Because if you teach to the test, you don't have to teach independent thought, and answer difficlut questions. I used to be the kid who asked the difficult questions- let me tell you, philisophical discussion is not welcome in the classroom! Political correctness means that everything but the most banal topics are verboten in public schools.
I very much agree with that article. I grew up in a harsh meritocracy, in which teachers thought nothing about publicly calling someone a dim bulb when they couldn't keep pace. I then came to US and faced the complete opposite: a harsh entitlement culture, which put teachers on the defensive. They could not suggest even in private, and in the gentlest of ways, that the student should consider a different field of study, b/c they simply didn't have the brains for doing math
( ... )
Political correctness, and the phenomenon of people getting offended-to the point of outrage- on behalf of others is one of the biggest reasons American culture is what it is today. We've all learned that if we have an unpopular opinion, we had best keep our mouths shut. There is no public discourse, no more debate. People assume that if you disagree with them, it's becuase you just don't understand. No one wants a classic liberal arts education anymore, everyone wants to be an investment banker or a rock star.
I would love to see our schools assign classes based on ability, but the law states that each student is entitled to an equal and appropriate education, and the easiest way to ensure that is to put all students together, regardless of their needs. This is fine for the majority of children, but those who are at either end of the intelligence spectrum get either left behind or not challenged. Frustrating for all.
Well, theoretically, Romania guarantees the right to an equal education, too. Every child has the RIGHT to sit the entrance exam to the most prestigious high-schools. Not every child has the ability to pass it, of course. But that's not the government's fault. They gave everyone an equal chance, didn't they? And of course, I'm being a bit tongue-in-cheek, b/c like everywhere else rights come down to economics: those whose parents can afford private tutors always have a better chance. Just like in US, those who can afford to pay a private college tuition...
This point shows exactly why 'ability' as a category is completely useless.
In the UK, we're 40 years on from getting rid of the 11+ and the grammar schools (the duffers who failed went to secondary moderns, did lots of cooking / woodwork and left school at 15 to start apprenticeships or work on the farm). This was *supposed* to make things fairer and give all kids a more level playing field. But of course, it just made some things better and other things worse.
On a lighter note, Hogwarts, contrary to popular belief, is NOT a English public (i.e fee-paying) school. It's more like a grammar school or an 'ideal' comprehensive and the whole series is a satire on UK education policy of the 80s and 90s.
I'm not sure I follow either of your points, entirely. In my view, ability is not a useless category - if by that, Jo, you meant that testing a child's intelligence is useless. (I'm not at all familiar with the UK system). Yes, economics play a role, and no system is completely fair - however fairness is defined. But no amount of private tutoring can make up for lack of brains. I know what I'm talking about - my parents have been tutoring rich dimwits for a long time
( ... )
Comments 14
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
I would love to see our schools assign classes based on ability, but the law states that each student is entitled to an equal and appropriate education, and the easiest way to ensure that is to put all students together, regardless of their needs. This is fine for the majority of children, but those who are at either end of the intelligence spectrum get either left behind or not challenged. Frustrating for all.
Reply
Reply
In the UK, we're 40 years on from getting rid of the 11+ and the grammar schools (the duffers who failed went to secondary moderns, did lots of cooking / woodwork and left school at 15 to start apprenticeships or work on the farm). This was *supposed* to make things fairer and give all kids a more level playing field. But of course, it just made some things better and other things worse.
On a lighter note, Hogwarts, contrary to popular belief, is NOT a English public (i.e fee-paying) school. It's more like a grammar school or an 'ideal' comprehensive and the whole series is a satire on UK education policy of the 80s and 90s.
Ack - sorry about the edits Mullvaney. *hugs*
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment