In my personal opinion , and from personal experience teaching college students

[UndertheOcean]

I came to the conclusion that only those who graduate HS with >=3.0 GPA should apply to Science or Engineering or Math. And their education should be totally free.

Some students just don't get it , even after explaining the material a million times.

A system I would support is having an Academic committee look at your HS performance , where your strengths are ? , and assign you the proper fields you can succeed in. If you choose to continue your education in those fields then all tuition is waived, if not you have to pay tuition.


I think that is the fairest system we can achieve.

[wtmusic]

1. Very French

not the worst system, by far. :thumbsup:

[Godhumor]

2. Absolutely not. I hate the idea that someone would be "assigned" possible careers at 18

I never liked that system in other countries and would be extremely annoyed to see it implemented here.

[whatchamacallit]

4. +1 nt

[n2doc]

5. +2 n/t

[Posteritatis]

6. Yep.

Especially if they're penalized for going against the government's decision of what they should study. Fuck that.

[wtmusic]

8. Correction: all careers are possible.

You just don't get a free ride for ones you don't show aptitude for.

Makes sense to me.

[CTyankee]

16. Except that, on one of my "aptitude" tests it was recommended that I be a bus driver.

I had and have no mechanical ability. But I was an communications and fine arts major. What were they thinking giving me this test?

[wtmusic]

37. What do you do for a living? nt

[CTyankee]

47. I am retired now but for over 35 years I was a Development professional

for nonprofit organizations. I made a conscious decision years ago that I wanted to work in a cause that I believed in and took a hardheaded look at the options available to me: it was either Public Relations or Fund Development (fundraising). I chose fundraising on the theory that I could always get a job if I knew how to raise money. I spent all my time learning how this was done: direct mail, grant writing, event planning and major donor recruitment and development (increasing their gifts every year). AT my highest pay level, I was a Major Gifts Officer.

While I was right that you can always get a job in nonprofits if tyou know how to raise money, it is also true that it's a job you probably don't want. The exception is the major donor category. You DO want the job there now. You DON'T want to be out trying to get the smaller donations. It's just too hard and you could risk not making the (unrealistic) goal the organization sets for you.

My recommendation: go to work in the Development Office of a major University. Ivy League preferably. Or just look up the college's fundraising online and make your decision accordingly...

Oh, and if you are older, no matter what the nonprofit, be prepared for age discrimination...it will come, it will come....

[wtmusic]

53. I had one of those wacky aptitude tests too

and I don't even remember what it told me I was "supposed" to be, only that I got a good laugh out of it.

In countries where this kind of system does exist, a lot of resources are devoted toward helping students figure out where their interests and aptitude lie. That would have to go hand-in-hand with it.

If the state is going to pay for your education I like the idea, in principle. But I've heard anecdotally that in France, for example, the stress level for secondary-level students is enormous.

[Sonoman]

56. Mine was sales of exotic cars and private jets.

I made my money on Peruvian Flake.

Retired, now.

Sonoman

[CTyankee]

158. Well, if it was just that, ;perhaps you have many cohorts...I guess you do...

tell me, how did you escape the long arm of the law?

[Sonoman]

172. Ain't nothing in ramblin'

Luck is just that...

Just Luck.

Sonoman

[Pithlet]

10. Agreed.

I hope we never do such a thing here.

[jody]

15. ROFL because one is assigned possible careers at birth because one's genes contribute to IQ just as

one's genes contribute to art, athletic, and other abilities.

You might not like it but that's just the way things are.

[whathehell]

45. Then one can "assign" themselves...

A person can be "good" at something but not be particularly interested in doing it.

[FreakinDJ]

60. Include your GENDER in that statement Jody

In defending the OP's statements your just precluded WOMEN from Math and Science Careers

[wtmusic]

64. I'd like to see a (specific) source for your graph.

Here's one that directly contradicts it:

"Although boys in high school performed better than girls in math 20 years ago, the researchers found, that is no longer the case. The reason, they said, is simple: Girls used to take fewer advanced math courses than boys, but now they are taking just as many."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/25/education/25math.html

[jody]

69. What a crock, I did not preclude WOMEN from Math and Science Careers, I precluded those who do not

have the ability for math and science careers, period!

