Started by Michelle James13 · · 👁 36 views · 608 replies
…
dustysailor13 said:English, math, Spanish, science, computer lab, social studies, PE, music, art, and religion—and yeah, they all get graded. That’s just how an immersion program works here in the US. As for the curriculum I brought up, I was just responding to the post I quoted; everyone follows a similar setup. Personally, I think the program is solid, but it’s overkill on the textbooks. My kid, like most kids, could actually absorb the material better if they weren't drowning in so many books.
jadegardener21 said:Now, respecting effort is one thing, and on that point, I am perfectly happy to agree with you.
However, insisting that every single child must exert the exact same amount of labor and struggle through every subject—ignoring the fact that some might find certain topics naturally easier or grasp them much faster—is an entirely different matter altogether... This is purely my own subjective take, and please, do not view this as an ad hominem attack, but I can't help but get the impression that you hold a certain grievance against what one might call "gifted children," and thus you want to force them to struggle just as hard as everyone else simply so the system doesn't appear "unfair." (And perhaps I am being far too subjective myself, having once been such a child who absolutely loathed it... I remember feeling like my right to a standard curriculum was under constant assault when I was forced to push against my own will to do things outside those boundaries, tasks that other children weren't even asked to perform. 😛 Even today, I maintain that it is not fair to MANDATE extra work for an advanced student, whereas I firmly believe it is wonderful and necessary to OFFER those extra opportunities.)
If I may drift slightly off-topic for a moment—though if anyone lacks the concentration for such diversions, feel free to skip these next couple of paragraphs—I really must clarify this, otherwise, I shall be biting my tongue from frustration because I haven't been precise enough... one must attempt to distinguish between the concepts of "fair" and "equitable."
Imagine a race where everyone is lined up at the exact same starting line. The race is for a limited cache of treasure—anyone who reaches the finish line gets a portion, but the amounts will vary WILDLY, because those who arrive first will grab as much as they possibly can. What, then, is the role of the official overseeing the race? There are two fundamental stances:
The "fair" stance would be this: the official's job is merely to ensure the runners aren't tripping each other or blocking the path, but essentially, they don't interfere at all. If one runner is an elite athlete and another is somewhat weaker, the official does nothing about it. The official must be FAIR—meaning identical conditions for everyone, and beyond that, it's up to each individual to perform to their own ability (within the permitted rules—that is what the official monitors).
The "equitable" stance would be this: the official's job is to adjust the starting conditions to "level the playing field" for the runners—perhaps letting the slower ones start a bit earlier or moving the finish line closer to them, attempting to erase the disparities caused by genetics or prior training. That is extremely unfair when viewed realistically, yet somehow feels more "equitable" from a human perspective.
(By the way, this little anecdote comes from an American textbook used to explain the difference between a liberal state and a social welfare state 😛 I have no idea who authored it, though I suspect they were paraphrasing one of the liberal philosophers, but it has certainly stuck in my memory.)
Well, it seems to me that we differ on this specific point (of course, this analogy isn't a perfect equivalent to our current discussion, so please don't latch onto it and force me to defend myself by claiming I don't agree with every broader implication presented, let us simply treat it as a rough guide)—I view the school system as a "liberal" framework, whereas you seem to see it as a "socialist" one. My view is that the role of the school is to be fair, providing everyone with the same starting positions and unhindered progress, and after that, it is up to the individual to build upon their own race as best they can. The goal for everyone enrolled in the same group (be it a grade, a course, or whatever you call it) should be identical, because that is how you ensure fairness and comparability—in other words, the final test, the basis upon which results are measured, must be the same for everyone, since they are all in the same class; if someone finds that doesn't suit them, they can move to another class with a different objective, etc. (much like in highly academic schools, where students are clearly in a different type of class with different goals, yet for the race to remain fair, it must still follow a consistent pattern). You believe the role of the school is to intervene in the race, shift the runners around, or set different goals for them, trying to force "equity" through sheer willpower (which I disagree with within the context of the same system or the same classroom—though I certainly agree with the existence of different schools with varying levels of knowledge and objectives, provided that the children in those specific departments are again in a fair race against one another).And that is a perfectly valid stance to take. All I am asking for is that you acknowledge my own position as being just as legitimate, even if we clearly find ourselves on opposite sides of the issue...
