School Reform: Thoughts?

Personally, I’ve always been a fan of the German education system. It feels way more effective than what we have here in the States. Like Susan Nguyen54 mentioned, everything is lumped together in one big group here, whereas over there, they start tracking students as early as fifth grade. I'm not entirely sure on all the details, but I think it's also possible to switch tracks—like, if you're crushing it in a vocational program, you can move up to a prep school track, and if your grades slip, you move back down. I actually love that approach. It pushes kids to work hard from a young age and teaches them that they have to earn their place. It shows them that they actually have choices in life... which isn't really how our elementary schools operate. Plus, kids who might not be academic superstars in primary school can find their niche through those specialized programs. It helps them find success on their own terms and build some actual confidence. Maybe that boost in self-esteem is exactly what eventually drives them to aim higher and try for the more advanced tracks later on.

Susan James said:Well, I'm definitely the expert here!
The more time I spend working with kids who are starting to act out or getting into real trouble, the more convinced I become that the school system itself is largely to blame. We’ve essentially pushed them into this corner. By placing such an overwhelming emphasis on traditional academic success, we end up driving kids right out of the classroom and onto the streets. It takes a massive toll on their self-esteem; when they feel like they can't meet the standards of a "good student," they figure the only way to find any sense of achievement is to lean into being a "troublemaker" instead.

Before the self-proclaimed experts on this forum start lecturing everyone about "family values," I just want to say that I truly believe the family is the foundation. Most of a child's core behavior starts at home. However, they also pick up a whole different set of behaviors at school—and then an entirely separate set while they're busy trying to find any excuse to skip class!
It’s no wonder some kids feel the need to skip school. For them, it doesn't feel like a place meant for learning or discovery at all. Instead, it feels like an environment where they constantly fall short—a place where their unique talents, interests, and skills just aren't valued. It can be incredibly draining when you're constantly being pressured to meet expectations that don't align with who you actually are or what you're capable of doing.

I honestly think the biggest misconception held by our parents—and even our grandparents—was the idea that sending kids to college was the only way to escape the grind. Their whole logic was basically, "Work hard in school and get a degree so you don't have to struggle like we did." They were so focused on making sure we wouldn't end up stuck in manual labor or working the fields just to get by, thinking a nice white-collar office job was the ultimate ticket to a smooth life.

To be honest, not every kid grows up wanting to sit behind a desk all day, and frankly, there just aren't enough of those office roles out there to go around anyway.
With unemployment rates climbing and so many people finding out that a college degree doesn't guarantee much these days, I completely get why kids aren't as obsessed with higher education anymore. You don't even really have to spell it out for them—they see it for themselves. They look around and see parents who went through the whole grind at places like UC Berkeley, only to end up unemployed or stuck in jobs that don't pay nearly what they were promised. It’s hard to value the hustle when you see that reality playing out right in front of you.

The most heartwarming thing I've noticed lately is that there are actually kids out there who genuinely get excited about different types of jobs while they play. It’s such a sweet thing to see.
Just look at these little ones in preschool—well, except for the kids who were handed a tablet by their grandparents!
People are curious about all sorts of things—how to start a garden from scratch, what it’s really like to work as a contractor, an electrician, or a carpenter. They want to know the ins and outs of being a tailor, a chef, a firefighter, or even a hairstylist. It's funny, I was just chatting with a neighbor about how much everyone seems to be looking for hands-on careers lately!
Kids are naturally such curious little explorers, aren't they? They’re constantly observing everything happening around them, trying to make sense of the world. I've always felt that the best way for them to process all that information is through play—it's how they actually get to test out those observations and experience things firsthand.
So, we send them off to school, but what do they actually spend most of their time doing there?
They just sit there, quiet and obedient, doing exactly what they’re told. It feels like all they do is study—and most of the time, it’s just pure rote memorization. I remember being back in high school, and it felt like we were constantly being told to "get a move on" or "keep your seat warm." There was always that pressure to stay focused and push harder, almost like if you weren't constantly grinding, you were falling behind.
I honestly don't see anything wrong with assigning homework. It’s about giving kids access to different types of information and teaching them how to actually hunt for answers on their own—as long as we aren't doing it at the expense of their actual interests. The problem is that we often fail to find that balance. I can't tell you how many times I've heard parents say things like, "You can't go play soccer until your math worksheet is done," or "You can't help Dad fix the car until you finish your reading assignment." I've even heard, "You can't help Grandpa in the garage because you haven't finished that geography project," or "No gardening with Grandma this weekend because you have tests all week." The mindset is always "school comes first, period." Teachers often back this up, too. But here's the thing I've noticed: when we constantly tell a child they can only enjoy life once their schoolwork is finished, it often backfires. In my experience, instead of motivating them, it just leads to a standoff where the kid ends up doing neither—they don't go play, and they don't finish the homework either.
By the time a kid hits eighth grade, they often lose interest in learning practical trades or hands-on skills, yet they aren't exactly hitting the books or excelling in school either. It’s that tricky middle ground where they seem to drift away from everything at once.
To be clear, I’m not talking about people losing focus because they’re glued to their computers or hanging out with the wrong crowd on the street. This is about something much deeper. It's about how families, relatives, neighbors, and even kids are genuinely showing interest in pursuing specific, high-level career paths. We're seeing real ambition and meaningful connections to important professions within the community.

