Lower education?

[GreenOasis]

Ha, ha, Carey! "Ich bin ein Berliner" means "I am a Berliner" and has nothing to do with jelly donuts. I assume that whatever American Republican made that up reckoned that no one would check it out, and from the number of times I've heard it, I guess that he was right! The Democrats' stupidity was the alleged statement by Quail, "I'd like to go to Latin America, but I never learned Latin in school." Sure!

And at no extra charge, the Russian "Мы похороним Вас" (forgive me dear Superfreak if I got that barse ackwards) or "We shall bury you", does not mean "we shall kill you", but "we shall still be alive when you're gone".

I look forward with interest to Steve's comments!

Why, Phil...I had no idea you spoke German as well! Don't know where you got your information from, but the use of "ein" is what makes it a "jelly donut" instead of a Berliner. What he SHOULD'VE said was, "Ich bin Berliner!"

 

[GreenOasis]

I agree completely. Some parents don't raise their children with ethics and while most people are quick to blame teachers, it ultimately goes back to the home. Some of my teachers aren't all "there" and I go to school in one of the most struggling states in terms of education (ranked 49th I think, if that), however my family instilled work ethics and has (since birth) told me that I'm going to college and made sure I study and do my work. The need for my family to do this stopped in early elementary because I had internalized this mentality.

Now, as I've said the problem starts at home. When you have families torn apart by drugs, violence, or any other factors, it damages the child. When children look on t.v and see people who "made it" that didn't place an emphasis on education or their neighbors or family members who don't place any value in education, their motivation to study or do well goes down the drain. Despite the many faults of public schools, one can not possibly blame them for the state of the nation's decline in education. Testing teachers based upon their kids' scores is ludicrous and unfair. That's because for the majority, you're testing kids who don't give a darn what score they get and don't care what the heck they've been taught that year. While in other classes, you may have a majority of kids who do care and see education as a pathway to greatness.

I'm sticking up for the public school system, but by no means is it perfect. But what do you expect with lack of funding? And now proposals are going off to cut funding again!? This is insane. Cut teachers and increase the class size. That hurts the few kids that WANT to learn, because now they have to compete for the teachers attention with kids who are nothing more than discipline cases and who are just there (as stated earlier) to be babysat. Let me ask you something, when the schools shut down do to teacher strikes, what's the main reason parents get involved? Not because they support the teachers' plight and not because they are against the teachers' plight. The reason parents get involved, is because now they have to take off from work to watch their kids or hire a babysitter to watch their kids when before, it was free.

In closing, the American school system will continue to fail until Americans collectively stand up and make it known to the politicians (whose sons and daughters are attending elite private schools) that education can not take a back seat on this country's agenda. Of course, in order for that to happen, the individual families, the basic unit of society, must realize that the only way for their children succeed, and I mean the only plausible way, is for their kids to get an education.

You are absolutely correct on all but one major point. The public school system has PLENTY of gov't funding...trust me. When I look at my property taxes for the year and see a couple hundred dollars going to "school fund" and then take into consideration all of our income tax & the gov't funding, they have PLENTY to go around. Here, EVERYONE that owns property pays school tax, even if they don't live on the property or don't have any kids in the school system. THEN, you get the local public schools that charges FEES, for this & that, whatever they think the kids "need", PLUS expect you to buy their school supplies every year (from a list dictated to you by the TEACHERS, based on their preferences of what will make THEIR life easier)...they have PLENTY of funding. What are they using it all for, I wonder? To sit there and tell me that my son can't go on the Senior Trip, to the Senior Prom, or attend pretty much ANY "function" with the word 'Senior' in it until we pay some $200+ MORE in "student fees"??? That's just freaking ridiculous. Needless to say, my poor kid has had a pretty boring Senior year so far, because I basically feel like I shouldn't have to pay for all this stuff that's SUPPOSED to be free (but in reality, we've already paid for in our taxes). Now, they want me to purchase his "cap & gown" for $90. I'm thinking I may just MAKE it. :angry:

I DO agree that much of it has to do with the parental/familial situation many modern families face. I can't even tell you how many of my older daughter's friends have parents who are either absent, involved in drugs, or simply don't care where their kids are or what they do. THIS is what I wanted her to get away from. Friends who pressure her about ***, friends who have pregnancy scares on a regular basis, friends who do drugs and offer them to her. You can sit there and say, "Well, don't let her hang out with them" all you want, but you know what? I DIDN'T in our personal time...however, I can't control who she "hangs out" with at school! I can't tell the teachers or principal to keep my 15-yr-old away from certain people at the school and reasonably expect them to do so.

The problem, as I see it, is that much of our society...particularly our schools...have been taken over by a liberal bias. You can't punish your child anymore in certain areas without someone butting their nose in. When I lived in California, I lived in a state of constant paranoia that someone would see me scolding my children in public and call the cops. Not punching or slapping, but SCOLDING. THAT'S how bad it was! (I was actually in a store once when it happened to another woman!) The schools HERE in Oklahoma still have "corporal punishment" but they WILL NOT use it...ever! My youngest son kept acting up the first two years we lived here and my husband, at that time, told me that they have corporal punishment, so I told them, "Swat him! He'll straighten up!" but they refused...and his teacher then decided that it would be best to have him assessed for Asperger's. REALLY? I tell them that he's playing them the fool & enjoys playing mind games with them (like trying to get away with "I don't know why I do bad things.") & they want to slap a label on him? Oh, let's perhaps give him some medication, too! Maybe THEN he'll be a good little zombie boy & sit & learn at the same boring rate as the rest of the repressed class!

This mentality is bleeding into our now young adult society. Lack of ethics (from getting away with stuff when they were kids), lack of good work habits (from being able to "just get by" in school), lack of morals or decency (I blame a lot of this on the entertainment industry), lack of attention/care (again, TV...how long is the average TV show??), lack of care for anything but themselves & their own (culmination of all of the above).

Until the public schools become single-*** & institute the use of uniforms & proper moral education, I will keep as many of MINE out of it as possible! ('*** education'? How about 'abstinence education'? Or better yet...How about MORAL education? That would be the ideal solution!)

But, that's just MY two-cents.

 

[kamakiri]

Teaching is a noble profession...just not in the US.

I'm not really sure where we went wrong, but I suspect the problems started in the homes. Not for dramatic reasons like drugs or divorce, but simply lack of caring to teach the value of learning.

At the top of my hit list:

Parents pushing better grades in lieu of better learning.

Pushing kids to build academic resumes.

Enabling kids with false self-esteem boosters...you can't ALL be winners!

Pushing college on kids who just shouldn't bother.

Failure to teach good work ethics and simply working hard to get what you want.

Schools should encourage and reward learning...regardless of the individual student.

 

[PhilinYuma]

Why, Phil...I had no idea you spoke German as well! Don't know where you got your information from, but the use of "ein" is what makes it a "jelly donut" instead of a Berliner. What he SHOULD'VE said was, "Ich bin Berliner!"

Why on earth should you, Carey? I used to speak fairly fluent French and passable German, plus a few other languages in varying degrees of awfulness. In German, the indefinite article is omitted in a "to be' construction when referring to one's place of birth, "Ich bin Englander", or profession, of course, but not in this case. He was saying that he was a Berliner in spirit.

This unfortunate misconception has been exploded in a number of sites as I just found when I Googled it. Try the Wikipedia reference.

I don't think that we've had a silly French translation joke yet, so here's one. It is said that King George V, addressing French troops in French during WWI, ended with, "Que Dieu vous blesse" instead of "benisse" A cute joke, but I don't believe it for a minute, do you?