My view is that the primary mission of the American school system should be to ensure every single child has the necessary environment to succeed and master the curriculum, providing them with support and offering supplemental instruction—and please, note my choice of the word "offer," because we certainly shouldn't be forcing children into extra work if they have no desire for it; their actual obligation lies strictly within the standard coursework and the prescribed material... whereas attempting to correct flawed genetics or social structures is a far more secondary objective, and one that absolutely cannot be masqueraded as some sort of "educational goal" (a concept which, if we disagree on its priority, essentially amounts to denying the very purpose of schooling itself).In the past, students who fell outside the expected average were often overlooked, but we are seeing a shift today. We see extracurricular enrichment for gifted students and tailored approaches for those who learn at a different pace. There is a palpable trend toward accepting individual differences. I believe that with a bit more willpower and effort, we could achieve results far more significant than what we see currently.
I agree, provided the system remains fair. That is, as long as we recognize that a student's sole obligation is to the mandatory curriculum, not to any elective enrichment programs (much like how a young 😛 wouldn't be forced into mathematics if it wasn't their calling), and as long as those who fail to meet the required minimum standards are allowed to fail without holding back the rest of the class... actually, I suspect a major flaw in the American education system is the lack of an option to fail a specific subject rather than having to repeat the entire grade, which would resolve quite a few headaches...It raises an interesting question: does a child have the right to behave or make choices that ultimately harm them? If they have the right to neglect their potential, do they also have the right to neglect their health or adopt habits that damage them? At the end of the day, it is their life and their body. How far can we push the concept of the right to choose?
While this is a complete departure from our topic, it is a fascinating question to ponder...
I don't personally feel that failing to utilize a mathematical talent "harms" someone—it simply means it doesn't "contribute" to them, and there is a profound difference between those two states... On the other hand, eating three bars of chocolate every day or sleeping only two hours a night would obviously do more than just fail to contribute; it would actively "harm" them. That is how I categorize it...
Regarding whether a child has the right to choose, I suppose you should ask all those unfortunate children across the country whom parents force into piano lessons, ballet classes, or professional sports just because the kid happens to have a natural gift for it. I don't believe that is a sound approach, and I would NEVER go against my own child's wishes in such a matter. As I mentioned before, I believe the duty exists only regarding the core curriculum, not when it comes to elective content or advanced studies...I notice a certain tension here, and a tendency to reduce a theoretical question to a personal level or even resort to ad hominem arguments. Who is to say whether I have children, and does that even matter? I know how things stand in our education system, and I know many people who harbor a certain dissatisfaction with it, which is more or less rationally grounded.
There is no tension; I am actually a very easygoing person, though perhaps I come across as much more "intense" in writing than I truly am in person...
😉 Perhaps my phrasing was a bit clumsy, and if it comes across like I’m coming after you personally, please believe me when I say that isn't my intention... I merely wanted to draw a clear line between how an individual chooses to approach a grade and the fact that the grade itself possesses no inherent value. One's personal methodology doesn't change the fundamental reality that the score, in and of itself, remains entirely devoid of any objective worth...
Whether you have kids of your own or not is really a secondary matter if you actually understand the reality of the situation, but I feel compelled to mention that I personally shed a significant number of my own prejudices once I had a child enrolled in the local school system... prior to that, I thought I "understood" the landscape through observing other people's children, only to discover that I was completely in the dark about many fundamental aspects of how things truly work. Of course, I am not an education professional by trade, so perhaps the perspective differs if you work directly with students every day—you might grasp the nuances of the system even without having a child of your own navigating it... 🙂).No, the reality remains that grades possess an inherent value-based dimension... if they didn't, educators wouldn't bother notifying parents when their child is struggling or failing, nor would they offer praise when a student truly excels. To label a student as "good" carries a profound axiological weight, just as calling them "bad" carries its own heavy, pejorative significance...
Someone’s personal way of looking at things doesn't change the fundamental reality that a grade, in and of itself, lacks any inherent dimension of value...