Not everyone is going to be into poetry, geography, or obsessing over what happened 20 or 200 years ago...
Just like I had zero interest in technical drawing back in the day, my buddy sitting next to me in class couldn't care less about literature.
I’d spend my time reading books and knocking out our required reading assignments (for both of us), while he’d help me fill out my workbooks.
In the end, we both walked away with straight A's in both subjects.
But what did we actually learn from all that?
I learned how to cut corners and navigate around the system—though, to be fair, I actually enjoyed the reading part.
Honestly, we were pretty lucky to have each other. We could swap favors, and by helping each other out, we were actually practicing things we were genuinely interested in.
Nowadays, if a kid struggles with a subject, parents usually just step in, hire a tutor, or pay someone to write their book reports for them.
I really don't like that.
It still feels like we're just encouraging kids to cheat and find loopholes.

I often see school reports stating that a child lacks "study habits" (usually alongside a long list of behavioral issues).
And it's true—they haven't developed the habit of memorizing facts, coming home to finish homework, reading assigned books, or doing any extra reading.
Among these kids, you'll find some who are totally lost in front of a computer or TV, or just wandering the streets. But you'll also find kids who love tearing computers apart and putting them back together, or who are obsessed with car mechanics. (I can talk your ear off about mechanics, but those kids usually have a mentor—someone they shadow at a local garage, for instance).

Sure, you could argue that kids get to choose a vocational path around age 14 or 15.
They do.
And quite often, they make that choice.
They can be really successful during their apprenticeships, yet they still choose not to go to college (which makes me wonder: do we really need as many professors and academic subjects in vocational high schools as we currently do?)
But then there are the ones who fall in with the wrong crowd before they hit 15. They lose interest in everything, never develop any work ethic—not for school, and not for a trade—and they end up cycling through various institutions that constantly tell them how much of a failure they are.

That's why I think we shouldn't wait until they're 15 to start guiding them; we should start much earlier.
Or, at the very least, we should scale back the hours spent on history, geography, literature, and biology. (I remember most of that was just review for us in high school, so it seems logical that the heavy lifting should happen during the later years).
As for physics, chemistry, and technical subjects... those should be strictly hands-on workshops in middle school.
(Maybe with a little bit of theory thrown in, but definitely different from how things are handled today).

I'm sorry, but I don't see the logic in what you just wrote.
Quality education actually does the exact opposite: it keeps kids off the streets by giving them real options and the chance to actually build a future for themselves.

So, the issue in America isn't that we value education too much; it's quite the contrary—we tend to undervalue it and downplay its importance.
And one thing I can't wrap my head around is the idea that learning isn't just "rote memorization."

Susan James said:True, but when you look at those high graduation rates in places like Canada, the UK, or Scandinavia, you have to account for the huge influx of bright immigrants moving there from all over the world.😍

As for how high schoolers behave... hmm. Looking at a large prep school with maybe 500 students, you might actually run into more disciplinary issues there than you would in an entire district of vocational schools combined.🤣

That's a fair point, but it actually reinforces my argument: in certain countries, knowledge and education are truly valued, regardless of whether people were born there or moved in.
If experts were actually appreciated here, they wouldn't be leaving. It’s pretty obvious they go wherever they are treated with more respect.

Susan James said:True, but when you look at those high graduation rates in places like Canada, the UK, or Scandinavia, you have to account for the huge influx of bright immigrants moving there from all over the world.😍

As for how high schoolers behave... hmm. Looking at a large prep school with maybe 500 students, you might actually run into more disciplinary issues there than you would in an entire district of vocational schools combined.🤣

David Palmer5 said:It’s an undeniable fact that you see way more behavioral issues in students at elite prep schools than you do in kids attending local vocational high schools.🙄

In reality, our culture doesn't actually emphasize the true value of education. And let's be clear: real learning isn't just about memorizing facts for a test.

If you look at countries with the highest percentages of highly educated citizens—like Finland, Norway, the US, Japan, South Korea, Canada, or the UK—I think that speaks volumes on its own.

I was being ironic
😁here
regarding your point about how overemphasizing the importance of education basically pushes kids out of the school system and right onto the streets.

David Palmer5 said:I'm sorry, but I don't see the logic in what you just wrote.
Quality education actually does the exact opposite: it keeps kids off the streets by giving them real options and the chance to actually build a future for themselves.

So, the issue in America isn't that we value education too much; it's quite the contrary—we tend to undervalue it and downplay its importance.
And one thing I can't wrap my head around is the idea that learning isn't just "rote memorization."

That's a fair point, but it actually reinforces my argument: in certain countries, knowledge and education are truly valued, regardless of whether people were born there or moved in.
If experts were actually appreciated here, they wouldn't be leaving. It’s pretty obvious they go wherever they are treated with more respect.

Education is being overemphasized only in terms of paperwork. Everyone is obsessed with which degree you hold rather than what you actually know. In that sense, you could argue that true education is being insulted.

silentraven6 said:Look, I don't think you've quite grasped what I'm getting at...

Maybe they won't remember every tiny detail, but they will realize that the world has a structure that can be deduced—that specific logic inherent to every field of study. It's the process that matters, not just the raw content. That's the part so many people are missing today.

I brought up expertise because so many people fail to see that not every topic is for everyone, yet they still try to jump in blindly. Without understanding the foundations of the system, and without even having the intention to learn how it works from the inside to offer meaningful suggestions for improvement, they just end up peddling these fairy-tale ideas instead.

It’s not like a kid is studying some hyper-exact science. I mean, people should be able to chime in if they’ve actually lived through the same school system as students themselves.