[FreakinDJ]

73. I have 50 seats available - who will fill them

by the scores - predominantly Males right?

[jody]

80. "by the scores" regardless of gender, ethnicity, race, etc. n/t

[FreakinDJ]

93. I've met School Administrators seeking to subvert the math curriculume

because they felt the female gender responded better to "Old Math" teaching curriculum given the apparent disparity currently being experienced

I felt the resulting effect would be an entire school less prepared for advanced mathematics

my bad

[jody]

98. Not sure how to reply. My experience is primarily graduate college in science & math and there I

found students with incredible ranges of potential.

My conjecture is that similar ranges of potential exist in K-12.

My goal is simple, for society to offer free education for gifted students so society can reap the benefits of their intellectual potential regardless of environment into which they were born.

[FreakinDJ]

103. In that endeavor I Whole Heartedly Support you

[Little Star]

3. I like it. Then parents and students can stop wasting time and

money just to have the kid drop out or such.

[Xithras]

14. We call them "zombie students"

They wander around aimlessly without any real idea what they're doing or what they hope to accomplish, but they're sure they need BRAAAINS!

Eventually they just drop out, in debt up to their ears.

[Hello_Kitty]

171. I'm not totally on board with the idea of tracking kids early in life but

Some people are not cut out for college. Which doesn't mean they aren't smart or can't succeed in other ways.

[treestar]

7. Such a student would go to other subjects on their own

After getting a lousy grade. I was like that - good at Math and Science in H.S. but not at college level. Though the HS teachers did explain it better. The trouble with colleges is that people who get a doctorate don't necessarily make the best teachers. But to teach in primary/secondary, one has to learn about teaching.

In college I took Math and the prof was this German guy I could barely understand. Had a lot to do with how I could not understand it.

[Xithras]

22. A college educator is not a teacher. That's not their job.

As I told a student at the beginning of last semester, "You are a wall. I am a bucket. I'm hurling information at you. It's your job to figure out how to make it stick." That students problem was ultimately traced (by someone else) to a lack of decent note-taking skills. A high school teacher might have helped the student overcome her problem. I gave her a reference to one of the school tutoring centers, and moved on to the next student.

The job of a high school teacher is to work with each student to help them learn the material. The job of a college educator is to place the material in front of the students in an understandable and accessible format, so that the students can learn it themselves. If a student wants to seek additional help from an educator, they may do so of their own accord, but the approach is different. My "students" are adults, and are expected to be 100% responsible for their own educations from the moment they walk in the door. If the student doesn't actively seek help for topics they're having trouble with, they won't get it.

[treestar]

42. I suppose so, but then it still doesn't mean colleges should

have professors with heavy accents or bad English. Even if teaching a foreign language, that's not quite fair. But I suppose adults can do something, not pay their tuition or complain to a higher level. Though 18 year olds aren't instantly adults.

Then some did "teach" us - they just had a knack for it.

[1monster]

118. I'm glad my college professors all recognized that the job of a college professor is

to teach (see further definition of "teach" below). Whatever else are you supposed to be doing if not teaching in an institution of higher learning?

Okay, I grant you that it is not your job to hold the hand of a student. But it is your job to facilitate YOUR students' learning processes. In the end, a teacher (of any level) cannot teach a student who is unwilling to learn. I'll even go so far as to say that most of the time, a teacher doesn't teach the student anything. The student teaches him/herself. But a teacher or professor shows the students the way.

And by the way, professor, I sure hope that your subject was not anything to do with English. Because your grammar is way off in your title sentences.

(Disclaimer: I often make typos, misspellings, and leave out words. I am not the grammar police, but I try very hard not to mix singular and plural when using pronouns.)

[dsc]

160. in fairness many people use their the way the poster did to avoid

the his or her problem. I won't say it is standard but it is increasingly common.

