School Reform: Thoughts?

If our education system were better, we probably wouldn't be dealing with so many anti-vaxxers and people drowning in debt in the States 😁

rowdypanther12 said:If our education system were better, we probably wouldn't be dealing with so many anti-vaxxers and people drowning in debt in the States 😁

I mean, excuse me, but I don't think we're really looking at the product of a formal education system here; it feels more like the result of endless Google searches and those various other ways people tend to "stay informed" these days, if you know what I mean.

rowdypanther12 said:If our education system were better, we probably wouldn't be dealing with so many anti-vaxxers and people drowning in debt in the States 😁

I’m asking you the exact same thing.
If you ask me what I’d change about our education system to prevent this kind of confusion from happening, I think we really need to rethink how we prioritize certain subjects. It's interesting because, looking at what kids learn today, they're already diving into things like vaccine science in the early grades, calculating interest rates on bank accounts, and practicing currency conversions in math class. I remember back when I was in school, we spent so much time on rote memorization that sometimes it felt like we were just learning how to pass a test rather than understanding how the world actually works. If I could step in and redesign the approach, I’d focus more on critical thinking and media literacy. Instead of just teaching the mechanics—like how to swap dollars for euros or how an interest rate works—we should be teaching students how to evaluate information and understand the "why" behind the facts. We need to give them the tools to navigate a world full of conflicting data so they can make informed decisions on their own. It’s all about building that foundation of logic early on!

I honestly think it’s just a fact of life: intelligence—or the lack thereof—tends to follow a bell curve. You can try all you want, but you can't just pour knowledge or common sense into everyone's head. Some people just get it, and others... well, they don't. It's one of those things you eventually just have to accept.
Regarding the vaccination situation, things have been getting interesting with the rollout of the new education laws. It seems like the Secretary of Education is actually pretty chill about it—she’s basically saying that if a parent chooses to take their kid to a private pediatrician for a consultation instead of using the school nurse, that should be perfectly fine. It's an interesting shift in how they're handling parental choice versus school requirements. It looks like they'll be posting something publicly in a few days..

Quincy:

When it comes to elective subjects, parents generally get to make those calls themselves anyway. But the real question is whether everyone is actually required to participate in those extra extracurricular activities—like, say, a check-in with the school nurse. In my view, a parent should always have the option to either handle those consultations personally or simply let the school professional take the lead. It’s so important to clear up these kinds of details, especially when you're navigating through all the conflicting information floating around lately.

It’s honestly wild how the Secretary of Education can just drop statements like that without even blinking, yet you don't see a single peep from school administrators or healthcare professionals. It feels like everyone is just looking the other way. 😲

I mean, I’ve been reading between the lines here, and honestly, I’ve come to my own conclusion. She didn't explicitly mention anything about being against vaccinations, but she definitely handed those foolish parents exactly what they wanted.
It’s not just about the vaccination debate, either—it's that whole dynamic where people walk right into a school and start demanding things like they own the place.
Because parents have that right.🙄

When it comes to those Swiss folks... honestly, I think even the best math professor would have tripped up with them. So, I wouldn't say the issue lies solely in whether someone actually understands how interest calculations work—because even an expert can mess that up. To me, the real issue goes a bit deeper than that: it’s about how they were chosen in the first place. 🙂

Susan James said:I’m asking you the exact same thing.
If you ask me what I’d change about our education system to prevent this kind of confusion from happening, I think we really need to rethink how we prioritize certain subjects. It's interesting because, looking at what kids learn today, they're already diving into things like vaccine science in the early grades, calculating interest rates on bank accounts, and practicing currency conversions in math class. I remember back when I was in school, we spent so much time on rote memorization that sometimes it felt like we were just learning how to pass a test rather than understanding how the world actually works. If I could step in and redesign the approach, I’d focus more on critical thinking and media literacy. Instead of just teaching the mechanics—like how to swap dollars for euros or how an interest rate works—we should be teaching students how to evaluate information and understand the "why" behind the facts. We need to give them the tools to navigate a world full of conflicting data so they can make informed decisions on their own. It’s all about building that foundation of logic early on!