Honestly, the moment a bunch of unqualified people start meddling in the exact same system you're talking about, it just means the system itself is what failed in the first place.

In our current situation, though, I doubt anyone actually gives a damn.

Susan James said:Well, I'm definitely the expert here!
The more time I spend working with kids who are starting to act out or getting into real trouble, the more convinced I become that the school system itself is largely to blame. We’ve essentially pushed them into this corner. By placing such an overwhelming emphasis on traditional academic success, we end up driving kids right out of the classroom and onto the streets. It takes a massive toll on their self-esteem; when they feel like they can't meet the standards of a "good student," they figure the only way to find any sense of achievement is to lean into being a "troublemaker" instead.

Before the self-proclaimed experts on this forum start lecturing everyone about "family values," I just want to say that I truly believe the family is the foundation. Most of a child's core behavior starts at home. However, they also pick up a whole different set of behaviors at school—and then an entirely separate set while they're busy trying to find any excuse to skip class!
It’s no wonder some kids feel the need to skip school. For them, it doesn't feel like a place meant for learning or discovery at all. Instead, it feels like an environment where they constantly fall short—a place where their unique talents, interests, and skills just aren't valued. It can be incredibly draining when you're constantly being pressured to meet expectations that don't align with who you actually are or what you're capable of doing.

I honestly think the biggest misconception held by our parents—and even our grandparents—was the idea that sending kids to college was the only way to escape the grind. Their whole logic was basically, "Work hard in school and get a degree so you don't have to struggle like we did." They were so focused on making sure we wouldn't end up stuck in manual labor or working the fields just to get by, thinking a nice white-collar office job was the ultimate ticket to a smooth life.

To be honest, not every kid grows up wanting to sit behind a desk all day, and frankly, there just aren't enough of those office roles out there to go around anyway.
With unemployment rates climbing and so many people finding out that a college degree doesn't guarantee much these days, I completely get why kids aren't as obsessed with higher education anymore. You don't even really have to spell it out for them—they see it for themselves. They look around and see parents who went through the whole grind at places like UC Berkeley, only to end up unemployed or stuck in jobs that don't pay nearly what they were promised. It’s hard to value the hustle when you see that reality playing out right in front of you.

The most heartwarming thing I've noticed lately is that there are actually kids out there who genuinely get excited about different types of jobs while they play. It’s such a sweet thing to see.
Just look at these little ones in preschool—well, except for the kids who were handed a tablet by their grandparents!
People are curious about all sorts of things—how to start a garden from scratch, what it’s really like to work as a contractor, an electrician, or a carpenter. They want to know the ins and outs of being a tailor, a chef, a firefighter, or even a hairstylist. It's funny, I was just chatting with a neighbor about how much everyone seems to be looking for hands-on careers lately!
Kids are naturally such curious little explorers, aren't they? They’re constantly observing everything happening around them, trying to make sense of the world. I've always felt that the best way for them to process all that information is through play—it's how they actually get to test out those observations and experience things firsthand.
So, we send them off to school, but what do they actually spend most of their time doing there?
They just sit there, quiet and obedient, doing exactly what they’re told. It feels like all they do is study—and most of the time, it’s just pure rote memorization. I remember being back in high school, and it felt like we were constantly being told to "get a move on" or "keep your seat warm." There was always that pressure to stay focused and push harder, almost like if you weren't constantly grinding, you were falling behind.
I honestly don't see anything wrong with assigning homework. It’s about giving kids access to different types of information and teaching them how to actually hunt for answers on their own—as long as we aren't doing it at the expense of their actual interests. The problem is that we often fail to find that balance. I can't tell you how many times I've heard parents say things like, "You can't go play soccer until your math worksheet is done," or "You can't help Dad fix the car until you finish your reading assignment." I've even heard, "You can't help Grandpa in the garage because you haven't finished that geography project," or "No gardening with Grandma this weekend because you have tests all week." The mindset is always "school comes first, period." Teachers often back this up, too. But here's the thing I've noticed: when we constantly tell a child they can only enjoy life once their schoolwork is finished, it often backfires. In my experience, instead of motivating them, it just leads to a standoff where the kid ends up doing neither—they don't go play, and they don't finish the homework either.
By the time a kid hits eighth grade, they often lose interest in learning practical trades or hands-on skills, yet they aren't exactly hitting the books or excelling in school either. It’s that tricky middle ground where they seem to drift away from everything at once.
To be clear, I’m not talking about people losing focus because they’re glued to their computers or hanging out with the wrong crowd on the street. This is about something much deeper. It's about how families, relatives, neighbors, and even kids are genuinely showing interest in pursuing specific, high-level career paths. We're seeing real ambition and meaningful connections to important professions within the community.

Not everyone is going to be into poetry, geography, or obsessing over what happened 20 or 200 years ago...
Just like I had zero interest in technical drawing back in the day, my buddy sitting next to me in class couldn't care less about literature.
I’d spend my time reading books and knocking out our required reading assignments (for both of us), while he’d help me fill out my workbooks.
In the end, we both walked away with straight A's in both subjects.
But what did we actually learn from all that?
I learned how to cut corners and navigate around the system—though, to be fair, I actually enjoyed the reading part.
Honestly, we were pretty lucky to have each other. We could swap favors, and by helping each other out, we were actually practicing things we were genuinely interested in.
Nowadays, if a kid struggles with a subject, parents usually just step in, hire a tutor, or pay someone to write their book reports for them.
I really don't like that.
It still feels like we're just encouraging kids to cheat and find loopholes.