[Xithras]

176. LOL, no, I don't teaches the Enlish

I teach the Computer Sciences, where the only syntax errors that matter are in code ;)

For what it's worth, your statement and mine aren't really all that different. You said: "it is your job to facilitate YOUR students' learning processes". I said: "The job of a college educator is to place the material in front of the students in an understandable and accessible format".

If I'm not placing that information out there in a format that facilitates the students learning it, whether in a lecture or in an assignment, then I'm obviously not doing my job. My lectures are presented to my students orally, with the use of visual aids, and by text. The three formats are used specifically to engage students of all learning styles. Please don't misunderstand and assume that I'm just a robot reading out of a textbook...because that's not what I meant.

My intent was to illustrate a much more subtle difference between high school and college educators. Contrary to what many students and parents seem to think, college is not merely "high school with harder homework and better parties". In elementary and high school, teachers track the progress of their students, intervene when they're having problems, stage parental interventions when students are falling behind, and generally handhold the kids until they have the material for their grade-year down. At the college and university level, there is a fundamental shift in responsibility. The onus is on the students to be responsible for their own educations and to seek help when they need it. There is no handholding, we stage no interventions, and assistance is reserved for those who ask for it.

Where the role of the high school teacher is to guide the students to their educational goals and ensure their success, the role of a college educator is much smaller. We are there to offer our lectures to students interested in hearing it and, when asked, to provide assistance to those having trouble comprehending it. We offer students the tools they need to engage in a successful academic career, but the ultimate success of the student is the students own responsibility.

[jody]

9. Agree, gifted students, i.e. the top 2.5%, demonstrating science and math aptitudes should have free

college including Ph.D. in majors using their science and math skills.

Several years ago I obtained K-12 data showing that for every $11 we spend on students with special education needs, the bottom 2.5%, we spend an astounding 2 cents on gifted students, the top 2.5%.

I demand equal treatment for gifted students particularly if one is serious about investing in education expecting future benefits to society.

[Pithlet]

21. Oh please. They don't even demand equal resources. What do you mean, equal treatment?

As the parent of two sons, one of whom isa highly intelligent and academically gifted and the other who has benefited from special educational needs, I know a thing or two about this. Do you mean to tell me that you resent the resources that special education take? Seriously? For one thing, programs vary so widely by region and even by district, that it's wrong to make such a blanket statement anyway. If your area doesn't offer enough for gifted children, then by all means do something about it. As a parent, it's your duty. But to make it a fight between gifted kids and kids with special needs is patently ridiculous. It makes as much sense to say that it's the athletic department that is depriving your gifted kid? Why not make them the target? Or the lunch budget? I mean, if you're going to pick one at all.

[jody]

24. ROFL because you quoted ny answer to your question "equal treatment". If you don't understand that

simple phrase, then nothing anyone says can help you.

[Pithlet]

25. Yes, I understand what it means. Why do you demand it?

The two student bodies don't require equal resources, do they? That seems pretty simple to understand to me.

[jody]

34. Please justify your assertion "don't require equal resources". n/t

[Pithlet]

49. LOL Okay.

Please justify your assertion that the sky is blue.... Gee, why are kids with special needs more expensive to educate? Let's see. Physical therapists. Occupational Therapists. Speech Therapists. Various special education teachers. That's just for a start. It depends on the child's IEP and what is required, which is determined through testing, which requires various specialists (who also need to be paid) to make those determinations. Some need more accommodations, some need less. Depending on the level of accommodation and how many professionals are needed, it can add up quite quickly. Some children require a lot of one on one intervention.

Gifted kids are entitled to resources as well. They are entitled to programs to further their enrichment. But they aren't ever going to cost near the money that kids needing IEPs are going to cost. Gifted kids are never going to need highly specialized care like occupational therapy and speech. You're lamenting the fact that special ed receives a different level of attention and funding, while totally ignoring the reasons why. Each group have completely different needs. It isn't that one deserves less. It's that one group needs resources that happen to be more expensive.