Even if we were to go so far as to label someone a "bad student," that particular descriptor only really applies to their academic performance within that specific phrase... It’s quite common for teachers to follow up such a remark by pointing out how wonderful the child is as a friend, or how much they are loved by their classmates, or perhaps highlighting some other admirable quality—but, well, the actual schoolwork just isn't clicking. Personally, I am still not entirely convinced that we should be so blunt as to slap the label of "bad student" on a child, especially not right to their face! However, if one is being exceptionally careful and views this "bad" designation strictly through the lens of academic struggle rather than judging the entire child based on a single metric, then I suppose there is a kernel of truth to be found in it...One simply cannot maintain the pretense that everything is perfectly fine when someone directs a comment like, "you are a bad mother," toward you... It is impossible to argue that such an accusation is merely a neutral observation, perhaps implying that one is occasionally, I don't know, a bit high-strung, or indifferent, or anything of the sort... Such things are far from neutral...
That is an incredibly potent accusation, one that some might even go so far as to call outright offensive... And if we are going to sit here and argue that labeling someone a "bad mother" is a stinging insult, then I simply cannot fathom why we don't apply that same level of scrutiny when we tell someone they are a "poor student"... It seems there is a strange, inconsistent double standard at play in our social judgments, isn't there...
If I happen to feel a bit on edge or perhaps somewhat indifferent from time to time... well, that single observation is fundamentally flawed because it commits the logical fallacy of taking a mere fragment of my temperament and trying to pass it off as the whole truth... If someone were to assume... It just keeps happening... over and over again, without fail... A bad student... I am not talking about those kids who just happen to have a rough week or fall into a temporary slump, no... I am referring to that singular, unwavering constant throughout their entire academic career, that persistent state of being... Spot on. The statement implies that we will remain vigilant for such an extensive period that we eventually find ourselves forced to "limit" our caution—which is really just a polite way of saying we’ve become a bad student of our own history... Considering the circumstances... The metrics regarding how effectively students are actually mastering the prescribed academic curriculum... When one takes everything into account and weighs it against... "...other kids the same age, blah blah blah." Honestly, you’re free to take offense if someone directs that at you, but let's be real—it's an accurate observation, regardless of how much it stings... I would certainly never utter such a thing directly to a child, given my respect for child psychology, but I can maintain enough emotional distance to recognize that certain circumstances exist where that statement is objectively true... just as there are bad mothers, or reckless drivers on the interstate, or poorly manufactured cars... We simply have to be careful to distinguish our "basis" for judgment, whether it's poor... Compared to what, exactly...? i But really, I have to wonder... what exactly are the criteria being used here? It feels like we’re just throwing darts in the dark without any real framework or established standards to lean on... and frankly, it's a bit exhausting to even contemplate the lack of consistency... Let us be clear about this. Every single one of these educators operates from some sort of foundational platform, some established base of knowledge or authority upon which they build their arguments... The issue only truly arises when YOU—and I am not being aggressive here, mind you, I am simply making an emphatic point that is entirely impersonal—when YOU decide to... 😉So, you’re telling me that you don't actually agree with the database they're using to back up that particular statement... which is honestly quite a bold stance to take given how much people tend to cling to whatever data is thrown their way, but I suppose if one is going to be pedantic about the facts, one might as well go all the way...
If you truly believe that "bad students" simply don't exist... if you’re actually suggesting that we can't compare children's results because every single child is an absolute individual moving at their own unique pace, and therefore nothing is comparable at all, which means objective grading scales shouldn't even exist... then I have to wonder where exactly we are heading with this logic... Alright, that is certainly your perspective, though I find myself standing on the entirely opposite side of the fence... perhaps we should just agree to disagree and leave it at that. 🙂I would argue that many educators employ a specific type of rhetoric that essentially ties a child's intrinsic worth directly to their academic performance.
This is a profound issue, and honestly, it isn't even confined to the American school system.
In general, attempting to view an individual solely through the lens of one single characteristic is a complete fool's errand, and frankly, it is quite tragic that human nature is wired this way... There will always be people who attempt to measure a person's entire value based on their net worth, their Ivy League degrees, their physical attractiveness, their influential social circles, or any other isolated quality you can think of. Some of these individuals happen to work with children, and one could easily expect them to bleed that exact same flawed mindset into their profession. What can you do, I suppose, it's just how humans are built... I am not suggesting it is right, per se, but I do understand the psychological mechanism driving it. 🤷
(Though, if we were to strip away all the nuances, it might end up being the case that in principle we actually agree on most things... 😛 My point is specifically about this current system, without denying the possibility of something better or acknowledging that, ideally, things ought to be vastly different.)