I often see school reports stating that a child lacks "study habits" (usually alongside a long list of behavioral issues).
And it's true—they haven't developed the habit of memorizing facts, coming home to finish homework, reading assigned books, or doing any extra reading.
Among these kids, you'll find some who are totally lost in front of a computer or TV, or just wandering the streets. But you'll also find kids who love tearing computers apart and putting them back together, or who are obsessed with car mechanics. (I can talk your ear off about mechanics, but those kids usually have a mentor—someone they shadow at a local garage, for instance).

Sure, you could argue that kids get to choose a vocational path around age 14 or 15.
They do.
And quite often, they make that choice.
They can be really successful during their apprenticeships, yet they still choose not to go to college (which makes me wonder: do we really need as many professors and academic subjects in vocational high schools as we currently do?)
But then there are the ones who fall in with the wrong crowd before they hit 15. They lose interest in everything, never develop any work ethic—not for school, and not for a trade—and they end up cycling through various institutions that constantly tell them how much of a failure they are.

That's why I think we shouldn't wait until they're 15 to start guiding them; we should start much earlier.
Or, at the very least, we should scale back the hours spent on history, geography, literature, and biology. (I remember most of that was just review for us in high school, so it seems logical that the heavy lifting should happen during the later years).
As for physics, chemistry, and technical subjects... those should be strictly hands-on workshops in middle school.
(Maybe with a little bit of theory thrown in, but definitely different from how things are handled today).

It's not just a "us" thing, either... even in Germany, they pour millions into trying to make trades and manual labor look useful and prestigious.

The bigger issue here is that the peak achievement for most parents was threatening, "either you study or you'll be digging ditches," without ever actually sitting down to help the kid learn... because at the end of the day, they either don't know the material anymore or, even if they do, they're too exhausted to care and just expect the teacher to handle everything.

I frequently get reports from the school saying my kid lacks work ethic (alongside a whole list of other behavioral issues).
And yeah, the kid doesn't have the habit of rote memorization. They don't have the habit of coming home and doing homework, reading assigned books, or doing extra reading.
Meanwhile, among these kids, you've got some who are just lost in front of a computer or a TV or wandering the streets, but you also find kids who love tearing computers apart or getting really into car mechanics (I could sell them anything if I showed a bit of mechanical knowledge, but those kids usually have someone they follow, like a relative they watch working away in a garage)....

I mean, you can't really expect them to develop any work ethic when there's zero motivation to begin with...

http://www.nytimes.com/news/education/agreement-reached-on-curriculum-standards/99460/

http://www.latimes.com/news/california/how-schools-are-handling-core-subjects/12

Talk about motivation... you show a kid how to actually do their homework... If they don't nail it in class, they have to finish it at home... or they're stuck staying late at school the next day until that same assignment is done right.

so I think we shouldn't wait until they're 15 to start career guidance, we should start way earlier.
and/or maybe just cut down the hours spent on history, geography, literature, and biology (honestly, I remember most of us just rehashed the same stuff through high school, so it feels logical that most of that stuff isn't truly learned until you hit a prep school or college).
but physics, chemistry, technical stuff... that needs to be strictly hands-on in middle school.
(mixed in with some theoretical guidelines, but definitely different from what we have now)

Geography is pretty light anyway... it would be better if they could just integrate it into other subjects.

Kids aren't interested in books that much, they aren't going to sit there reading them, they'll just cheat whenever they get the chance, and they won't ever pick up a reading habit...

Literature could just be its own thing. Ruining a kid's life just because they didn't read a specific book for English class is kind of tacky (regardless of how rare it is for a kid to actually know the material perfectly without having read the assigned book).

And those same subjects—those required readings—are being used all wrong. I think there's plenty of room to find actual motivation there too.

A good example of connecting subjects would be making them read someone like Ernest Hemingway for a book report before you even touch World War II in history class.
Why that writer, specifically?

Because books are like movies... forcing a kid to read a boring book is like forcing a kid to watch a boring movie... Honestly, it's hard enough to get an adult to sit through a bad movie, so how are you supposed to force a kid to read a dull book? Even with a decent movie, it's tough if you're just not in the mood for that genre at the moment.

The goal should be to pick genres and themes that kids actually care about and find fascinating... that way they actually build a reading habit... and Hemingway is a solid example. At the same time, kids would actually feel motivated to study history later on. Because it's not the same thing to just read about thousands of people fighting versus actually feeling the weight of it through a story.

As for the rest, I'm not sure what the best move would be.

analogseal18 said:If you simply park a child in front of a television, they might passively absorb a handful of phrases or recognize a few sounds, but let us be clear: that is nowhere near actual proficiency. If one wishes to truly master a language, it requires a systematic approach. One cannot rely on osmosis alone, especially when compared to the rigorous "use of English" standards required by international certification exams used globally.

I find myself in agreement with rhino. Every child possesses unique strengths, and we ought to emphasize those specific areas, particularly if the child shows little interest in a broad, generalized curriculum.

In fact, I was visiting a friend just yesterday, and she was quite distraught because her nephew—who was merely an average student—decided to enroll in a three-year vocational program. It isn't that he lacks passion for the trade itself; rather, he simply has no stomach for traditional academics. He isn't unintelligent, nor is he a troublemaker or lazy; he actually commits to three hours of grueling physical training every single day. He has simply grown weary of the standard curriculum offered by most schools.
For these types of children, who are fundamentally average, we should provide a spectrum of content where they can actually find their footing—perhaps a cluster of related trades taught over four years so they can refine their choice later. In our current system, it feels as though you are forced to be either a genius or a complete fool just to get by.😢

Sure... but I was talking about motivation and passive learning.