[jody]

55. Please provide source for "aren't ever going to cost near the money that kids needing IEPs are going

to cost."

While you are searching for that nonexistent source, you might find a source for ROI to society per dollar spent on the top 2.5% of K-12 students versus bottom 2.5% of K-12 students.

Absent a source for the latter, do you expect that social ROI is 10, 100, or 1,000 times greater for the top 2.5% than social ROI for the bottom 2.5%?

[Pithlet]

57. I'm done.

Because I don't have to provide a source for that. Most people are smart enough to figure that one out. Even my seven year old was able to figure it out. He was whining and crying about not being able to go to speech like his big brother. I was able to actually explain to him why he didn't have to go. He was able to eventually get it. He was okay with it.

[jody]

63. Looks like your personal experiences provide evidence supporting equal treatment for gifted students

if you have the ability to understand.

[Pithlet]

66. Yep. I have the ability to understand like a seven year old

that gifted doesn't mean needing additional therapy. Imagine that. You want to equate being gifted to being special needs, that's fine. Most people can see that it isn't the same. Many of those children require additional needs that gifted children willl never require. How hard is that to grasp?

[jody]

71. I accept your self description, "I have the ability to understand like a seven year old". Have a

great evening and goodbye. :hi:

[Pithlet]

72. Just like I thought.

You couldn't counter what I said. Apparently you can't grasp it at all :)

[1monster]

127. Quite often students who are gifted require IEPs also. Just because they are on

the upper scale of achievement doesn't mean that they too don't have learning disabilites. It is a misapprehension to believe that only children with low achievement abilities need IEPs.

[jody]

133. Understand, I have three brilliant friends, one set of parents with PhDs in math/science fields and

their 14 year old son.

They all are autistic and have difficulty functioning in social settings but contribute in their own way.

[Pithlet]

137. delete dupe

[Pithlet]

138. delete, mistake

[Pithlet]

139. Oops, I thought this was in response to me.

Sorry *blushing*

[1monster]

125. The thing is that many of the methods used for the "gifted" children's education

would work well with the lower level children. It is hands on and stimulates thinking and doing.

But it has been explained too me that it costs to much for the average and lower level students to get that kind of education. I've seen some real travesties in the lower level education. One young person is blind and has cerebral palsy. That student is also bilingual, fluent in both languages. But this student is not being taught braille because the powers that be don't think the student has enough intelligence to learn it. So the student sits in a wheel chair most of the day doing nothing but playing with different shaped blocks and holes.

Go sit for a day in a gifted program and then sit in a varying exceptional program. Equal treatment?! :eyes:

[Goblinmonger]

161. So all the top students need to go into science and math?

Screw the rest of the disciplines?

[jody]

I said "majors using their science and math skills". n/t

[Goblinmonger]

165. Let me rephrase, the top students in the country need to go into majors that FOCUS

on math and science. Screw the arts. Screw the humanities. Screw the social sciences.

[peacebird]

11. Total crock. I know many folks that blew off HS but worked their heinies off and did well in college

usually in science or engineering degrees.

Frequently smart kids are totally turned off by HS curriculum, particularly if they don't manage to get put in AP or honors courses, but the challenges of college really light a fire in them.

[tridim]

27. Yep, lots of brilliant C students out there.

HS grades don't always tell the whole story.

[wtmusic]

35. Take W, for example. He was just misunderestimated. nt

[tridim]

39. I didn't say all C students are brilliant.

But there certainly are some.

[wtmusic]

43. Can you name any famous ones?

The only ones I can think of are creative types whose aptitude wouldn't really suit them for college anyway.

[tridim]

50. Einstein was a C-student

That's the only one I know of for sure.

Susskind was a plumber before he broke out, probably an average student.

[wtmusic]

59. That's somewhat of a myth.

He did fail non-science subjects. But in a system like this anyone who understood calculus at 12 should get a free education - in science.

