like computer science, ecology, or art classes acts as a sort of soft guidance toward their interests. The real goal here should be to build a solid foundation of knowledge and, more importantly, to help them develop the cognitive ability to step outside their own little bubbles and see the bigger picture.
It’s a bit of a domino effect, isn't it? It all starts with those middle school grades from seventh and eighth grade—which dictate where they head for high school—then that leads directly into college admissions, which eventually determines their career path or whether they decide to pursue advanced degrees. It’s essentially one long, interconnected chain of academic decisions that sets the trajectory for their entire adult life.
That’s exactly why I made a point to specify the fifth and sixth grades.
Any competent teacher or school counselor can spot exactly where a kid shines and where they tend to struggle—identifying which subjects spark their curiosity and which ones just feel like a chore. The real key, though, is actually communicating those insights to the parents. If parents engage in meaningful dialogue with their kids about these patterns, they can help them navigate the daunting process of picking a career path or deciding on a college major. I really want to emphasize the word "help" here. Even though kids are young and, frankly, haven't a clue what they're doing yet, we need to empower them to think independently. We should be encouraging them to start making their own decisions—even small ones—that will eventually shape their lives. It’s about providing a safety net, sure, but not one that dictates their every move. They need guidance, but they also need the space to figure out who they are.
I’m inclined to agree—the responsibility for that mess falls squarely on their shoulders.
And frankly, they deserve to get hit by the rain.
Exactly. That’s quite literally what they get paid for.
It really comes down to two things—incompetence and a total lack of motivation. That's the core of the issue.
It’s high time we acknowledged that a lack of motivation is often just a mask for incompetence. When you actually give a damn about what you’re doing—when it truly sparks something in you—you don't settle for mediocrity. You push to be at least decent, if not outright exceptional. It’s simple, really.
It’s funny how it works—the moment someone dares to point out the cracks in our education system, you get this immediate, unified chorus of defensive shouting. It’s always the same predictable refrain: "We are highly trained professionals for exactly what we do!" As if a credential acts as some kind of bulletproof vest against legitimate criticism.
In a perfect educational system, that little scrap of paper would actually serve as a genuine guarantee—a promise that you possess the actual knowledge and expertise required to back up your claims. Of course, it shouldn't cost employers much more to run a bit of due diligence; even among those walking around with straight-A diplomas, there’s a massive spectrum of actual ability. Not everyone is a fit for every role, either—some industries are perfectly fine with mediocrity, while others demand nothing less than the absolute best. That said, there ought to be a baseline level of competency required for any given profession. Ideally, that bar should be constantly rising—as we progress, our collective standard for what constitutes "average" should move upward—and most importantly, those standards need to be clearly defined by law, transparent, and actually measurable.
Look—finishing school and holding a diploma doesn't automatically make someone an expert.
(which really calls the whole concept of formal education into question)
Exactly.
Oh, I know how it works.
Just take a look at any elementary school reading list—mostly mindless drivel—and see how they handle the few decent pieces that actually make the cut, and you'll get the picture.
I'm with you there. And honestly, I can't help but regret that our curriculum lacks authors like Mark Twain, unknown, Jack Kerouac, and George Bernard Shaw—all brilliant writers who would actually resonate with kids today. But hey, I guess they aren't "politically correct" enough.🙄
Of course, literature should primarily nurture its own traditions, but that should never be an excuse for an educational system to prioritize a superficial introduction to foreign classics over a deep understanding of our own heritage.
(In our case, the reason is different: it mostly comes down to the staff. When a school organizes a trip to a book fair, teachers hop on the bus, and half of them end up stopping halfway through a trip to New York just to visit relatives using free school transport. The ones who actually make it to the fair end up buying whatever's trendy. There are great texts available, but you need someone who actually knows how to teach them to children.)
It’s about knowing the material, sure, but it’s also about instilling a genuine love for reading. Kids will despise Homer for the rest of their lives if you force them to slog through hexameters when they're fourteen. But if they read something like Gustav Schwab's (
The Most Beautiful Stories of Classical Antiquity, which includes a prose retelling of the
Iliad and the [*I*/Odyssey*][/I]), I believe most would be hooked (since those stories are genuinely gripping—full of intrigue, outlaws, mythical creatures, etc.😁), potentially sparking a lifelong desire to eventually tackle Homer in the original language. That's just one example; I won't go too far off-topic, as I've already ranted about similar issues on the Literature forum.
Wait, I disagree.
Why would anyone pay you well if you aren't doing your job properly?
Here in the States, salaries have fluctuated—there was a brief period where we were paid quite well. The quality of work didn't change during that time.
There was even a proposal to pay teachers based on performance (essentially testing all students six or seven times a year to track individual progress and then basing compensation on those metrics).
The teachers revolted en masse against the idea, so it never passed.
A real shame.
My point was that we need to identify and reward truly skilled, effective educators. If we underpay everyone indiscriminately, we lose the incentive for anyone to excel. However, if we can distinguish the talented from the mediocre—rewarding the former with praise, social standing, and, of course, proper financial compensation—then we'll build a faculty that actually loves what they do, knows how to do it, and performs consistently. It's common sense: people perform better when they're satisfied with their work and appropriately compensated for it.