If I try to steer back toward the original topic, personally, I don't see a massive issue with grading elementary students; "psychologically" speaking, perhaps it feels a bit awkward—much like any form of evaluation—since it is inherently imprecise and acts more as a "placement on a scale" rather than assessing someone within their own unique parameters, which is what the protagonist advocates for (but within the system, I truly believe there is no other way for it to function).
I mean, do people insist there are no winners when kids play any game, even a harmless one, just because they don't want the losing team to feel bad? Are we really trying to scrub that "competitive" edge out of every single aspect of life just to shield children from reality? Grades, ultimately, are the same thing; from my own experience and that of my children, I don't see any more drama surrounding grades than there is around anything else kids obsess over... the only difference is that a larger number of adults will take them seriously and, unfortunately, judge a child through that narrow lens, which again, has nothing to do with the child themselves. I don't believe their existence is "destructive" to a child's psyche, even in the lower grades (though life could certainly be more comfortable without grades there), provided that the adults around them remain sane and don't hyperventilate over them. In my view, the real problem lies in the hysteria of the adults, much more so than in the existence of grades or the comparison of children's achievements.
placidorca16 said:In regular American public schools, a second language is usually an elective—starting anywhere from 1st grade to 4th. Computer science is also an elective, typically popping up in 3rd or 4th grade, but rarely in 1st. Religion classes are electives starting in 1st grade too. It feels weird that at this specific academy, computer science is mandatory right from 1st grade if we're supposedly following the same national curriculum. Some public schools that offer electives starting in 1st grade end up having the exact same number of subjects as this academy.
Some elementary schools also follow what you'd call a "classical curriculum"—Latin starting in 5th grade, Greek in 7th. That’s still part of the standard US system, just for certain schools.
Anyway, regarding the mountain of books, workbooks, and whatnot—most schools have supplies for every subject (plus music and art), and most subjects come with multiple books (workbooks, problem sets, textbooks, etc.) starting from 1st grade. My son, for instance, has four books for English in 3rd grade (two textbooks and two workbooks) plus required reading. For math, he has three (textbook, workbook, and a problem set). Science and English each have two books plus three CDs for English. So, most subjects involve a ton of books—which are supposed to be helpful teaching aids, not obstacles. Another thing is that these things are heavy to lug around every day; honestly, it works best in those schools where kids bring their bags on Monday and take them home on Friday. Of course, that’s not an option everywhere.
Sarah James4 said:It surprises me that computer science isn't mandatory... my daughter goes to a British international school here in the States, and computer science is required. It's alongside math, history, geography, English, science, art, PE, swimming, creative writing, calligraphy, Spanish, French, and Arabic.
I won't even comment on religious studies in schools.🙄
Nor will I comment on hauling heavy backpacks. Nothing has really changed. Thirty years ago, they promised us lockers and told us we'd finish homework at school.😁😂🤣
The school practices selective streaming and I'm happy with it.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streaming_(education)
just like hauling around backpacks full of books. It seems absolutely nothing has changed—thirty years ago, they promised us we'd finally get lockers and actually do our homework at school.😁😂🤣
schools practice selective streaming and I'm all for it.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streaming_(education)
placidorca16 said:As far as I'm concerned, religious studies doesn't belong in the curriculum either, but that's beside the point. Regarding computer science, it's usually an elective—like religious studies—starting around 3rd or 4th grade in most American elementary schools, though plenty of kids skip it because they already know more than what's being taught, making it pretty boring. Whether it should be mandatory from 1st grade or just starting in 3rd is definitely up for debate.
I’m curious—are history and geography mandatory from 1st grade at that international school (which I assume is here in the States)?just like hauling around backpacks full of books. It seems absolutely nothing has changed—thirty years ago, they promised us we'd finally get lockers and actually do our homework at school.😁😂🤣
In my kid's school, they bring their books on Monday and take them home on Friday. Most homework is done during school hours anyway. If someone doesn't want to lug a backpack home, they don't have to. We choose to bring it home—we want to stay in the loop with their progress and work.schools practice selective streaming and I'm all for it.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streaming_(education)
To pull that off, schools would need way more funding than they currently get in America—and honestly, that method doesn't guarantee any better results than other teaching styles.
placidorca16 said:As far as I'm concerned, religious studies doesn't belong in the curriculum either, but that's beside the point. Regarding computer science, it's usually an elective—like religious studies—starting around 3rd or 4th grade in most American elementary schools, though plenty of kids skip it because they already know more than what's being taught, making it pretty boring. Whether it should be mandatory from 1st grade or just starting in 3rd is definitely up for debate.