I honestly think it’s just a fact of life: intelligence—or the lack thereof—tends to follow a bell curve. You can try all you want, but you can't just pour knowledge or common sense into everyone's head. Some people just get it, and others... well, they don't. It's one of those things you eventually just have to accept.
Regarding the vaccination situation, things have been getting interesting with the rollout of the new education laws. It seems like the Secretary of Education is actually pretty chill about it—she’s basically saying that if a parent chooses to take their kid to a private pediatrician for a consultation instead of using the school nurse, that should be perfectly fine. It's an interesting shift in how they're handling parental choice versus school requirements. It looks like they'll be posting something publicly in a few days..

Quincy:

When it comes to elective subjects, parents generally get to make those calls themselves anyway. But the real question is whether everyone is actually required to participate in those extra extracurricular activities—like, say, a check-in with the school nurse. In my view, a parent should always have the option to either handle those consultations personally or simply let the school professional take the lead. It’s so important to clear up these kinds of details, especially when you're navigating through all the conflicting information floating around lately.

It’s honestly wild how the Secretary of Education can just drop statements like that without even blinking, yet you don't see a single peep from school administrators or healthcare professionals. It feels like everyone is just looking the other way. 😲

I mean, I’ve been reading between the lines here, and honestly, I’ve come to my own conclusion. She didn't explicitly mention anything about being against vaccinations, but she definitely handed those foolish parents exactly what they wanted.
It’s not just about the vaccination debate, either—it's that whole dynamic where people walk right into a school and start demanding things like they own the place.
Because parents have that right.🙄

When it comes to those Swiss folks... honestly, I think even the best math professor would have tripped up with them. So, I wouldn't say the issue lies solely in whether someone actually understands how interest calculations work—because even an expert can mess that up. To me, the real issue goes a bit deeper than that: it’s about how they were chosen in the first place. 🙂

But that's really the exact point we're always harping on about here—ministers and principals are ALWAYS going to side with the PARENTS. Always.
I mean, you can't really raise your voice in a way that the public actually hears, mostly because they're more powerful, louder, and just much more numerous.

The Secretary plus the principals plus the parents versus the teachers.

It feels like an eternal, and probably always lost, battle.

The whole issue with the Swiss Franc was that banks would only offer it through all sorts of ridiculous excuses. It was like, oh, because of your salary bracket, or your eye color, or even your shoe size... you could get a loan in Francs, take it or leave it.
My husband actually had an auto loan in Swiss Francs. Why? Because he wasn't even given the option of any other currency. (Thank goodness he paid it off before the absolute clusterfuck of the financial crisis hit—man, what a ride.) Back then, who would have ever guessed that the Franc, which was basically the gold standard for stability, would start acting so erratic?

And where on earth do you get the idea that teachers aren't going to push back against this notion of parents meddling in everything? You know, the idea that they should decide which parts of the school curriculum align with their specific "upbringing values." It’s just funny because, honestly, nobody actually listens to us anyway when it comes to state education laws and district regulations.

I mean, parents could easily influence what their kids hear from the school nurse—like, they could just take them for their own checkups. But it’s much easier to dump that responsibility onto the school, or specifically the homeroom teacher, who ends up sitting in a waiting room until 7 PM after the final bell just to keep tabs on their students. (At this rate, I'm just waiting for someone to decide we should be responsible for hand-delivering dinner to their houses, too...)

I’m honestly stuck on what needs to change in how we actually teach. I could just say we need more hands-on activities or better ways to encourage critical thinking, but those are just empty buzzwords.
I want to see a curriculum designed by actual experts—and I don't just mean subject matter experts, but people collaborating with specialists who truly understand child brain development and how kids learn at different stages. I want to read a program and think, "Wow, this is it." Something where kids actually grasp the concepts instead of just memorizing definitions to pass a test.

rowdypanther12 said:I’m honestly stuck on what needs to change in how we actually teach. I could just say we need more hands-on activities or better ways to encourage critical thinking, but those are just empty buzzwords.
I want to see a curriculum designed by actual experts—and I don't just mean subject matter experts, but people collaborating with specialists who truly understand child brain development and how kids learn at different stages. I want to read a program and think, "Wow, this is it." Something where kids actually grasp the concepts instead of just memorizing definitions to pass a test.