I've seen a whole generation of average kids where their grade in a foreign language depended entirely on whether they had German Pokemon cards at home... or if they listened to foreign music or whatever...

And I'm mostly talking about middle schoolers here..

Jonathan Ortiz2 said:It’s not like a kid is studying some hyper-exact science. I mean, people should be able to chime in if they’ve actually lived through the same school system as students themselves.

Honestly, the moment a bunch of unqualified people start meddling in the exact same system you're talking about, it just means the system itself is what failed in the first place.

In our current situation, though, I doubt anyone actually gives a damn.

It's not just a "us" thing, either... even in Germany, they pour millions into trying to make trades and manual labor look useful and prestigious.

The bigger issue here is that the peak achievement for most parents was threatening, "either you study or you'll be digging ditches," without ever actually sitting down to help the kid learn... because at the end of the day, they either don't know the material anymore or, even if they do, they're too exhausted to care and just expect the teacher to handle everything.

I frequently get reports from the school saying my kid lacks work ethic (alongside a whole list of other behavioral issues).
And yeah, the kid doesn't have the habit of rote memorization. They don't have the habit of coming home and doing homework, reading assigned books, or doing extra reading.
Meanwhile, among these kids, you've got some who are just lost in front of a computer or a TV or wandering the streets, but you also find kids who love tearing computers apart or getting really into car mechanics (I could sell them anything if I showed a bit of mechanical knowledge, but those kids usually have someone they follow, like a relative they watch working away in a garage)....

I mean, you can't really expect them to develop any work ethic when there's zero motivation to begin with...

http://www.nytimes.com/news/education/agreement-reached-on-curriculum-standards/99460/

http://www.latimes.com/news/california/how-schools-are-handling-core-subjects/12

Talk about motivation... you show a kid how to actually do their homework... If they don't nail it in class, they have to finish it at home... or they're stuck staying late at school the next day until that same assignment is done right.

so I think we shouldn't wait until they're 15 to start career guidance, we should start way earlier.
and/or maybe just cut down the hours spent on history, geography, literature, and biology (honestly, I remember most of us just rehashed the same stuff through high school, so it feels logical that most of that stuff isn't truly learned until you hit a prep school or college).
but physics, chemistry, technical stuff... that needs to be strictly hands-on in middle school.
(mixed in with some theoretical guidelines, but definitely different from what we have now)

Geography is pretty light anyway... it would be better if they could just integrate it into other subjects.

Kids aren't interested in books that much, they aren't going to sit there reading them, they'll just cheat whenever they get the chance, and they won't ever pick up a reading habit...

Literature could just be its own thing. Ruining a kid's life just because they didn't read a specific book for English class is kind of tacky (regardless of how rare it is for a kid to actually know the material perfectly without having read the assigned book).

And those same subjects—those required readings—are being used all wrong. I think there's plenty of room to find actual motivation there too.

A good example of connecting subjects would be making them read someone like Ernest Hemingway for a book report before you even touch World War II in history class.
Why that writer, specifically?

Because books are like movies... forcing a kid to read a boring book is like forcing a kid to watch a boring movie... Honestly, it's hard enough to get an adult to sit through a bad movie, so how are you supposed to force a kid to read a dull book? Even with a decent movie, it's tough if you're just not in the mood for that genre at the moment.

The goal should be to pick genres and themes that kids actually care about and find fascinating... that way they actually build a reading habit... and Hemingway is a solid example. At the same time, kids would actually feel motivated to study history later on. Because it's not the same thing to just read about thousands of people fighting versus actually feeling the weight of it through a story.

As for the rest, I'm not sure what the best move would be.

Sure... but I was talking about motivation and passive learning.

I've seen a whole generation of average kids where their grade in a foreign language depended entirely on whether they had German Pokemon cards at home... or if they listened to foreign music or whatever...

And I'm mostly talking about middle schoolers here..

Oh sure, teachers know everything. They’re the geniuses and gods, while students and parents are just mere mortals who have to sit there and listen, because clearly, the American education system is flawless.

Jonathan Ortiz2 said:It’s not like a kid is studying some hyper-exact science. I mean, people should be able to chime in if they’ve actually lived through the same school system as students themselves.

Honestly, the moment a bunch of unqualified people start meddling in the exact same system you're talking about, it just means the system itself is what failed in the first place.

In our current situation, though, I doubt anyone actually gives a damn.

It's not just a "us" thing, either... even in Germany, they pour millions into trying to make trades and manual labor look useful and prestigious.

The bigger issue here is that the peak achievement for most parents was threatening, "either you study or you'll be digging ditches," without ever actually sitting down to help the kid learn... because at the end of the day, they either don't know the material anymore or, even if they do, they're too exhausted to care and just expect the teacher to handle everything.

I frequently get reports from the school saying my kid lacks work ethic (alongside a whole list of other behavioral issues).
And yeah, the kid doesn't have the habit of rote memorization. They don't have the habit of coming home and doing homework, reading assigned books, or doing extra reading.
Meanwhile, among these kids, you've got some who are just lost in front of a computer or a TV or wandering the streets, but you also find kids who love tearing computers apart or getting really into car mechanics (I could sell them anything if I showed a bit of mechanical knowledge, but those kids usually have someone they follow, like a relative they watch working away in a garage)....

I mean, you can't really expect them to develop any work ethic when there's zero motivation to begin with...

http://www.nytimes.com/news/education/agreement-reached-on-curriculum-standards/99460/

http://www.latimes.com/news/california/how-schools-are-handling-core-subjects/12

Talk about motivation... you show a kid how to actually do their homework... If they don't nail it in class, they have to finish it at home... or they're stuck staying late at school the next day until that same assignment is done right.

so I think we shouldn't wait until they're 15 to start career guidance, we should start way earlier.
and/or maybe just cut down the hours spent on history, geography, literature, and biology (honestly, I remember most of us just rehashed the same stuff through high school, so it feels logical that most of that stuff isn't truly learned until you hit a prep school or college).
but physics, chemistry, technical stuff... that needs to be strictly hands-on in middle school.
(mixed in with some theoretical guidelines, but definitely different from what we have now)

Geography is pretty light anyway... it would be better if they could just integrate it into other subjects.

Kids aren't interested in books that much, they aren't going to sit there reading them, they'll just cheat whenever they get the chance, and they won't ever pick up a reading habit...

Literature could just be its own thing. Ruining a kid's life just because they didn't read a specific book for English class is kind of tacky (regardless of how rare it is for a kid to actually know the material perfectly without having read the assigned book).

And those same subjects—those required readings—are being used all wrong. I think there's plenty of room to find actual motivation there too.

A good example of connecting subjects would be making them read someone like Ernest Hemingway for a book report before you even touch World War II in history class.
Why that writer, specifically?

Because books are like movies... forcing a kid to read a boring book is like forcing a kid to watch a boring movie... Honestly, it's hard enough to get an adult to sit through a bad movie, so how are you supposed to force a kid to read a dull book? Even with a decent movie, it's tough if you're just not in the mood for that genre at the moment.

The goal should be to pick genres and themes that kids actually care about and find fascinating... that way they actually build a reading habit... and Hemingway is a solid example. At the same time, kids would actually feel motivated to study history later on. Because it's not the same thing to just read about thousands of people fighting versus actually feeling the weight of it through a story.

As for the rest, I'm not sure what the best move would be.

Sure... but I was talking about motivation and passive learning.

I've seen a whole generation of average kids where their grade in a foreign language depended entirely on whether they had German Pokemon cards at home... or if they listened to foreign music or whatever...

And I'm mostly talking about middle schoolers here..

How the hell are kids supposed to spend 5-7 hours at school every single day if parents are also expected to tutor them or pay for private tutors?
When I was in school, the main line from teachers was "you aren't doing enough work," and at parent-teacher conferences, it was always "you need to do more with your children." When I asked a similar question during my time, the teacher didn't even have an answer (not counting the fact that the communication wasn't phrased that way).

Jonathan Ortiz2 said:It’s not like a kid is studying some hyper-exact science. I mean, people should be able to chime in if they’ve actually lived through the same school system as students themselves.

Honestly, the moment a bunch of unqualified people start meddling in the exact same system you're talking about, it just means the system itself is what failed in the first place.

In our current situation, though, I doubt anyone actually gives a damn.

It's not just a "us" thing, either... even in Germany, they pour millions into trying to make trades and manual labor look useful and prestigious.

The bigger issue here is that the peak achievement for most parents was threatening, "either you study or you'll be digging ditches," without ever actually sitting down to help the kid learn... because at the end of the day, they either don't know the material anymore or, even if they do, they're too exhausted to care and just expect the teacher to handle everything.

I frequently get reports from the school saying my kid lacks work ethic (alongside a whole list of other behavioral issues).
And yeah, the kid doesn't have the habit of rote memorization. They don't have the habit of coming home and doing homework, reading assigned books, or doing extra reading.
Meanwhile, among these kids, you've got some who are just lost in front of a computer or a TV or wandering the streets, but you also find kids who love tearing computers apart or getting really into car mechanics (I could sell them anything if I showed a bit of mechanical knowledge, but those kids usually have someone they follow, like a relative they watch working away in a garage)....

I mean, you can't really expect them to develop any work ethic when there's zero motivation to begin with...

http://www.nytimes.com/news/education/agreement-reached-on-curriculum-standards/99460/

http://www.latimes.com/news/california/how-schools-are-handling-core-subjects/12

Talk about motivation... you show a kid how to actually do their homework... If they don't nail it in class, they have to finish it at home... or they're stuck staying late at school the next day until that same assignment is done right.

so I think we shouldn't wait until they're 15 to start career guidance, we should start way earlier.
and/or maybe just cut down the hours spent on history, geography, literature, and biology (honestly, I remember most of us just rehashed the same stuff through high school, so it feels logical that most of that stuff isn't truly learned until you hit a prep school or college).
but physics, chemistry, technical stuff... that needs to be strictly hands-on in middle school.
(mixed in with some theoretical guidelines, but definitely different from what we have now)

Geography is pretty light anyway... it would be better if they could just integrate it into other subjects.

Kids aren't interested in books that much, they aren't going to sit there reading them, they'll just cheat whenever they get the chance, and they won't ever pick up a reading habit...

Literature could just be its own thing. Ruining a kid's life just because they didn't read a specific book for English class is kind of tacky (regardless of how rare it is for a kid to actually know the material perfectly without having read the assigned book).

And those same subjects—those required readings—are being used all wrong. I think there's plenty of room to find actual motivation there too.

A good example of connecting subjects would be making them read someone like Ernest Hemingway for a book report before you even touch World War II in history class.
Why that writer, specifically?

Because books are like movies... forcing a kid to read a boring book is like forcing a kid to watch a boring movie... Honestly, it's hard enough to get an adult to sit through a bad movie, so how are you supposed to force a kid to read a dull book? Even with a decent movie, it's tough if you're just not in the mood for that genre at the moment.

The goal should be to pick genres and themes that kids actually care about and find fascinating... that way they actually build a reading habit... and Hemingway is a solid example. At the same time, kids would actually feel motivated to study history later on. Because it's not the same thing to just read about thousands of people fighting versus actually feeling the weight of it through a story.

As for the rest, I'm not sure what the best move would be.

Sure... but I was talking about motivation and passive learning.

I've seen a whole generation of average kids where their grade in a foreign language depended entirely on whether they had German Pokemon cards at home... or if they listened to foreign music or whatever...

And I'm mostly talking about middle schoolers here..

A few months back, I read an article where several experts argued that we need to lighten the curriculum and the workload so everyone gets a fair shot, especially since estimates suggest parents are picking up about 40% of the schoolwork for their kids.

]

I still find myself advocating for the separation of students based on their German proficiency levels. It’s becoming painfully obvious in fifth grade just how much those who struggled during elementary school are falling behind. Honestly, it’s only going to get more difficult and tedious for them as they progress, yet we're stuck maintaining this mediocre standard of instruction that essentially serves no one. 🙂

I’m not necessarily against tracking if it’s handled with precision and done the right way.

I disagree with the idea of sorting kids based on arbitrary age brackets—like saying all 5th graders go to prep school, while 4th graders head to vocational or trade schools.

It might make sense to group students by aptitude. If someone excels at math and physics, they belong in an advanced STEM track. If they lean toward social sciences, they should focus on things like English, history, or geography. In the end, you'll have the students who don't quite fit a specific mold; they'll spend middle school covering the basics of everything, then likely move into trade programs in high school. That isn't inherently a bad thing.

nimblelynx7 said:I’m not necessarily against tracking if it’s handled with precision and done the right way.

I disagree with the idea of sorting kids based on arbitrary age brackets—like saying all 5th graders go to prep school, while 4th graders head to vocational or trade schools.

It might make sense to group students by aptitude. If someone excels at math and physics, they belong in an advanced STEM track. If they lean toward social sciences, they should focus on things like English, history, or geography. In the end, you'll have the students who don't quite fit a specific mold; they'll spend middle school covering the basics of everything, then likely move into trade programs in high school. That isn't inherently a bad thing.

On one hand, this feels like déjà vu; it reminds me of the policies proposed by Šuvar.

On the other hand, very few parents are willing to confront the actual abilities—or lack thereof—of their own children, nor are they accepting of such an educational system.

People just settle for a broken education system like this. They accept whatever garbage they're handed because they don't have an alternative—they don't even know there's a better way. Instead, they just try to make the best of a bad situation.

As for parents accepting their own failures, or worse, their kid's incompetence? Of course nobody wants to hear that truth.

I didn't go through school during the Šuvar era (if I was even around back then), so I can't tell you if this feels like déjà vu or not.

As long as computer science remains just an elective, there isn’t much point in even having this discussion. They should be prioritizing history and geography over tech. Back in 2014... they even scheduled it during the afternoon shift at the largest high school in the city, which basically screwed over the 25% of students who rely on public transit, not to mention another 25% who couldn't show up because they had music lessons or other commitments... I think I've made my point sufficiently...

Well, that would require actual effort from the Department of Education, or maybe even the state agency, but nobody there is ever going to lift a finger to make a change like that.

Then you have my fifth grader; on Monday, he walks in and realizes he has... wait for it... eight!!! classes scheduled back-to-back... Who on earth approves a schedule like that...

Angela Wright4 said:As long as computer science remains just an elective, there isn’t much point in even having this discussion. They should be prioritizing history and geography over tech. Back in 2014... they even scheduled it during the afternoon shift at the largest high school in the city, which basically screwed over the 25% of students who rely on public transit, not to mention another 25% who couldn't show up because they had music lessons or other commitments... I think I've made my point sufficiently...

Well, that would require actual effort from the Department of Education, or maybe even the state agency, but nobody there is ever going to lift a finger to make a change like that.

Then you have my fifth grader; on Monday, he walks in and realizes he has... wait for it... eight!!! classes scheduled back-to-back... Who on earth approves a schedule like that...

There are plenty of things here that could be fixed; the only question is whether we possess the leadership capable of executing them.

I was infuriated today by information my daughter, a sixth grader, brought home from school. Apparently, the music teacher stated that students without a synthesizer will receive a failing grade in music class. My daughter also attends a local music academy, and in my view, this requirement is nothing more than a corruption of her existing skills, especially since she can play everything they teach on her own guitar.

So, what is the recourse? Do we submit to this "requirement," or go to the school hoping someone will address these delusions and unnecessary complications?

Angela Wright4 said:As long as computer science remains just an elective, there isn’t much point in even having this discussion. They should be prioritizing history and geography over tech. Back in 2014... they even scheduled it during the afternoon shift at the largest high school in the city, which basically screwed over the 25% of students who rely on public transit, not to mention another 25% who couldn't show up because they had music lessons or other commitments... I think I've made my point sufficiently...

Well, that would require actual effort from the Department of Education, or maybe even the state agency, but nobody there is ever going to lift a finger to make a change like that.