I’m curious—are history and geography mandatory from 1st grade at that international school (which I assume is here in the States)?just like hauling around backpacks full of books. It seems absolutely nothing has changed—thirty years ago, they promised us we'd finally get lockers and actually do our homework at school.😁😂🤣
In my kid's school, they bring their books on Monday and take them home on Friday. Most homework is done during school hours anyway. If someone doesn't want to lug a backpack home, they don't have to. We choose to bring it home—we want to stay in the loop with their progress and work.schools practice selective streaming and I'm all for it.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streaming_(education)
To pull that off, schools would need way more funding than they currently get in America—and honestly, that method doesn't guarantee any better results than other teaching styles.
well—another day, another attempt at being productive. turns out, I’m mostly just good at staring blankly at my monitor. placidorca16 says:
In our school, they start teaching history and geography from first grade—yeah, right from the jump.
I haven't seen any actual books around the house—just a stack of those damn workbooks.The Bond book—just my luck. It’s just her and the English and Mother Tongue worksheets. She’s supposed to tackle them solo within a 25-minute window—though the teacher suggested we time her and let that stretch if she really needs it. We just have to jot down the timing and any specific hurdles on a piece of paper—to leave in the folder for the teacher to check when they're grading everything.
They carry around these little handheld organizers—basically just a folder stuffed with whatever project, worksheet, or daily log they need for the day. Back in my day, we did "mental math" where you were expected to solve everything in your head without touching a pencil or a scrap of paper. Reading was its own thing, too. Spelling. I think you might have hit "send" a little too early there—unless this was some kind of avant-garde minimalist statement, which, honestly, I probably wouldn't even get. The Bond book—just a little something to pass the time. English homework took an hour and a half—all at once. In the upper grades, they’re planning to have kids finish their assignments at school since after-school programs will be running until 5:00 PM—though classes currently wrap up around 2:30 PM.
The schedule is airtight—exactly when, how much, and why everything gets done, read, studied, or tested. No awkward surprises here. It’s all about hitting those milestones and actually building some decent work habits. We even use a daily planner where the kids log their assignments—so they know exactly what's due, no "I forgot" excuses allowed. At this point, if something doesn't get finished, it's either pure laziness, a total lack of time, or something completely out of left field.
Streaming is just one way to do things—kind of like how averaging is just one way to calculate data... I don't see why that would require more money.
Neither approach is perfect... but I personally prefer the first one much more.🙂 I always know exactly how my kid is doing—where they’re crushing it and where they actually need to put in some work.
The school uses mobile streaming, which basically means if a student makes strides in math, they move up to the next group, and so on. They aren't stuck in one place; the child sees their own progress firsthand and realizes the effort paid off. There's plenty of positive reinforcement in the school setting.🙂
James Perez54 said:Why not?
The bare minimum I expect from my kid's teacher is basic literacy.
Nobody is claiming teachers need to master the postulates of nuclear physics.
For instance, "our" teacher can barely handle basic grammar—her notes in my child's notebook prove it. When I tried to point it out to her, she took it personally and got all offended...😲
And when I suggested that we, as parents, should bring up the issue of educator literacy at the PTA meetings—or even at the school board level—given how much everyone obsesses over the "literacy" of the students😉 (barring the occasional exception), I'm pretty sure I ended up on her permanent blacklist...😉
placidorca16 said:well—another day, another attempt at being productive. turns out, I’m mostly just good at staring blankly at my monitor. placidorca16 says:
In our school, they start teaching history and geography from first grade—yeah, right from the jump.
It’s a stretch trying to compare curriculum standards like this on a random forum. But from what I gather—and I'm no expert—British schools aren't actually all that much better than American ones on average.I haven't seen any actual books around the house—just a stack of those damn workbooks.The Bond book—just my luck. It’s just her and the English and Mother Tongue worksheets. She’s supposed to tackle them solo within a 25-minute window—though the teacher suggested we time her and let that stretch if she really needs it. We just have to jot down the timing and any specific hurdles on a piece of paper—to leave in the folder for the teacher to check when they're grading everything.
They carry around these little handheld organizers—basically just a folder stuffed with whatever project, worksheet, or daily log they need for the day. Back in my day, we did "mental math" where you were expected to solve everything in your head without touching a pencil or a scrap of paper. Reading was its own thing, too. Spelling. I think you might have hit "send" a little too early there—unless this was some kind of avant-garde minimalist statement, which, honestly, I probably wouldn't even get. The Bond book—just a little something to pass the time. English homework took an hour and a half—all at once. In the upper grades, they’re planning to have kids finish their assignments at school since after-school programs will be running until 5:00 PM—though classes currently wrap up around 2:30 PM.
Look, that’s just how things work over there—everyone has their own way of doing things, even parents. It’s a little different here, but that doesn’t mean it isn't high quality. Honestly, as a parent, I’d actually like to see the books and notebooks once in a while—just to know what's going on.
In our district, only the little kids—up through 4th grade—get that after-school program until about 5:00 PM, where they actually get their homework done and play a bit. Once they hit the upper grades, it’s basically nonexistent because the schools aren't set up for it. We usually kick things off with classes at 8:00 AM, though I'm guessing you guys tend to start around 9:00?The schedule is airtight—exactly when, how much, and why everything gets done, read, studied, or tested. No awkward surprises here. It’s all about hitting those milestones and actually building some decent work habits. We even use a daily planner where the kids log their assignments—so they know exactly what's due, no "I forgot" excuses allowed. At this point, if something doesn't get finished, it's either pure laziness, a total lack of time, or something completely out of left field.
It’s pretty much the same here—at least according to CNN. Keeping a daily log isn't mandatory, though some teachers have kids doing it as early as second grade. Forgetting homework isn't really tolerated either; most kids actually know exactly what they're supposed to be working on.Streaming is just one way to do things—kind of like how averaging is just one way to calculate data... I don't see why that would require more money.
What "averaging out" are you actually talking about? If you’re grouping our curriculum in with the standard public school baseline, you’re dead wrong. There is plenty of room here for gifted kids to thrive—but the PTA bears just as much responsibility for that as anyone else. You’re underestimating a system you clearly don't understand, yet somehow expect us to bow down and praise your opinion.👎Neither approach is perfect... but I personally prefer the first one much more.🙂 I always know exactly how my kid is doing—where they’re crushing it and where they actually need to put in some work.
Those of us keeping a close eye on our kids' progress in the American school system know this all too well. We don't necessarily need "streaming" methods to figure that out—not that I have anything against them personally.The school uses mobile streaming, which basically means if a student makes strides in math, they move up to the next group, and so on. They aren't stuck in one place; the child sees their own progress firsthand and realizes the effort paid off. There's plenty of positive reinforcement in the school setting.🙂
I'm not knocking it—it's just worth noting there are other ways to get the same results. Positive motivation doesn't require switching groups every time a grade improves. The method you mentioned leans heavily into individual competition, but that shouldn't be the only goal of education. Kids also need to learn how to collaborate and value group progress—especially given today's job market, where being a lone wolf isn't enough. You see this tension between the American model (heavy on the individual) and the Japanese model (focused on the collective), though both have their pros and cons. Nowadays, the Scandinavian and Finnish models are often cited as the gold standards, even if they differ slightly from one another.
The biting chill of a north wind... it just settles deep into your bones, doesn't it? There is something about that relentless, freezing gust sweeping down from the northern reaches of the country that makes one feel quite small and rather ill-prepared, regardless of how many layers of wool one might attempt to pile on... It carries a certain sharpness, a sense of inevitability, much like the sudden shift in temperament one experiences when the seasons turn without warning. One moment you are enjoying the mildness of an afternoon, and the next, you are bracing against a draft that seems determined to penetrate even the thickest insulation of a suburban home... It is quite unsettling, really. jadegardener21 says:
🙄 If this is how they’re teaching the concepts of the "liberal" and "social" welfare state in American schools, then I suppose it’s hardly any surprise that your average citizen is left wandering around in total ignorance... they probably know enough about the dollar bill and the Stars and Stripes to get by, but beyond that, there seems to be nothing but a reflexive urge to spit on anything that dares to look even slightly different from the standard US system... it’s all just a blur of superficial patriotism and a complete lack of actual understanding...😁 This is nothing more than a prime example of how certain sociological phenomena are being stripped of their complexity and reduced to mere caricatures, all in the pursuit of that typical, superficial American style...👎 I truly appreciate being enlightened by such an educational demonstration... ☕
The American educational system is frankly a disaster, far from where it ought to be if we actually cared about excellence... It’s a mess, really, and quite frankly, it leaves a lot to be desired when you look at how things are handled elsewhere. If one were to look toward the most advanced models currently in existence—the kind of systems that actually prioritize true learning—one would have to look toward Finland and those other Scandinavian nations... which makes you wonder why we can't seem to grasp the concept.
jadegardener21 said:The biting chill of a north wind... it just settles deep into your bones, doesn't it? There is something about that relentless, freezing gust sweeping down from the northern reaches of the country that makes one feel quite small and rather ill-prepared, regardless of how many layers of wool one might attempt to pile on... It carries a certain sharpness, a sense of inevitability, much like the sudden shift in temperament one experiences when the seasons turn without warning. One moment you are enjoying the mildness of an afternoon, and the next, you are bracing against a draft that seems determined to penetrate even the thickest insulation of a suburban home... It is quite unsettling, really. jadegardener21 says:
🙄 If this is how they’re teaching the concepts of the "liberal" and "social" welfare state in American schools, then I suppose it’s hardly any surprise that your average citizen is left wandering around in total ignorance... they probably know enough about the dollar bill and the Stars and Stripes to get by, but beyond that, there seems to be nothing but a reflexive urge to spit on anything that dares to look even slightly different from the standard US system... it’s all just a blur of superficial patriotism and a complete lack of actual understanding...😁 This is nothing more than a prime example of how certain sociological phenomena are being stripped of their complexity and reduced to mere caricatures, all in the pursuit of that typical, superficial American style...👎 I truly appreciate being enlightened by such an educational demonstration... ☕
The American educational system is frankly a disaster, far from where it ought to be if we actually cared about excellence... It’s a mess, really, and quite frankly, it leaves a lot to be desired when you look at how things are handled elsewhere. If one were to look toward the most advanced models currently in existence—the kind of systems that actually prioritize true learning—one would have to look toward Finland and those other Scandinavian nations... which makes you wonder why we can't seem to grasp the concept.
Of course, your typical middle schooler—using a textbook designed for, say, an eighth grader, which is supposedly a crowning achievement of the American educational system—is somehow capable of distinguishing between the concepts of a social state and a liberal state at a highly sophisticated level... they can place both models within their proper historical context, and it goes without saying that they were required to read the foundational texts from the leading proponents of both ideologies... ☕
Let’s not kid ourselves here, especially when we are discussing an educational system where philosophy and politics are squeezed into a single school year, and frankly, based on the textbooks I once swapped out for someone else's lecture notes just to gauge the supposed "breadth" and "depth" of the material... well, it's a joke. American children are likely even more clueless than the students this curriculum was actually designed for...
The American school system operates on a completely different wavelength than what I experienced back home, and honestly, it’s a double-edged sword with its own unique set of headaches and perks. Since I’ve actually sat through classes in both countries, I feel uniquely qualified to weigh in—and before anyone tries to dismiss my take as just some baseless rant fueled by Hollywood stereotypes, let me be perfectly clear... I know what I'm talking about. When you look at the reality of an average American high school versus an average school in the States... Not really... It’s all the same, really... whether you’re looking at a standard high school or one of those specialized preparatory academies, they don't actually weigh your GPA by default when applying to university, which feels like a bit of a missed opportunity if you ask me... and honestly, once you peel back the prestige, there isn't much of a tangible difference in terms of the actual intellectual depth or the breadth of knowledge they provide to students... it's just more of the same...