The truth is, there isn't any subject matter that is inherently understandable, engaging, and relatable to absolutely everyone. There just isn't.
There is no such thing as a universal magic formula.
And maybe there shouldn't be, either. I suppose some people are naturally going to grasp things better than others, while some won't, and some might become intensely fascinated by a topic while others simply aren't.
Definitions—which, frankly, are already overrepresented in our current textbooks—are really just secondary.
And I think all of that is perfectly fine and normal. We have grading scales from A to F, and I guess it might be time for parents to just accept that reality. (It seems to me that most of their frustration stems from those grades anyway).
School isn't exactly an amusement park where every single person is supposed to be having a blast, all the time, without exception.
I don't quite get this obsession with making everything constant, high-energy, and—let's be honest—highly functional entertainment.🤷
As for critical thinking, well, if you ask me, that skill develops way before they even step foot in a classroom, so it’s not like we need to explicitly teach it only within school walls.
If a student doesn't have even a basic theoretical foundation in... well, anything, they probably aren't going to have much luck with higher-level reasoning or applying what they've learned.
Now, I’m certainly not talking about mindless rote memorization; I’m all for learning through comprehension, but I guess that just doesn't work for everyone or in every single situation.

So, here’s the deal—specifically regarding math—the proposed curriculum actually leans into a step-by-step approach. Instead of, say, grabbing fractions and then just cramming every single related concept into a kid's head within a single month—and then acting totally surprised when maybe three students actually manage to keep up—it's more gradual. Like, in third grade, you focus on the actual concept of a fraction: halves, quarters, eighths... using things like a pizza or a Hershey bar as examples. Then in fourth grade, you move on to writing those fractions down. In fifth, you're using Lego bricks to add fractions with like denominators (like 1/4 + 1/4 = 2/4), and by sixth grade, you're looking for common denominators and tackling addition and subtraction. That way, they actually get a full year to let it sink in through practical problems.
I’m definitely no mathematician, but based on what I remember from my own school days, what I hear from my math teacher friends, and even just chatting with parents, I’ve gathered that the biggest issue with math in our American school system—aside from those "cramming" students who try to swallow everything at once, much like how people try to tackle history, geography, or science—is this total lack of progression. We grab one topic and suddenly students are expected to master every single sub-topic ever conceived in a tiny window of time. It honestly baffles me why they don't just introduce trigonometric formulas alongside angle measurements in the same grade ☕ and allow for that steady buildup of concepts—breaking meaningful units down into smaller, digestible pieces. For instance, why does someone have to learn the perimeter and the area of triangles, squares, rectangles, and everything else all at once? Couldn't that be split up? Just giving them enough time to really grasp it would solve so many issues for so many kids.

urbantinker8 said:The truth is, there isn't any subject matter that is inherently understandable, engaging, and relatable to absolutely everyone. There just isn't.
There is no such thing as a universal magic formula.
And maybe there shouldn't be, either. I suppose some people are naturally going to grasp things better than others, while some won't, and some might become intensely fascinated by a topic while others simply aren't.
Definitions—which, frankly, are already overrepresented in our current textbooks—are really just secondary.
And I think all of that is perfectly fine and normal. We have grading scales from A to F, and I guess it might be time for parents to just accept that reality. (It seems to me that most of their frustration stems from those grades anyway).
School isn't exactly an amusement park where every single person is supposed to be having a blast, all the time, without exception.
I don't quite get this obsession with making everything constant, high-energy, and—let's be honest—highly functional entertainment.🤷
As for critical thinking, well, if you ask me, that skill develops way before they even step foot in a classroom, so it’s not like we need to explicitly teach it only within school walls.
If a student doesn't have even a basic theoretical foundation in... well, anything, they probably aren't going to have much luck with higher-level reasoning or applying what they've learned.
Now, I’m certainly not talking about mindless rote memorization; I’m all for learning through comprehension, but I guess that just doesn't work for everyone or in every single situation.