 

[MantidLord]

You are absolutely correct on all but one major point. The public school system has PLENTY of gov't funding...trust me. When I look at my property taxes for the year and see a couple hundred dollars going to "school fund" and then take into consideration all of our income tax & the gov't funding, they have PLENTY to go around. Here, EVERYONE that owns property pays school tax, even if they don't live on the property or don't have any kids in the school system. THEN, you get the local public schools that charges FEES, for this & that, whatever they think the kids "need", PLUS expect you to buy their school supplies every year (from a list dictated to you by the TEACHERS, based on their preferences of what will make THEIR life easier)...they have PLENTY of funding. What are they using it all for, I wonder? To sit there and tell me that my son can't go on the Senior Trip, to the Senior Prom, or attend pretty much ANY "function" with the word 'Senior' in it until we pay some $200+ MORE in "student fees"??? That's just freaking ridiculous. Needless to say, my poor kid has had a pretty boring Senior year so far, because I basically feel like I shouldn't have to pay for all this stuff that's SUPPOSED to be free (but in reality, we've already paid for in our taxes). Now, they want me to purchase his "cap & gown" for $90. I'm thinking I may just MAKE it. :angry:

I DO agree that much of it has to do with the parental/familial situation many modern families face. I can't even tell you how many of my older daughter's friends have parents who are either absent, involved in drugs, or simply don't care where their kids are or what they do. THIS is what I wanted her to get away from. Friends who pressure her about ***, friends who have pregnancy scares on a regular basis, friends who do drugs and offer them to her. You can sit there and say, "Well, don't let her hang out with them" all you want, but you know what? I DIDN'T in our personal time...however, I can't control who she "hangs out" with at school! I can't tell the teachers or principal to keep my 15-yr-old away from certain people at the school and reasonably expect them to do so.

The problem, as I see it, is that much of our society...particularly our schools...have been taken over by a liberal bias. You can't punish your child anymore in certain areas without someone butting their nose in. When I lived in California, I lived in a state of constant paranoia that someone would see me scolding my children in public and call the cops. Not punching or slapping, but SCOLDING. THAT'S how bad it was! (I was actually in a store once when it happened to another woman!) The schools HERE in Oklahoma still have "corporal punishment" but they WILL NOT use it...ever! My youngest son kept acting up the first two years we lived here and my husband, at that time, told me that they have corporal punishment, so I told them, "Swat him! He'll straighten up!" but they refused...and his teacher then decided that it would be best to have him assessed for Asperger's. REALLY? I tell them that he's playing them the fool & enjoys playing mind games with them (like trying to get away with "I don't know why I do bad things.") & they want to slap a label on him? Oh, let's perhaps give him some medication, too! Maybe THEN he'll be a good little zombie boy & sit & learn at the same boring rate as the rest of the repressed class!

This mentality is bleeding into our now young adult society. Lack of ethics (from getting away with stuff when they were kids), lack of good work habits (from being able to "just get by" in school), lack of morals or decency (I blame a lot of this on the entertainment industry), lack of attention/care (again, TV...how long is the average TV show??), lack of care for anything but themselves & their own (culmination of all of the above).

Until the public schools become single-*** & institute the use of uniforms & proper moral education, I will keep as many of MINE out of it as possible! ('*** education'? How about 'abstinence education'? Or better yet...How about MORAL education? That would be the ideal solution!)

But, that's just MY two-cents.

True, public schools generally have funding, or rather the county does. But the wealth isn't distributed evenly, not by a long shot. And when schools are penalized for having low test scores and get even fewer funds, it only makes things worse. Like starving a child for not eating. And these schools that continually get cut funding are the inner city schools where most minorities and low-income students attend school (which speaks a lot for crime rates for minorities but let's not go there now). As a senior in high school, I feel your pain regarding the fees and what not. I (my mom) just got done paying hundreds of dollars on senior trip, upcoming prom, yearbook, cap and gown, and pictures, not to mention admissions fees for colleges and other college related fees.

As far as scolding goes or lack of discipline, I agree again. My family believes in the "spare the rod, spoil the child" philosophy and as a young child I was accustomed to being disciplined both verbally and (if need be) physically. Now, parents are afraid to discipline their children. Parents are attempting to be their children's friend, rather than a parent. And regarding the labeling and false diagnosis of disorders, I agree 100% and have nothing more to add about that, you summed it up pretty well.

