School Reform: Thoughts?

Betty Wood54 said:Not really. Most colleges didn't actually change that much when the new academic structure was implemented. It’s mostly just a 3+2 setup now, and they introduced those standard credit hours. The professors who used to demand attendance still demand it, and the ones who didn't, well, they don't. It's pretty much the same thing, I guess.

"Most"? That's a stretch. It’s really just the Law and Business schools where they force you to show up simply because there aren't enough chairs in the lecture halls.
In my experience, you could count the number of professors who actually tolerated absences on one hand—and that’s including people I’ve heard from over at Berkeley, Johns Hopkins, and even the engineering departments. You were basically allowed three absences per semester.
Before these reforms, you could practically skip whenever you felt like it (unless it was a lab). Honestly, I don't even want to get into a full-blown debate about it; his passive-aggressive tone and that constant facepalming are enough to give me high blood pressure.

I find myself in agreement with analogseal18 regarding this matter.

However, one must consider that students often apply entirely different sets of standards when evaluating their various instructors. My daughter, currently navigating her years at a local high school, holds her chemistry teacher in high regard precisely because of her rigorous and demanding nature; yet, she simultaneously directs a certain level of criticism toward her history teacher—a critique rooted in the pragmatic realization that chemistry will be an essential pillar of her future academic career, whereas history, in her current estimation, offers no such immediate utility.

Jason Morgan said:"Most"? That's a stretch. It’s really just the Law and Business schools where they force you to show up simply because there aren't enough chairs in the lecture halls.
In my experience, you could count the number of professors who actually tolerated absences on one hand—and that’s including people I’ve heard from over at Berkeley, Johns Hopkins, and even the engineering departments. You were basically allowed three absences per semester.
Before these reforms, you could practically skip whenever you felt like it (unless it was a lab). Honestly, I don't even want to get into a full-blown debate about it; his passive-aggressive tone and that constant facepalming are enough to give me high blood pressure.

Speaking from direct experience at the engineering school, that isn't really how it works anymore, especially since around 2012 when things started reverting to the old ways (like bringing back strict deadlines and ditching those weird bell curve grading systems). Before that, participation and lecture attendance were mandatory points for almost every single course. Now, there might be a handful of classes—maybe five to ten—where that applies, and even then, those points don't usually carry over to the final exam. I'm fairly certain things were more rigorous before the big educational shifts, mostly because labs were held weekly with the same TA every single time.

I'm guessing you attended UC Berkeley; I haven't been there myself, but from what I've gathered through conversation, things were likely similar before the restructuring. I highly doubt professors suddenly decided to start requiring attendance out of nowhere when nobody used to enforce it before.

Jason Morgan said:Well, at most American universities since the credit reform... yes, they do.

Most of my colleagues conduct this kind of research independently through anonymous end-of-year surveys or by checking in with the eighth graders.

The real issue here—as a reaction to this imaginary scenario of student extortion where the primary demand is "unlimited absences"—is the question of why anyone would force a student to attend lectures in the first place; specifically, why attendance should (or shouldn't) have any bearing whatsoever on the grade they earn.

Testing knowledge is essentially a process equivalent to weighing someone—it's simply determining a state of being. Forcing students to show up to class and subsequently conditioning a passing or better grade on that physical presence is just like a situation where someone shows up to be weighed having achieved a perfect weight and boasting massive biceps, triceps, and all the other muscles—only to have the scale operator screw them over because they didn't do their workouts at 8:00 AM at the MuscleBuscle gym, but instead chose some other time at some other location.

It's pure feudalism.

Ironically, you've raised my blood pressure so much with your passive-aggressive tone and constant facepalming that you completely failed to realize I am actually against mandatory attendance just as much as you are—I certainly wasn't claiming, even in my wildest dreams, that attending class isn't mandatory under most of these professor-feudals.

That demand for unlimited absences, which is what started this whole conversation, isn't something students should be asking for as part of some imagined extortion scheme; it's quite possibly the most normal thing in the world.