"Second, Einstein definitely did not fail at high school. Einstein was born on 14 March in Ulm, in Germany, in 1879. The next year, his family moved to Munich. At the age of 7, he started school in Munich. At the age of 9, he entered the Luitpold-Gymnasium. By the age of 12 he was studying calculus. Now this was very advanced, because the students would normally study calculus when they were 15 years old. He was very good at the sciences. But, because the 19th-century German education system was very harsh and regimented, he didn't really develop his non-mathematical skills (such as history, languages, music and geography). In fact, it was his mother, not his school, who encouraged him to study the violin - and he did quite well at that as well.

In 1895, he sat the entrance examinations to get into the prestigious Federal Polytechnic School (or Academy) in Zurich, Switzerland. He was 16, two years younger than his fellow applicants. He did outstandingly well in physics and mathematics, but failed the non-science subjects, doing especially badly in French - so he was not accepted. So in that same year, he continued his studies at the Canton school in Aargau (also called Aarau). He studied well, and this time, he passed the entry exams into the Federal Polytechnic School."

http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2004/06/23/1115185.htm?site=science/greatmomentsinscience

[spinbaby]

140. I believe Germany was far more flexible about education at that time

The reason I say that Germany was very flexible about education when Einstein went to school is that my own father, in the late 1920s, dropped out of school at the age of 13 because he wanted to tour Europe on a bicycle, which he did. After an education gap of several years, he went to university and eventually earned his PhD. Can you imagine anything like that happening in the USA today?

Our educational system is very lockstep--it doesn't adapt well to student's quirks and tends to reward time served rather than skills acquired.

[Lost-in-FL]

87. I read once that Stephen Hawking was a B/C student but I might be wrong. nt

[1monster]

129. Thomas Alva Edison... did very poorly in school.

[JCMach1]

174. I was one of those HS underachievers... I am now a Professor and Higher Ed. Administrator

:eyes:

[KT2000]

12. A friend was told

all through high school he was not college material. He didn't listen to them and is now a PhD nuclear pharmacist.
The high school we both went to was a particularly crappy school. The messed up teachers and administrators were sent to that school - the burnouts, alcoholics etc. That happens. No one's life should be mapped out by people like that.
Your idea would probably work in an ideal situation but there are too many realities that do not measure up.

[Xithras]

13. As a compsci prof, I tend to agree.

There are few things less pleasant for an educator than to watch a student who barely cleared high school flail pointlessly as they try to wrap their brains around the harder disciplines. If you don't have the fundamentals, you're not going to have any chance with the harder stuff.

[jody]

17. My experience and that of colleagues agree with your observation. n/t

[whatchamacallit]

18. Elitism

Why are we compelled to give extra benefits to those who are already gifted by nature?

[wickerwoman]

102. It's not a zero sum game.

Everyone benefits from the work that the brightest members of society do. Name a major invention, technology, medical breakthrough or great work or art or literature discovered or created by someone of average intelligence.

The cure for cancer or the solution to the energy crisis aren't likely to come from kids getting Cs in high school math and science. They're probably going to come from kids that are naturally bright and work their asses off. And if they're poor, there's a chance they may never reach their full potential. For me, it's worth giving "benefits" to a few kids that don't need them in order to increase the chance that those innovations will come.

[SheilaT]

19. My older son has done math tutoring

at a junior college, and he talks about the kids who just don't get it, and those who do. He has noticed that the ones who will eventually go on to take calculus are much easier to tutor in algebra than the ones who have no interest, and maybe no aptitude in, math in the first place.

I think the OP has a certain point, but we are not a country that would be willing to permanently track students into specific careers very early on. Many years ago someone pointed out to me that in this country you are never permanently shut out of higher education, and that's a very good thing. So, okay, maybe I never was Harvard or MIT material in the first place, but I can still get a college education no matter how old I am, so long as I apply myself to learn. A lot of us are late bloomers.

[patrice]

20. Why are poets less worthy of free education than engineers? nt

[whatchamacallit]

23. Word!

;)

[patrice]

26. From some perspectives, we ARE in more need of true poets than we are of engineers.

Poets and Artists, of course.

I (and some others I can think of) sometimes speculate that "our" over dependence upon the machinations and manipulations of organized religion is due to a certain aesthetic anemia.

[whatchamacallit]

33. Indeed

We are made low by our material obsessions.

[jody]

30. “I must study politics and war, that my sons may have the liberty to study mathematics and

philosophy, natural history and naval architecture, in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, music, architecture, tapestry, and porcelain.” (John Adams)

Science and mathematics help we humans understand nature with its matter, energy, and immutable laws.

The arts including poets help us understand the preternatural if it exists. :pals:

[wtmusic]

32. You missed the point.

Poets would get a free education if they showed aptitude for it in HS.

[patrice]

67. Actually, I think everyone should receive a free education to the max of their potentials whatever

those potentials are, regardless, and that does imply, therefore, a life-long education, not just one that ends when someone else says you're finished learning.

[wtmusic]

70. Who would determine when someone "maxed out"? nt

[patrice]

79. Authentic learner-teacher guided assessments could provide the kinds of

"documentation" that would support specific decisions made by the stakeholders, including some points in the process where the learner's decisions are primary and some conditions in which the system's, or parents, guardians' decisions are primary. All such decisions could be made conditionally, such that when/if certain defined conditions are met or not the process either resumes or terminates according to previous more-or-less contractual agreements amongst those involved.

I'm not completely certain that we would even take attendance in my schools. Schools would receive an agreed upon block of money from taxes. They'd be open 8a-8p to anyone of any age who is accountably engaged in the agreed upon process.

I am a Freire-ian http://books.google.com/books?id=xfFXFD414ioC&printsec=frontcover&dq=paulo+freire+pedagogy+of+the+oppressed&source=bl&ots=sWUbb8iWV7&sig=lbEutJGPMahzsebn-zK9DyX7xnQ&hl=en&ei=Ru4cTaW0MsSAnQe6oeXfDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=false in regards to Education, btw, by way of John Dewey.

[wtmusic]

83. Very interesting, thank you.

Makes me want to read more on Freire. It seems that a fixed block of money addressing the needs of an arbitrary number of students would come with all kinds of associated problems...but there's obviously more to it. :thumbsup:

[patrice]

106. Oh, I'll admit that I don't think very carefully about the financial side of it. I just think

that if you build the right kinds of learning processes the money should just be there for the kids, let the learning process guide everything, no money questions asked. I just can't deal with any implication that this country's children aren't worth ___________ whatever it is that it seems that people think they aren't worth, i.e. funding our schools appropriately.

[AngryAmish]

36. Because poets don't contribute to a society the way engineers do

Poets tend to lay on the couch and feel sorry for themselves. Engineers keep the drinking water clean and the bridges standing.

[Swamp Rat]

Engineers also make bombs that destroy life on Earth, and chemicals that pollute our water..

Poets sometimes fart while laying on the couch feeling sorry for themselves. :D

[jody]

40. ROFL at what I assume is an attempted joke. See post #30. n/t

[patrice]

58. Do you think perhaps you should do a reality check on whether you are a bigot or not? nt

[patrice]

61. My sincere apologies, if you were being "funny". It's hard to tell online. And there are

ALL types of people on this board.

[Froward69]

28. Ahem.. I graduated HS with a 1.6 gpa

then earned an engineering degree with a 3.7gpa.

(yes I tested high)

HS for me was too restrictive. too regimented, with not enough sex, Drugs and R&R.

[Kweli4Real]

29. We have had systems where ...

"Academic committee look at your HS performance , where your strengths are ? , and assign you the proper fields you can succeed in."

We have experience with the "Tracking" systems that you speak of ... It tends to not work out well for "minorities" and women.

[Gregorian]

31. I disagree. We need to change the way we teach.

I could sum it up by saying "fuck Socrates". The military teaches (or used to teach) in a way that universities would call spoon feeding.

In my opinion, universities are not for learning so much as weeding out. And that is a shame. I say that because even the worst student can become proficient at something they seem totally uncut for. To me that is the point of life. If we only did what we were good at we'd live in a very dull world.