The only part I find myself in disagreement with is the single-*** idea for schools (I'll even give you the uniforms bid). I believe that being able to work efficiently in a work environment with the opposite *** is crucial for real-life experiences. Having children barred from being with the opposite *** (friends and even dates) could stunt the child's social development or (in extreme cases) lead to uncontrollable "urges" or desires simply due to lack of information obtained from being around the opposite ***.

Also, schools should teach abstinence more than they teach *** ed. But I don't think sexual education should be banned from schools. Kids mess up, regardless of how many times you warn them and show them the danger. Sexual education should not be used to condone these acts in children, but should be used more as a "just in case" situation. And that should be stressed. It's like telling someone what to do if he/she accidentally cut themselves. It's not saying, "go ahead and cut yourself, just do this...". It's saying, "In the event". Which, as much as some parents don't want to admit it, most sexual acts in teens aren't planned, but rather (as much as I hate this saying) "just happen". Therefore, in the event, follow these rules. Although I will say that most of these "events" can go avoided if the kid's head is on straight. Which goes back to proper morals.

Didn't mean to right that much, now if you excuse me, I have a physics lab to finish.

Oh and Kamakiri, teaching is a noble fashion except in the U.S. When you have people who can swing a stick to hit a puck on ice or run up and down a field or court with a ball get paid more than those who are supposed to be molding the future leaders of the country, then there is a serious problem. And when I talk about sports, I'm not bad mouthing any athlete, it's not their fault they're getting paid millions. This just shows where society-our nation- places its values...entertainment rather than education. Talk about laugh now, cry later.

 

[PhilinYuma]

"And regarding the labeling and false diagnosis of disorders, I agree 100% and have nothing more to add about that, you summed it up pretty well."

Could you expand on that one a bit, Mantidlord? Carey didn't mention false diagnosis, she didn't want her son tested at all, because of the stigma or "label" of the diagnosis. In my childhood, Aspergers's and ADHD weren't recognized, but the "stigma" was epilepsy, so a lot of kids were allowed to suffer, untreated, because of their parents' sense of shame.

You have upped the ante, though. By using the term "misdiagnosis", you agree that the diagnoses as listed in the DSM are valid, it seems (correct me if I am wrong), but that the child psychologists who are doing the testing, are doing it incorrectly. Do you have any evidence for that, or are you just repeating something that you heard? Do you believe that other diseases of childhood, like early onset diabetes and sickle cell anemia are also being misdiagnosed, or is it just psychiatrists and psychologists who are at fault? As always, I shall be most interested to hear yr answer.

 

[kamakiri]

As far as scolding goes or lack of discipline, I agree again. My family believes in the "spare the rod, spoil the child" philosophy and as a young child I was accustomed to being disciplined both verbally and (if need be) physically. Now, parents are afraid to discipline their children. Parents are attempting to be their children's friend, rather than a parent.

I hate the parent-buddy role that so many parents take now. My wife and I were just out to dinner and were surrounded by families with misbehaving children. Running around wasn't the worst of it. One child even had her spaghetti sent back to the kitchen...TWICE! Incredible!

I openly tell people that my Father wasn't allowed to smack me around...and I feel like I've paid for it for my whole life.

Oh and Kamakiri, teaching is a noble fashion except in the U.S. When you have people who can swing a stick to hit a puck on ice or run up and down a field or court with a ball get paid more than those who are supposed to be molding the future leaders of the country, then there is a serious problem. And when I talk about sports, I'm not bad mouthing any athlete, it's not their fault they're getting paid millions. This just shows where society-our nation- places its values...entertainment rather than education. Talk about laugh now, cry later.

Don't get me started on the athletics over academics! My favorite example is how everyone forgets about a certain rapist because he led a team championship this year. :angry: It makes my head hurt and my heart ache.

 

[MantidLord]

"And regarding the labeling and false diagnosis of disorders, I agree 100% and have nothing more to add about that, you summed it up pretty well."

