Archonsod said:
I would love to see anybody actually come up with a argument to refute this point.
TRY!
I am part of the 99%
- Thread starter Schmon
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
I would love to see anybody actually come up with a argument to refute this point.
TRY!
Dodes
Count
discipline? It's not the school's job, or at least shouldn't be, to discipline a child how to learndel_diablo said:
it's a problem that plagues all throughout the ages and is usually due to parenting, the education system can't be successful if the parents have not instilled virtue into the student
there, I tried
And you failed. Next?
Dodes
Count
More so this point, which it's validity I agree with, makes it an arguement against focusing on kids who don't score high and such (as the current education policy of the US does, the "no child left behind") and for focusing on kids who already do well and focus funding on making them better so they score higher and contribute more (I will call the program "**** the child left behind, we have to move forward")
and now we're fully into debating the education system
and now we're fully into debating the education system
Dodes
Count
I don't know how they do it in Finland, but don't they have the best schools in the world or something? Or most proficiency? Could you briefly explain what they do?
But the method I advocated was the system that the Japanese do, and their statistics are high up in education (as well as suicide though but is that directly connected?)
But the method I advocated was the system that the Japanese do, and their statistics are high up in education (as well as suicide though but is that directly connected?)
Yes. Because having taxpayers pay our school meals make our school the best in the world.
We don't have private schools like other countries. I can't speak for the Finnish schools as I'm in a Swedish-speaking one and we have the worst teachers ever due to lack of teachers willing to work in that language. Teachers need higher education (which isn't worth **** because of the corrupt system) to be teachers which also contributes to the lack of teachers. Means only legit pedophiles get to work with children. I'd wager a good third of my teachers have somehow touched their students in inappropriate ways or ****ed them mentally.
I don't really think we have that good schools, but compared to Sweden and the third world I suppose they manage.
Also, my view is a bit biased, but you get my point.
We don't have private schools like other countries. I can't speak for the Finnish schools as I'm in a Swedish-speaking one and we have the worst teachers ever due to lack of teachers willing to work in that language. Teachers need higher education (which isn't worth **** because of the corrupt system) to be teachers which also contributes to the lack of teachers. Means only legit pedophiles get to work with children. I'd wager a good third of my teachers have somehow touched their students in inappropriate ways or ****ed them mentally.
I don't really think we have that good schools, but compared to Sweden and the third world I suppose they manage.
Also, my view is a bit biased, but you get my point.
We don't even have science as a separate subject. Reading comprehension is all we do during "native language" lessons (and some small bits of grammar). There was an explanation in a newspaper not too long ago about the good math results which were compared to the Italian results.
The conclusion was that the finnish school system kind of cheats as we basically train for these tests by using old Pisa tests and so we get all the information needed a couple days before the actual test.
It's not as much about real knowledge as it is about the hunger for prestige. It's like studying for a test. There's people who study 6 hours a day and get full points in the test and then they forget everything. And then there's people who don't study almost at all and maybe miss one or two points.
I'd say the person who only studies a bit has more basic knowledge.
The conclusion was that the finnish school system kind of cheats as we basically train for these tests by using old Pisa tests and so we get all the information needed a couple days before the actual test.
It's not as much about real knowledge as it is about the hunger for prestige. It's like studying for a test. There's people who study 6 hours a day and get full points in the test and then they forget everything. And then there's people who don't study almost at all and maybe miss one or two points.
I'd say the person who only studies a bit has more basic knowledge.
Stechschritt
Veteran
Dodes said:
Finns have their own way of discipline.
- Dad look! I scored a B today!
- ?!
- Papa?
- Nyt tulee kirvestä, perkele!
DISCLAIMER:
I've never been to Finland and this is based solely on preconceptions
Mage246
Translation, for those who aren't from the Moon and either can't or won't visit Youtube?
Starforge said:
Maybe their financial or work circumstances changed after they'd already had kids. That happens, especially nowadays. On the abortion point, it's possible that poor people like having kids, and might even think they deserve them just as much as better-off people do. There could even be a biological imperative that drives all mammals towards sexual reproduction. I think the evidence points to that.
Starforge said:
I agree education should be a huge priority - I even agree that not enough parents take an active role in it or treat it seriously - but food always comes first. If you lack food (and there are still people who do) neither cool clothes or calculus will help you.
Starforge said:
That's good, and good on you for making something of yourself. My parents were the same, though working class - well, to be honest they weren't so bothered about grades, but they wanted me to do well. I think most parents want the best for their kids, but low expectations don't come from nowhere. A lot of people just don't see much point in trying, especially academically, having seen no evidence in their own lives that it gets anybody further forward ('cos it usually doesn't). I agree that is a problem.
Archonsod said:
But that would mean David Cameron's Free Schools policy is doomed to failure... I'm sure the Scientologists will at least make a decent go of it.
Our schools have been ****ed since Labour decided semi-privatisation was the way to go. Because paying a school dependent on pass grades while letting the schools buy their own exams is guaranteed to result in a top class system. Rather than a giant race to the bottom once everyone figures out you get ****loads more money handing out A's like candy than you do actually testing.
Or as my teacher friend calls it, they ditched education in favour of a state childcare service.
Or as my teacher friend calls it, they ditched education in favour of a state childcare service.
Archonsod said:
I would love to see anybody actually come up with a argument to refute this point.
TRY!
[/quote]
I'll give it a go.
The first five years of a kid's life are very important to their educational future, even though they're not in formal education yet. The attitude of the parents to reading, writing, being all brainy and stuff like that, as well as the way they communicate generally, is important even to a tiny wee bawbag with no sense in it's head. A ton of learning goes on in the home that translates over later to the school environment, and that's an ongoing process throughout their school life. So the parents are important to the education system, otherwise it'd be fine to have a bunch of five year olds turn up on their first day at school in nappies without being able to speak or walk yet.
Archonsod said:
Aye, and the Free Schools are only a continuation of Blair's City Academies, though the state sector's no better than a Public Private Partnership now as you said, to the benefit of nobody but the private side of the deal.
I'm scared of Michael Gove. He's not saying it openly (why would he?) but "greater private sector involvement" in both healthcare and education is clearly his top priority - Labour opened the door and now the wolves are in. He wrote about it with gleeful anticipation in 2003, before becoming education secretary. Must've hoped nobody'd remember. He is cunning and dangerous like a Liam Fox (despite also, like Liam, being thick as ****. Not sure how they manage to be both at once).
Mage246
Just to get back on topic a bit, this movement is basically similar to the Tea Party. While the Tea Party was a right-leaning populist group that claimed to represent the majority of Americans, the Occupy Wall Street movement is a left-leaning populist group that claims to represent a majority of Americans. The irony is that both of these groups are clear minorities, and thateven internally they'd find it impossible for 99 percent of their group to agree on anything but the most general of goals.