Ugh, I wish.
I literally just saw this half an hour ago and, honestly, it's enough to make me lose my mind.

urbantinker8 said:The truth is, there isn't any subject matter that is inherently understandable, engaging, and relatable to absolutely everyone. There just isn't.
There is no such thing as a universal magic formula.
And maybe there shouldn't be, either. I suppose some people are naturally going to grasp things better than others, while some won't, and some might become intensely fascinated by a topic while others simply aren't.
Definitions—which, frankly, are already overrepresented in our current textbooks—are really just secondary.
And I think all of that is perfectly fine and normal. We have grading scales from A to F, and I guess it might be time for parents to just accept that reality. (It seems to me that most of their frustration stems from those grades anyway).
School isn't exactly an amusement park where every single person is supposed to be having a blast, all the time, without exception.
I don't quite get this obsession with making everything constant, high-energy, and—let's be honest—highly functional entertainment.🤷
As for critical thinking, well, if you ask me, that skill develops way before they even step foot in a classroom, so it’s not like we need to explicitly teach it only within school walls.
If a student doesn't have even a basic theoretical foundation in... well, anything, they probably aren't going to have much luck with higher-level reasoning or applying what they've learned.
Now, I’m certainly not talking about mindless rote memorization; I’m all for learning through comprehension, but I guess that just doesn't work for everyone or in every single situation.

Yeah, right. Like the system isn't already tearing people apart.
☕

Richard Perez3 said:Ugh, I wish.
I literally just saw this half an hour ago and, honestly, it's enough to make me lose my mind.

Yeah, right. Like the system isn't already tearing people apart.
☕

I’m not entirely sure why it hit you so hard, though I suppose I get it; personally, it makes my blood boil just thinking about any kind of... institution... where there isn't a shred of accountability, where nobody is held to any standard, there's zero discipline, let alone oversight, and everyone just does whatever they feel like—or nothing at all if they aren't in the mood.🤮
Just imagine if your own kid was constantly calling the shots, dictating your entire schedule, and you were expected to just respect every single one of their little "decisions" without any criteria whatsoever.🤣

I can't help but worry that the students at those fancy private academies in New England are being completely taken advantage of.😂 😂
Yeah, right.

urbantinker8 said:I’m not entirely sure why it hit you so hard, though I suppose I get it; personally, it makes my blood boil just thinking about any kind of... institution... where there isn't a shred of accountability, where nobody is held to any standard, there's zero discipline, let alone oversight, and everyone just does whatever they feel like—or nothing at all if they aren't in the mood.🤮
Just imagine if your own kid was constantly calling the shots, dictating your entire schedule, and you were expected to just respect every single one of their little "decisions" without any criteria whatsoever.🤣

I can't help but worry that the students at those fancy private academies in New England are being completely taken advantage of.😂 😂
Yeah, right.

Yeah, exactly. That's why.
Was it really that hard to see?

Richard Perez3 said:Yeah, exactly. That's why.
Was it really that hard to see?

no😁

I guess since I know how many people tend to jump on board with these kinds of "progressive" ideas, without actually making eye contact or hearing the actual tone of someone's voice, I just can't really tell what anyone's true stance is, maybe.😁
sorry.
i'm glad you aren't one of those types.👍

So, regarding your little take on how "parents just have to accept the grades," I’m sitting here thinking, "Man, I wish it were that simple."
😁

Edit. Honestly, this whole obsession with "child competency" makes me want to gag. It’s all just a way to dismiss actual expertise and real skill, acting like everyone's an expert and anyone can do anything. People love to blame the entire American education system for being broken, acting like it's some massive failure because it doesn't coddle every single kid and hand them a trophy for existing. It's pathetic.

It's pretty obvious now, isn't it? 😁

Richard Perez3 said:So, regarding your little take on how "parents just have to accept the grades," I’m sitting here thinking, "Man, I wish it were that simple."
😁

Edit. Honestly, this whole obsession with "child competency" makes me want to gag. It’s all just a way to dismiss actual expertise and real skill, acting like everyone's an expert and anyone can do anything. People love to blame the entire American education system for being broken, acting like it's some massive failure because it doesn't coddle every single kid and hand them a trophy for existing. It's pathetic.

It's pretty obvious now, isn't it? 😁

it is.😁

Richard Perez3 said:Ugh, I wish.
I literally just saw this half an hour ago and, honestly, it's enough to make me lose my mind.

Yeah, right. Like the system isn't already tearing people apart.
☕

But seriously, how are parents supposed to track their kid's progress without actual grades? If a student pulls a 4.0 GPA, everyone knows exactly where they stand, right? 🤣?
If we switched to just descriptive feedback, most parents wouldn't bother reading it anyway, and then they'd be right back to demanding numbers. 👏
Interesting read, though. You always have to know what the opposition is cooking up.😁

My son just got a C on his reading assignment today (one of those worksheets they finish at home). He wasn't paying enough attention, and most of his mistakes were just from rushing through it. I told him he got exactly what he earned and that he needs to slow down and be more careful next time, so that’s that. It isn't his first C, and it certainly won't be his last.

So, I spent seven years teaching foreign languages at the elementary level, and honestly, I used to complain all the time about how I shouldn't even be handing out grades until third grade—and my reasoning was pretty much identical to what’s being said here.
I mean, look, by the end of the school year, about 90% of my kids would have mastered those 200 core words and 25 basic phrases. The only outliers were kids who needed special education services or, you know, children dealing with serious neglect at home. So, does it really matter if little Johnny masters everything required by the curriculum in January, April, or May? When I do grade, I’m measuring exactly that—just the speed at which a child picks up the material.
It’s a similar story in English Language Arts and Math, from what I’ve observed—because in those first two grades, you're just focusing on fundamental life skills: reading, writing, the four basic math operations... things every student should have down by the end of second grade. (Though, forcing kids through the system when they *haven't* actually mastered those basics? Well, that's a whole different conversation entirely.)
It isn't until third grade that you see a real split in ability, where some kids start pulling ahead and others fall behind, making the mastery of knowledge more uneven. That's when my grades actually become worth their weight in gold—they serve as quick feedback for everyone involved, showing us exactly where each student stands.

Sarah Hall53 said:So, I spent seven years teaching foreign languages at the elementary level, and honestly, I used to complain all the time about how I shouldn't even be handing out grades until third grade—and my reasoning was pretty much identical to what’s being said here.
I mean, look, by the end of the school year, about 90% of my kids would have mastered those 200 core words and 25 basic phrases. The only outliers were kids who needed special education services or, you know, children dealing with serious neglect at home. So, does it really matter if little Johnny masters everything required by the curriculum in January, April, or May? When I do grade, I’m measuring exactly that—just the speed at which a child picks up the material.
It’s a similar story in English Language Arts and Math, from what I’ve observed—because in those first two grades, you're just focusing on fundamental life skills: reading, writing, the four basic math operations... things every student should have down by the end of second grade. (Though, forcing kids through the system when they *haven't* actually mastered those basics? Well, that's a whole different conversation entirely.)
It isn't until third grade that you see a real split in ability, where some kids start pulling ahead and others fall behind, making the mastery of knowledge more uneven. That's when my grades actually become worth their weight in gold—they serve as quick feedback for everyone involved, showing us exactly where each student stands.

But honestly, I don't see why there's an issue with factoring speed into the evaluation, provided they’re getting the accuracy right too.
Personally, I wouldn't dream of extending a "no-grading" period indefinitely. Without proper, timely feedback—because let's be real, who actually reads descriptive comments? Most kids are just obsessing over their letter grades or whether they got a gold star or a smiley face—they just end up drifting along without any clue if they actually know the material or if they've reached a proficient, advanced, or excellent level.

There is a significant difference between someone mastering a concept in a month versus taking five months, because if they lag behind, those gaps in knowledge tend to just pile up in future lessons.
It’s kind of like math; does it really not matter if a kid fully grasps their multiplication tables in November or if they’re still struggling through it in May while the rest of the class has already moved on to much more complex stuff?

But check out these crazy ideas coming out of Paris—they think giving lower grades punishes you, when really, it just reflects how much you don't know.
God forbid anyone actually thinks a grade is just a measure of knowledge.
Oh, you don't want your ignorance graded? Please. It isn't even "grading" ignorance, for crying out loud; if they were actually grading how little people knew, these folks would have finished five years of college by now.

Richard Perez3 said:But check out these crazy ideas coming out of Paris—they think giving lower grades punishes you, when really, it just reflects how much you don't know.
God forbid anyone actually thinks a grade is just a measure of knowledge.
Oh, you don't want your ignorance graded? Please. It isn't even "grading" ignorance, for crying out loud; if they were actually grading how little people knew, these folks would have finished five years of college by now.

🤣 😂 🤣 😂
queen!

It’s kind of like that old argument—you know, the idea that when you test someone, you shouldn't be looking for what they lack, but rather focusing on what they actually know.
I mean, honestly, how am I supposed to zero in on that tiny 10% they actually grasp without accidentally tripping over the 90% they don't? (And in some cases, the gap is even more ridiculous than that)