Could you expand on that one a bit, Mantidlord? Carey didn't mention false diagnosis, she didn't want her son tested at all, because of the stigma or "label" of the diagnosis. In my childhood, Aspergers's and ADHD weren't recognized, but the "stigma" was epilepsy, so a lot of kids were allowed to suffer, untreated, because of their parents' sense of shame.

You have upped the ante, though. By using the term "misdiagnosis", you agree that the diagnoses as listed in the DSM are valid, it seems (correct me if I am wrong), but that the child psychologists who are doing the testing, are doing it incorrectly. Do you have any evidence for that, or are you just repeating something that you heard? Do you believe that other diseases of childhood, like early onset diabetes and sickle cell anemia are also being misdiagnosed, or is it just psychiatrists and psychologists who are at fault? As always, I shall be most interested to hear yr answer.

Forgive me for my concise reply, not to be rude but I want to reply to this asap but with limited time:

I could have upped the ante even more by claiming that these disorders don't exist. To answer your question, it's based off of something I've read. Although these aren't the original articles, they will serve my purpose. Remember, google is your friend. Now, behavioral (or social disorders) are different than actual diseases. Children who are more active are quick to be tested and given medicine to treat their "symptoms". Whether or not they've been officially diagnosed is something different, but being treated as if they had the disorder is not right. Psychologists are more influenced by society than medical doctors (I'm not saying medical doctors aren't influenced), so when society is quick to label a child as adhd for his/her behavior, psychologists and psychiatrists are more likely to diagnose those kids. Here:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/08/100817103342.htm

http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=50453

http://www.bonnieterry.com/blog/index.php/2011/03/misdiagnosed-attention-deficit-disorder-adhd/

You should check out this book!

http://www.keepkidshealthy.com/reviews/parenting_books/adhd_misdiagnosis.html

 

[GreenOasis]

Why on earth should you, Carey? I used to speak fairly fluent French and passable German, plus a few other languages in varying degrees of awfulness. In German, the indefinite article is omitted in a "to be' construction when referring to one's place of birth, "Ich bin Englander", or profession, of course, but not in this case. He was saying that he was a Berliner in spirit.

This unfortunate misconception has been exploded in a number of sites as I just found when I Googled it. Try the Wikipedia reference.

I don't think that we've had a silly French translation joke yet, so here's one. It is said that King George V, addressing French troops in French during WWI, ended with, "Que Dieu vous blesse" instead of "benisse" A cute joke, but I don't believe it for a minute, do you?

I learned my German from a professor of German (who also taught English to German children for several years overseas.), before the internet ever entered the picture. He wasn't preaching from a textbook, he taught us from life experience. So, trust me, I'm not "googling" this. "Ich bin Berliner" means "I am a Berliner" in spirit, the same way we say "I am an American". He said, "Ich bin EIN Berliner." The use of this one little word changes the entire meaning of the sentence. But not to worry, the German crowd he spoke to knew what he meant and took it in stride (and perhaps with a bit of honor that he was trying to express familiarity with them). Rather like when you go to France, knowing no French, and are treated with contempt. However, try speaking just a few phrases to them in French and suddenly they begin to appreciate your presence much more! N'est pas?

I love languages, and have made an effort to learn phrases in any languages that strike my fancy. Took 4 years of German (some in college), 2 years of French (only because I had to PROVE to the PUBLIC SCHOOL that I could handle taking BOTH languages simultaneously without getting "confused."). Self-taught Spanish, Japanese, Korean, a little Chinese & even some Lakota. 'Chanku luta mani!' ("Walk the red road.) & 'Mitakuye oyasin.' ("We are all related.") I even used to sing a Lakota song to my youngest son as a lullaby when he was a baby...worked every time! (The Rabbit Dance song, for anyone out there that cares.)

I am an exceptional student of most subjects, provided they are not thrust upon me. I favor the Montessori idea of teaching...allowing children to follow their own curiousity...but I realize that most kids need a push. Unfortunately, if you push too much, they don't want to learn anything...ever...again.