Betty Wood54 said:Speaking from direct experience at the engineering school, that isn't really how it works anymore, especially since around 2012 when things started reverting to the old ways (like bringing back strict deadlines and ditching those weird bell curve grading systems). Before that, participation and lecture attendance were mandatory points for almost every single course. Now, there might be a handful of classes—maybe five to ten—where that applies, and even then, those points don't usually carry over to the final exam. I'm fairly certain things were more rigorous before the big educational shifts, mostly because labs were held weekly with the same TA every single time.

I'm guessing you attended UC Berkeley; I haven't been there myself, but from what I've gathered through conversation, things were likely similar before the restructuring. I highly doubt professors suddenly decided to start requiring attendance out of nowhere when nobody used to enforce it before.

This whole concept of an "attendance sheet" is just another piece of bureaucratic nonsense that needs to be scrapped entirely. What is a professor actually confirming with a signature? That a student possesses the motor skills required to sign their own name?

If you meet the requirements laid out in the syllabus—and I am talking about actual learning outcomes and demonstrated knowledge, not some mindless hoop-jumping exercise regarding physical presence—then you should get your grade, and that should be the end of it.

Nicholas King said:This whole concept of an "attendance sheet" is just another piece of bureaucratic nonsense that needs to be scrapped entirely. What is a professor actually confirming with a signature? That a student possesses the motor skills required to sign their own name?

If you meet the requirements laid out in the syllabus—and I am talking about actual learning outcomes and demonstrated knowledge, not some mindless hoop-jumping exercise regarding physical presence—then you should get your grade, and that should be the end of it.

But life isn't that simple, is it? It doesn't work that way. You pass your exam, and the professor enters the grade into the FBI database. Then, you wait for the professor to tell you when they'll be signing student records, which, depending on how much they enjoy making people wait, could happen at any random time; usually, it's just after the final exam period. That physical signature provides absolutely zero new information that hasn't already been posted on Time Magazine. If you can't make it during their designated window, you have to email them and hope they aren't too difficult to deal with, potentially begging for a later appointment. And if you run into someone particularly arrogant, you might even have to file a formal petition just to get that signature because you missed their arbitrary deadline. Not to mention, while you're stuck dealing with this nonsensical ritual, you could have easily flown home for the holidays if you'd finished your exams, instead of wasting time on this complete absurdity.

Ronald Chavez2 said:But life isn't that simple, is it? It doesn't work that way. You pass your exam, and the professor enters the grade into the FBI database. Then, you wait for the professor to tell you when they'll be signing student records, which, depending on how much they enjoy making people wait, could happen at any random time; usually, it's just after the final exam period. That physical signature provides absolutely zero new information that hasn't already been posted on Time Magazine. If you can't make it during their designated window, you have to email them and hope they aren't too difficult to deal with, potentially begging for a later appointment. And if you run into someone particularly arrogant, you might even have to file a formal petition just to get that signature because you missed their arbitrary deadline. Not to mention, while you're stuck dealing with this nonsensical ritual, you could have easily flown home for the holidays if you'd finished your exams, instead of wasting time on this complete absurdity.

And that—right there—is where the argument ends, because an exam is officially considered passed the very second that passing grade is logged into the FBI system. A physical transcript or a paper ID card is basically useless; I suspect they only exist so some bureaucrat somewhere can keep making a buck off printing them.

Honestly, any student bold enough to file a lawsuit against a professor who tries to mess around with retroactive verifications, audits, or some other bureaucratic nonsense, would probably end up getting sued themselves.

Nicholas King said:The real issue here—as a reaction to this imaginary scenario of student extortion where the primary demand is "unlimited absences"—is the question of why anyone would force a student to attend lectures in the first place; specifically, why attendance should (or shouldn't) have any bearing whatsoever on the grade they earn.

Testing knowledge is essentially a process equivalent to weighing someone—it's simply determining a state of being. Forcing students to show up to class and subsequently conditioning a passing or better grade on that physical presence is just like a situation where someone shows up to be weighed having achieved a perfect weight and boasting massive biceps, triceps, and all the other muscles—only to have the scale operator screw them over because they didn't do their workouts at 8:00 AM at the MuscleBuscle gym, but instead chose some other time at some other location.