Regarding the whole business of private schooling here in the States... well, that’s really an entirely different conversation altogether, and frankly, it makes much more sense within the context of America than it ever would have in some other place... ☕ Let’s just say that within this particular sector, children have the potential to achieve something truly, truly massive... we're talking about reaching heights that are practically unimaginable within the standard American system, whether you're looking at the public sector or private corporations alike...
It is fundamentally dishonest to take the absolute best examples from one system and hold them up against the mediocre or even the worst elements of another... You likely have no idea just how much variety exists within the American school system, much like how our own domestic landscape isn't some monolith, ranging from elite private academies to those truly subpar vocational schools that struggle to find their footing... Neither the American educational scene nor our local environment is a single, uniform entity; it is incredibly diverse and fragmented... To base an entire opinion regarding a whole SYSTEM on nothing more than a handful of individual anecdotes or a few lackluster, average institutions is, quite frankly, logically unsound...
I simply "adore" it when people decide to get all high and mighty about how Americans supposedly don't understand geography... honestly, just tell me, if you were to stop a random group of pedestrians on a street corner here in the States, how many of them could actually pinpoint exactly where North Carolina, Panama, or say, Yemen, sits on a world map? I’d bet my life savings you wouldn't find many who could do it accurately... and it's the exact same thing when we start getting into the weeds regarding a serious grasp of liberalism, or frankly, any other subject of substance for that matter...
I have no idea what the Scandinavian school system actually looks like in practice, but if we’re going to sit around here and debate this, I would very much like for us to establish some clear-cut criteria... specifically, what exactly are we measuring against, and by what metrics are we even judging success? Because if you are honestly suggesting that PISA tests serve as a serious benchmark—something capable of truly and "representatively" capturing the actual knowledge possessed by children in various nations—then I simply cannot follow your logic... why on earth would anyone believe that? To me, these PISA rankings feel exactly like those dubious university rankings that measure professors based on citation counts or some other arbitrary metric that might not even be tangentially related to the actual quality of education being provided... 🤷
(My apologies, truly... I realize I’ve been veering quite heavily into off-topic territory here...)
northerncobra27 said:I feel like if I keep this up, everyone is going to start thinking I’m just trying to be provocative by questioning everything,😁 but honestly, what can I do when my mind just wanders into these things? I genuinely wonder—what kind of percentage of kids actually end up enrolling in those elite prep schools?
It occurs to me, as I sit here contemplating the sheer weight of modern discourse, that there is a certain... shall we say, intellectual bankruptcy currently infecting our public squares, much like a slow-acting toxin in the water supply of a small Midwestern town... and one cannot help but wonder if we have entirely lost the ability to engage in true dialectic. It brings to mind the old philosophical debates, those rigorous exercises of logic that once defined the educated mind, yet today we seem content to merely shout slogans into the digital void, hoping for some semblance of validation from strangers who possess the attention span of a goldfish... it is truly exhausting to witness such a decline in civil reasoning, where nuance goes to die under the heavy boot of partisan fervor... and frankly, it leaves one feeling quite adrift in a sea of superficiality. kaže:
You seem to hold the conviction that the liberal model is a sound approach, yet I find myself detecting a multitude of inherent flaws within its structure... Furthermore, you appear to believe that it would be perfectly acceptable to simply transplant such a framework directly into our educational system, which is a notion I find quite troubling...
Perhaps we ought to finally come to terms with the inherent biological and social disparities that exist within our society... and truly allow the next generation to accept them for what they are, rather than fighting an uphill battle against reality itself...
But honestly, let’s just call a spade a spade for once... We need to be blunt about what we're actually dealing with here. Let's be perfectly clear that this institution is fundamentally elitist, and frankly, it functions as a racist establishment that judges its students based on nothing more than their supposed genetic pedigree...
But when you really sit back and consider that parents are essentially the primary architects of a child's entire moral compass and value system from day one, one has to wonder... is that so-called "independent" decision truly independent at all?...
Yes, that’s precisely the point. But I shall reiterate my position: younger children could quite easily be spared some of the more unsightly and cutthroat aspects of competition, especially since they are bound to encounter the full weight of it later in life anyway...
Noah Diaz29 said:Look, Ariana Grande—did you not learn anything from our "special" thread? Apparently, you still haven't grasped the fundamental truth: teachers are always right, and you’re the only actual problem here.😂And you know perfectly well—better than anyone—that you can’t talk about them like that.