 

[GreenOasis]

"And regarding the labeling and false diagnosis of disorders, I agree 100% and have nothing more to add about that, you summed it up pretty well."

Could you expand on that one a bit, Mantidlord? Carey didn't mention false diagnosis, she didn't want her son tested at all, because of the stigma or "label" of the diagnosis. In my childhood, Aspergers's and ADHD weren't recognized, but the "stigma" was epilepsy, so a lot of kids were allowed to suffer, untreated, because of their parents' sense of shame.

You have upped the ante, though. By using the term "misdiagnosis", you agree that the diagnoses as listed in the DSM are valid, it seems (correct me if I am wrong), but that the child psychologists who are doing the testing, are doing it incorrectly. Do you have any evidence for that, or are you just repeating something that you heard? Do you believe that other diseases of childhood, like early onset diabetes and sickle cell anemia are also being misdiagnosed, or is it just psychiatrists and psychologists who are at fault? As always, I shall be most interested to hear yr answer.

No, I didn't want my son tested at all...but remember that whole "liberal pressure" I alluded to? I felt like I was being made out to be the "bad guy" by not wanting him tested. I was quite vehement about it, but my husband calmed & reassured me and said, "Let them test him, they will just find out that they're wrong." I figured that the "school psychologist" would surely label him with Asperger's and I would have to take him to a REAL child psychologist to argue it, but fortunately the school psychologist was level-headed enough to see right through my son's game and told them as much. That blew the steam out of the teacher that wanted to slap on the label, but of course, I vowed to never have to deal with that teacher again. I'm sure THAT didn't help his schooling.

His behavior had always been an issue and I didn't feel it was fair that I should have to punish him at home for things he did at school because THEY wouldn't. So, finally year before last, I had had enough of the phone calls, asking me "what to do with him" and took him out of school to be homeschooled. It took ONE YEAR of staying home with me to straighten him out. This year that he's been back in public school, he has had ONE incident...and that was about a month ago. I told him we could always go back to homeschooling & I can "straighten" him out again...he straightened himself out...QUICK. (No, I am not really that horrible of a teacher, but they do tend to get a bit BORED without the distraction of other kids in the room. At least he was LEARNING for a change, though!)

 

[GreenOasis]

The only part I find myself in disagreement with is the single-*** idea for schools (I'll even give you the uniforms bid). I believe that being able to work efficiently in a work environment with the opposite *** is crucial for real-life experiences. Having children barred from being with the opposite *** (friends and even dates) could stunt the child's social development or (in extreme cases) lead to uncontrollable "urges" or desires simply due to lack of information obtained from being around the opposite ***.

I cannot imagine what information you think you can glean from being around the opposite ***, or why you would think that NOT being around the opposite *** IN A LEARNING ENVIRONMENT would stunt their social development? Studies have been done and it has been PROVEN that children (particularly adolescents going through puberty) learn better in a single-*** environment. I'm not saying separate campuses necessarily, and certainly kids could have adult-supervised lunches or recess with the opposite ***, etc...but they will concentrate better on their studies if they're not distracted by "that cute guy" or "that hot girl" that is "checking <them/me> out!" Why do you think they HAVE "all-girl" & "all-boy" schools? Look at the places where they have single-*** schools as the norm and check THEIR test scores. Japan instantly comes to mind, but I'm sure Phil could share others.

 

[PhilinYuma]

Ah, Mantidlord, I think that I see the problem. You have strong feelings on this subject -- is your family strongly conservative Christian by any chance? -- and you haven't done your homework. Let me clue you in:

Only psychiatrists, not psychologists, can prescribe psychotropic drugs. They are all "medical doctors" and can prescribe psychotropics even if they have had no specialized psychiatric training.

ADD and ADHD, on which you cite some interesting if somewhat unreliable sources (I tend to agree with them in part!) bear absolutely no relationship to Asperger's syndrome which is part of the autism spectrum of illnesses which sometimes border on High Functioning Autism but do not show linguistic or intellectual impairment. Indeed, in the case of one of "my kids" there is a very high IQ (140+ on the Stanford Binet). There is, however, a marked lack of empathy which can cause the child a lot of discomfort in peer situations -- home schooling is often advised, and huge enthusiasms for a particular subject which may give way to another over time. It can but need not be associated with a cluster of disorders including ADHD and sometimes markedly antisocial behavior which may need medication like Risperdol. (cf).

Psychiatric illness still carries a stigma among the ignorant, and that does not always mean the uneducated. I have an in law, one of my favorite people, who was raised in a "good Catholic family" of professionals who didn't believe in or discuss mental illness,even though one of her siblings was psychotic and eventually killed himself When I felt close enough to her to ask her if anyone had mentioned the possibility of Asperger's syndrome (how carefully we tiptoe around the subject!) to her, she said that she had been diagnosed when she was 21, far too late for an illness of childhood and adolescence.

Far too many Americans put their children's lives in jeopardy by refusing to allow them to be vaccinated. Please do not think that a return to a mythical "morality" which in our past sanctioned slavery and the burning of witches (there were no "good old days"!) is a substitute for the psychiatric alleviation of the mental and emotional ills of the young.

 

[MantidLord]

I cannot imagine what information you think you can glean from being around the opposite ***, or why you would think that NOT being around the opposite *** IN A LEARNING ENVIRONMENT would stunt their social development? Studies have been done and it has been PROVEN that children (particularly adolescents going through puberty) learn better in a single-*** environment. I'm not saying separate campuses necessarily, and certainly kids could have adult-supervised lunches or recess with the opposite ***, etc...but they will concentrate better on their studies if they're not distracted by "that cute guy" or "that hot girl" that is "checking <them/me> out!" Why do you think they HAVE "all-girl" & "all-boy" schools? Look at the places where they have single-*** schools as the norm and check THEIR test scores. Japan instantly comes to mind, but I'm sure Phil could share others.

Before I head off to school, I'll quickly reply (don't worry Phil, I'm not ignoring you!). Please cite these studies, as I can cite studies proving the opposite, or at least supporting the need for children to learn socially in co-ed environments. A multitude of institutions here in the states are coed and are considered the top of the line in education (see ivy league schools) where most foreigners (even your stated Japanese students) aspire to go once they reach the college level. But in regards to high school, do you honestly think that the American society would go with what your proposing? Supervised lunches, that's laughable amongst teens. In my experiences "that hot girl" has been nothing more than an afterthought. My parents had taught me well that females will always be around, I just need to handle my business with school and education first. With that mentality, there was no need for me to separated from the opposite ***. Sure I saw girls and checked them out, but I certainly wasn't "distracted". This goes back to the parents. Instead of desiring schools to separate sexes and monitor them constantly, how about the PARENTS teach their children about the opposite *** and give them some morals on how to deal with them? It worked for me and plenty of other people I know. If parents let their children know that it's "okay to like another person, just don't get distracted" or some other form of that, then there is a greater chance of that child staying focused on his/her work. Don't put all the pressure on the schools or the student, parents should take responsibility and help school their children in the social aspect as well. But students should still be able to live and learn while they're children about who to play with (excluding the extremes like drug dealers and killers) and who to talk to. Children should be able to work with members of the opposite *** in learning environments, what do you think college is like? With a higher percentage of it being females anyway? Having never worked with females before in school, I just might loose my mind! Oh but wait, I have worked with females before in school, and it's nothing special.

And Phil, my family is certainly not "conservative" by any definition of the word :lol: . But I gotta go!

 

[guapoalto049]

Even if it is a little more effective to learn in a same-*** environment, I for one think it adds enjoyment when there are girls around. Education is important but not so important to deprive kids of some fun. Most of my fondest memories involve girls in some way or another, and I feel it helped to keep me well-rounded.

As I mentioned before, the kids who are willing to put in time will do so. I can tell you that I was distracted on many occasions by girls in school, but I still worked hard and it paid off.