It's pure feudalism.

Ironically, you've raised my blood pressure so much with your passive-aggressive tone and constant facepalming that you completely failed to realize I am actually against mandatory attendance just as much as you are—I certainly wasn't claiming, even in my wildest dreams, that attending class isn't mandatory under most of these professor-feudals.

That demand for unlimited absences, which is what started this whole conversation, isn't something students should be asking for as part of some imagined extortion scheme; it's quite possibly the most normal thing in the world.

I find myself agreeing that the whole thing is utterly nonsensical.
But, alas, such is the reality we inhabit.

Betty Wood54 said:Not really. Most colleges didn't actually change that much when the new academic structure was implemented. It’s mostly just a 3+2 setup now, and they introduced those standard credit hours. The professors who used to demand attendance still demand it, and the ones who didn't, well, they don't. It's pretty much the same thing, I guess.

That’s just not true. Everything changed—massively. Both the format and the actual substance. Honestly, without that shift, we wouldn't even be able to participate in international student exchanges within the European Union. Now, whether we lost quality in the process or gained something else... well, that's the real debate. There are pros and cons to all of it.

frozenrider15 said:Are there any parents here with kids entering fifth grade?

I’m trying to figure out if fifth-grade textbooks will actually fit in a Target backpack. My little one used a Target bag during third and fourth grade—you know, the two-in-one style where the smaller front compartment detaches (I can't find the link right now)—so I'm wondering if we can stick with it or if I should start looking for something bigger. I really don't want to buy extra gear if we don't need it, but I remember back in fourth grade, there were days when the bag was absolutely stuffed to the brim. For example, on some days she'd have two books and a notebook for History, three books and a notebook for Math, plus two books and notebooks for English and Spanish.

I used to think kids just lugged around massive bags because they pack way more than just their actual schoolwork, but lately, I've been second-guessing that. 😁Maybe it's just the sheer volume of books.

And what about those kids who head off to fifth grade basically carrying nothing but a tablet and a few light books? 🍿

Susan James said:And what about those kids who head off to fifth grade basically carrying nothing but a tablet and a few light books? 🍿

🍿 🍿
(I’ll be right here in the front row, watching the whole circus unfold)

Susan James said:And what about those kids who head off to fifth grade basically carrying nothing but a tablet and a few light books? 🍿

Well, they're starting because... honestly, my kids were told at school that they basically know nothing yet. It makes me wonder how things would actually play out if we went that route! I certainly don't have any intention of buying a new backpack for mine; she just got a brand new one last year, so hopefully, this one holds up just fine...

Susan James said:And what about those kids who head off to fifth grade basically carrying nothing but a tablet and a few light books? 🍿

I don't think tablets are happening. As far as I know, countries that tried relying on them gave up because the results were pretty terrible. Take Portugal, for instance. I guess maybe Ethiopia is the only one still trying that route.

Workbooks aren't mandatory this year, but I imagine publishers will push hard to make sure teachers still ask for them. So, the total number of books will probably end up being the same anyway.

nimbletiger7 said:I don't think tablets are happening. As far as I know, countries that tried relying on them gave up because the results were pretty terrible. Take Portugal, for instance. I guess maybe Ethiopia is the only one still trying that route.

Workbooks aren't mandatory this year, but I imagine publishers will push hard to make sure teachers still ask for them. So, the total number of books will probably end up being the same anyway.