Then you have my fifth grader; on Monday, he walks in and realizes he has... wait for it... eight!!! classes scheduled back-to-back... Who on earth approves a schedule like that...

We all seem to be hitting that number eight lately... Eight classes on a Monday, eight pounds of heavy textbooks in the backpack... It would be a blessing if they didn't also assign eight tests a week. But they can certainly squeeze in four. And it seems some teachers take full advantage of that, quite a few times throughout the school year...
It isn't even a matter of negligence. Yesterday, the homeroom teacher told us there wouldn't be any breaks until Christmas break. Fine. Then I get home, pull up the district's academic calendar, and—oops—it shows a scheduled break around October 10th. So, who exactly is out of the loop here? Is it the homeroom teacher, the IT coordinator, the counselor??? Or maybe the Principal who doesn't bother checking the school website??? Some people actually care about this, and they could really benefit from accurate information...

How can we even talk about educational reform when they can't manage to provide basic, accurate information through their own systems? If they can't handle that, how could they ever successfully implement real changes...

Raymond Wright4 said:There are plenty of things here that could be fixed; the only question is whether we possess the leadership capable of executing them.

I was infuriated today by information my daughter, a sixth grader, brought home from school. Apparently, the music teacher stated that students without a synthesizer will receive a failing grade in music class. My daughter also attends a local music academy, and in my view, this requirement is nothing more than a corruption of her existing skills, especially since she can play everything they teach on her own guitar.

So, what is the recourse? Do we submit to this "requirement," or go to the school hoping someone will address these delusions and unnecessary complications?

It is entirely possible that garant is misinterpreting the situation. There is always the chance she actually wants a synth and is merely trying to engineer a way to get one. 😉 Besides, trained musicians generally hold those things in lower regard than a cheap plastic recorder.

This is actually the first time I’ve heard of them playing instruments in the sixth grade (mine is in sixth as well). Some middle schools start teaching the recorder in fifth grade, and students can often choose to play the melodica instead. Unfortunately, our local district falls into that category where they don't bother with actual playing at all.

analogseal18 said:It is entirely possible that garant is misinterpreting the situation. There is always the chance she actually wants a synth and is merely trying to engineer a way to get one. 😉 Besides, trained musicians generally hold those things in lower regard than a cheap plastic recorder.

This is actually the first time I’ve heard of them playing instruments in the sixth grade (mine is in sixth as well). Some middle schools start teaching the recorder in fifth grade, and students can often choose to play the melodica instead. Unfortunately, our local district falls into that category where they don't bother with actual playing at all.

That is possible. Since Parent-Teacher conferences are in two days, I will verify this personally.

She already owns a recorder (a wooden one, at that), so there is no way she will be getting a synthesizer under any pretext. If the school or the teacher actually demands such an instrument, they will certainly hear from me.

The little brat was actually trying to flirt with me. 🙂

She told me today that she can play both the guitar and the melodica.

Children will be children, I suppose, though one often wonders if they aren't simply mirroring the chaos we've allowed to fester around them.🙂

I actually dig how they set up free English tutoring over in Mexico.
http://www.juznevesti.com/Drushtvo/B...leskog.sr.html

urbanorca8 said:I actually dig how they set up free English tutoring over in Mexico.
http://www.juznevesti.com/Drushtvo/B...leskog.sr.html

It really is commendable. We see similar initiatives here in the States every now and then, though within our actual school system, there is a permanent fixture for learning support known as remedial classes. The thing about these sessions is that attendance is entirely voluntary; no one can force a student to show up if they have no interest in being there. Consequently, most students don't bother showing up unless an exam is looming on the horizon. It really falls on the parents to push their children, to sit them down and negotiate a commitment to attend regularly if they are struggling with a particular subject. In my experience, the kids who typically show up for extra help are those who were out sick when a specific unit was covered. Those who truly need the help because they simply cannot grasp the material—despite having been present for the regular lessons—are the ones you rarely see. Then, of course, there are the cases where a child refuses to follow along in class, won't touch their homework, and won't study, yet they expect me to just pour everything into their heads during remedial sessions as if it were effortless.
I’m dealing with a situation this year with a seventh-grade group where five students failed their exams. Even though I'm not officially assigned to lead the remedial sessions for seventh graders—my extra hours are dedicated to fifth graders and specialized instruction for the seventh grade—I offered to meet with them once they had at least mastered the basics. I told them to reach out once they understood things like subjects, attributes, and adverbial modifiers, because I can't teach those concepts *for* them if they refuse to listen or participate; I can only clarify what they find confusing once they've put in the work. So far, only one student has taken me up on the offer, and after working together for two hours, he managed to pull a solid B.

Then you have the children whose parents have been paying for expensive private language academies for years, only for the kid to come home with a dismal D or a C in foreign language class. Some of those parents are understandably bitter, wondering how such a massive investment yielded such poor results. The answer is simple: a private academy offers no guarantees if the child has no desire to learn and instead just sits there idling through the hours. There is no mechanism to ensure progress if the will isn't there. That reality applies to every classroom, whether public or private.
At the end of the day, there has to be some semblance of willpower.

^

It honestly breaks my heart to hear about kids failing middle school—you know, the ones getting straight Cs or worse because they just won't study. But let's be real: it’s usually kids from less educated families who are stuck—they aren't to blame when their parents can't help them navigate the coursework. The high achievers are almost always the ones with a parent or an older sibling at home who can actually walk them through a chemistry problem or hand down a reading list from years ago—which I think is great, though it definitely leaves some kids out in the cold without that support system.