 

[PhilinYuma]

Ha, ha! Back in the days when we were writing on papyrus, I went to an all boys' school. After school, the "sexually daring" would meet up with some of the girls from the girls' school half a mile away. The nice thing about this arrangement was that there was little doubt about the intentions of either the boys or girls who went.

There are two problems, that I can see, to sexually segregating kids, especially since it has been traditionally done when kids enter high school and puberty. The first is that *** between young adolescents is labelled by a society in which adultery is commonplace as a "bad thing". It isn't, I remember distinctly. Being sexually active doesn't turn a girl into a "######". whatever that may be. I can think of two of "my kids" who became active in their mid teens, and both are now in a monogamous relationship. The idea that sexual intercourse is morally bad goes back to when there was no birth control and when families would have a serious problem marrying off a daughter who was in the family way already.

In my youth, although *** among teens occurred, it was on a small enough scale not to be a "hot topic". Boys of my age, though, were exhorted not to fall into the sin of masturbation (in those days, no one thought that girls could **********!), which would destroy the social fabric and make practitioners blind so that they could not see the hair sprouting out of their hands. So adults were having all sorts of *** and denying kids the innocent pleasure of jerking off!

The overriding reason preventing a return to sexual segregation, though, is a financial one. Towns that boast one large high school or two, many miles apart would, in the first case, have to build a second school and waste half of the first one or, in the second case, bus children to school. Folks with no school-age kids and many with, would howl in outrage at the expense.

No, it's not going to happen any more than we are going to return to slavery, which at least has economic advantages.

 

[MantidLord]

Back. Now Phil, this will be short. What I was trying to say was that many people are quick to blame (and prescribe medication for) behavioral disorders that may or may not be present in the individual. I'm not saying they don't exist. GreenOasis's child was to be tested for something when (in her opinion) the discussion should not have even been brought up. Sometimes kids don't have any disorders, they just need some discipline. Other times, they do have disorders and by all means should be treated. However, screening to come with a proper diagnosis before dishing out medicine that may CREATE the symptoms should be improved. And no, I don't feel strongly about the subject, or at least the behavioral disorders part if that's what you meant. The education part, yes.

And Phil, I'm glad you added your past experiences to the same *** school discussion. Kids are going to find one way or another to meet up with people of the opposite ***, it's unavoidable. And quite frankly, I don't think the benefits of having same *** schools (I'll agree there are some) overrides the costs. I asked a kid at school today what he thought about same *** schools. His response was, "I wouldn't come to school". Now this may be an extreme, but I agree that having girls at school does make it "fun" and interesting. And as stated above, if the kid is able stay on course, despite inevitable distractions, he or she will make it.

 

[PhilinYuma]

Fair enough, Mantidlord! My original question, though, was about a teaching methodology that that mandates that a lot of class time be spent on computer lab research, which could be done at home, peer discussion and peer class presentations of PowerPoint and Movie Maker (good for Microsoft, though, get those kids hooked while they're still in school!) insread of lecture/discussion that still seems to be the modus operandi in college, except for education majors. I can remember using class rooms after them several times as an undergraduate and finding that they had left the chairs arranged in cute little circles for "buzz groups"!

So as an "embedded reporter", what is your experience? Is it just Amanda's school that does this or is it a widespread practice?

 

[MantidLord]

Sorry, for the 3 day time lapse, I was out of town. As an "embedded reporter" (I assume in the "war of education"), I'll have to say that this is a widespread practice, however not every teacher employs this teaching strategy. For example, I have a teacher now that lectures a chapter for a day using a powerpoint. The powerpoint only covers the basics of the chapter and it's up to us to go and read and take extensive notes. We then come back and after a couple of days take a test. Then rinse and repeat. I'd say it works fairly well. However, another class of mine simply has us spending the whole class period "researching" and then coming back to spend more class periods watching presentations. So in short, unfortunately it isn't confined to Amanda's school, however to say it's "mandated" is a little extreme considering it is up to the teacher.