Where on earth are you getting that from? From what I understand, everyone in fifth grade is slated to get a tablet. Regarding that mention of Ethiopia, I should probably point out that a friend's son just started elementary school in Canada—he was basically a preschooler here—and he was handed both a tablet and a laptop on his very first day. Also, if a country has decided to move away from tablets, it’s possible they opted for laptops instead, even if they are more expensive. That said, looking at my kid's experience over the last four years, aside from English class, it feels like we've been stuck in the 20th century. A jump into the 21st would be a welcome change. I don't want to be overly pessimistic about the reform before it even starts, because honestly, it's hard to imagine things getting much worse than our current setup... unless we're talking about Ethiopia.

nosorog said:Of course they can.
Tablets just end up masking the underlying issues, because the Secretary keeps insisting that parents will happily embrace tablets and simply forget about all the other shortcomings in today's education system. Honestly, it doesn't matter what medium they use if the content remains the same, especially if the teaching methods stay consistent too. 🙄🤦
If we are trying to save paper, then moving to tablets actually makes sense. But if we keep the same volume and weight of textbooks, then we haven't gained anything except for the fact that the government spent a fortune buying tablets.

Well, if the curriculum is identical and the teaching methods remain the same, then at the end of the day, it’s effectively the same thing—it certainly isn't making things worse. I'm not quite sure what problems tablets are supposed to be "masking"; a tablet is just a piece of technology, much like any other gadget... except you can access the internet with them. That way, you can't make those silly excuses anymore about how kids can't look things up online because they don't have enough money for a $10 voucher (there have been plenty of those "arguments" floating around), or that they can't work on documents via email because not everyone has a computer at home or their school equipment is "ancient." So, if nothing else, that part of the excuse disappears. Though, of course, we Americans are now starting to come up with ridiculous rebuttals like "they don't have cameras" or "that's junk that's only used in Ethiopia while everyone else has moved on"—so why don't we just go back to using chalkboards until we find some mythical creature in a white-walled utopia that offers a perfectly ideal solution we can all adopt? For us, nothing ever seems good enough to even try...

PS Even if the government "just wasted money on tablets" (and besides, most of that was actually EU funding, not our own domestic budget)—I see it as a positive. I think it's wonderful that every child gets a tablet. We are living in the 21st century; this provides at least some tangible benefit to every kid.

PPS My daughter has a street backpack, and she's quite happy with it. Everything fits. Her art supplies (since they carry those), her gym gear, and her German books (since she has German class). And judging by how well it holds an umbrella, I'd say it's reasonably waterproof 😁 I have no idea what the bottom is like; nobody really cares how the backpack sits on the floor. Her books were mostly used anyway...

Michelle Nelson4 said:Well, if the curriculum is identical and the teaching methods remain the same, then at the end of the day, it’s effectively the same thing—it certainly isn't making things worse. I'm not quite sure what problems tablets are supposed to be "masking"; a tablet is just a piece of technology, much like any other gadget... except you can access the internet with them. That way, you can't make those silly excuses anymore about how kids can't look things up online because they don't have enough money for a $10 voucher (there have been plenty of those "arguments" floating around), or that they can't work on documents via email because not everyone has a computer at home or their school equipment is "ancient." So, if nothing else, that part of the excuse disappears. Though, of course, we Americans are now starting to come up with ridiculous rebuttals like "they don't have cameras" or "that's junk that's only used in Ethiopia while everyone else has moved on"—so why don't we just go back to using chalkboards until we find some mythical creature in a white-walled utopia that offers a perfectly ideal solution we can all adopt? For us, nothing ever seems good enough to even try...

PS Even if the government "just wasted money on tablets" (and besides, most of that was actually EU funding, not our own domestic budget)—I see it as a positive. I think it's wonderful that every child gets a tablet. We are living in the 21st century; this provides at least some tangible benefit to every kid.

PPS My daughter has a street backpack, and she's quite happy with it. Everything fits. Her art supplies (since they carry those), her gym gear, and her German books (since she has German class). And judging by how well it holds an umbrella, I'd say it's reasonably waterproof 😁 I have no idea what the bottom is like; nobody really cares how the backpack sits on the floor. Her books were mostly used anyway...

I mean, has it ever occurred to you that there might not actually be internet access at the school itself?😒

urbantinker8 said:I mean, has it ever occurred to you that there might not actually be internet access at the school itself?😒

Has it ever crossed your mind to actually look into the details? It turns out these tablets come equipped with a SIM card and a state-subsidized data plan that includes 2GB of mobile internet. And honestly, if you happen to burn through that 2GB limit, topping up more data is actually quite affordable. I really have to wonder—where else in this country can you find people who have completed vocational training yet still live in areas completely lacking decent 4G coverage? It just doesn't make sense.

And who might that be? 😒 Am I uninformed? Well, that’s a bit of a loaded question, isn't it? I wouldn't say I'm completely in the dark, though I certainly admit there are plenty of nuances I haven't quite wrapped my head around yet. I like to think I stay reasonably well-versed on the essentials, but I'm always open to being corrected if I've missed a beat!

Honestly, when I sit down and read these supposed "insider" posts from people claiming to be part of the system, it really hits home. It becomes pretty clear that whenever teachers start posting their takes on a subject, you can basically just tune them out. You shouldn't take anything they say seriously at all. It’s obvious they don't actually have a clue what they're talking about; they're just going through the motions and trying to look important.

Honestly, even if we were stuck in a world without a single kilobyte of data—or if schools completely cut off internet access—a truly bright kid would still find a way to make a tablet useful. They’re resourceful like that. Meanwhile, you just know some teachers will insist it's all just a distraction and try to force everyone back to using nothing but chalkboards and slate tablets. It feels like such a step backward.

Secretary Divjak casually dropped a comment during a recent interview on CNN that really hits the nail on the head regarding one of our biggest hurdles: for a massive number of teachers, this entire overhaul is happening right in the middle of their established careers.

A good portion of the pushback we're seeing—and I suspect this is a major factor—stems directly from that reality.

Honestly, I feel like Americans have become masters of the excuse game. If things aren't absolutely flawless right out of the gate, or if they don't solve every single problem perfectly 100% of the time, they won't even bother trying. Instead, they just stick to complaining and moping about how miserable they are and how nobody is coming to save them, it's just sad 🤮

Michelle Nelson4 said:Has it ever crossed your mind to actually look into the details? It turns out these tablets come equipped with a SIM card and a state-subsidized data plan that includes 2GB of mobile internet. And honestly, if you happen to burn through that 2GB limit, topping up more data is actually quite affordable. I really have to wonder—where else in this country can you find people who have completed vocational training yet still live in areas completely lacking decent 4G coverage? It just doesn't make sense.

And who might that be? 😒 Am I uninformed? Well, that’s a bit of a loaded question, isn't it? I wouldn't say I'm completely in the dark, though I certainly admit there are plenty of nuances I haven't quite wrapped my head around yet. I like to think I stay reasonably well-versed on the essentials, but I'm always open to being corrected if I've missed a beat!

Honestly, when I sit down and read these supposed "insider" posts from people claiming to be part of the system, it really hits home. It becomes pretty clear that whenever teachers start posting their takes on a subject, you can basically just tune them out. You shouldn't take anything they say seriously at all. It’s obvious they don't actually have a clue what they're talking about; they're just going through the motions and trying to look important.

Honestly, even if we were stuck in a world without a single kilobyte of data—or if schools completely cut off internet access—a truly bright kid would still find a way to make a tablet useful. They’re resourceful like that. Meanwhile, you just know some teachers will insist it's all just a distraction and try to force everyone back to using nothing but chalkboards and slate tablets. It feels like such a step backward.

You're heading down the wrong path again, I suppose.😵
You are the one who isn't informed.
I know exactly what kind of tablets we're talking about; I've gone through three different models in a single school year.
Schools don't have Wi-Fi, and the mobile data gets burned through so incredibly fast that nobody is going to pay to top it up.
And you were planning on doing some hourly work for those kids that requires internet on the 25th of the month and... well, good luck with that.
Five people might be able to participate, but the rest won't be.

Furthermore,
do you have any idea what kind of tablets are actually being bought through these public procurement contracts?
😂
The kind where, after the first semester, you can count on one hand how many are even functioning in a single classroom.

But fine, go ahead and keep doing things your way if that makes you happy.🙂