So basically what I'm saying is we need to pay teachers as much as we pay those who supply the parts for our B1 bombers. And we need double the number of teachers.

I think every person has the capacity to learn anything. What I hear you saying is we just don't want to spend the time on everyone.

I went to college when I was 30. I chose mechanical engineering. What I found was I understood the principals of almost all of what I studied. But I got bogged down in the details. When an author made that Socratic leap from one part of the solution to the other part and used the word "clearly", it was most often anything but clear. And I spent my evenings trying to figure out what they left out. Had someone just given me a tiny bit of help, I would have made it through much easier, and been a better engineer. As a result, I wasted more time than had they just spelled it out without leaving empty voids for me to figure out. I'm studying Shakespear and vibrations at the same time. Good grief, I'm only human.

[jody]

38. Aren't you confusing training with education? I'm familiar military training and it's benefits but

I'm also familiar with military education and recognize their differences.

[Gregorian]

107. Is there a difference? I would like to know.

How else does one learn Kirchoff's law. If I discover it for myself, or if someone tells me about it. If someone tells me about it, is that training? I don't see the difference. Once it's learned, it's knowledge.

If someone had sat me down and explained everything about thermodynamics, I'd have gotten way more out of it than by sitting with a book in my lap, like I did. I have a hard time learning from books. I'm a mechanical type. I learn when I take something apart.

I was interpreting electrocardiograms at 15 years old. I did learn if from a book, mostly. But it took a lot longer than a typical course would have taken. I think we all learn at different rates. Our schools teach one way. And yet there are a multitude of learning types. Or a few.

[jody]

112. "Is there a difference?" Military services say yes although there will be overlap. For example,

military courses train students to repair weapon systems but in contrast war colleges educate students in a variety of topics.

That's not an answer but the military contrast is between training a student to reproduce a set of procedures versus educating students to make decisions in situations perhaps quite different from any other in history.

[Gregorian]

159. I understand that. I think the issue is why we're even learning in the first place.

In war, it's life or death. But where I have an issue is that we treat our education differently in our civilian colleges. I believe our colleges perform more of a weeding out process than one that is aimed toward molding an end result.

In a nutshell, we treat our society in one way, and war another. I think this is a far less subtle problem than people realize. We let students out of school without an education. And we turn those with certain degrees into Prima Donnas. As a result, we have a huge schism that has lead to the society in which we find so many unable to afford health care. At least that is what I think I see.

I think we treat education like a joke. Sort of like voting. And we wonder why we have so much dumbing down.

I lost my train of thought. It had something to do with the role corporatization plays. And how as I graduated from engineering school, the FBI and Exxon, among others, were waiting for us with their arms wide open. It's something like how they drive the schools to find those students who had an easier time learning. I don't know the story behind Einstein flunking math. But I do know that as one who feared probation in school, the valedictorian had nothing but amazement at the designs I created outside of class. We need to nurture those who do not appear to be a bright as the others. My bottom line is that everyone is a genius at something. Now I'm rambling.

[jody]

162. Perhaps not rambling, just enough years of experience to realize there is no simple answer.

Education or training, whatever but IMO society should help each person reach their potential.

At the same time society doesn't have the money to finance students with fantasy expectations of becoming a professional in some specialty for which she/he is not qualified.

[wtmusic]

41. "every person has the capacity to learn anything"

That's sort of equivalent to saying everyone has the same level of intelligence. I don't believe that's the case, and more importantly, a lot of people who do have the "capability" intelligence-wise to learn something just aren't interested in it. They'll never learn it.

[jody]

46. ROFL "every person has the capacity to learn anything" just as every person has the ability to kick

ass with Tiger Woods, Michael Jordan, or other superstar athletes.

[Gregorian]

105. Given a healthy mind, I think it's the environment that has greater impact than innate potential.

I think we do all have the same level of intelligence. But things like fetal alcoholism, abuse, lack of nurturing, all have ways of taking away from the brain's potential.

We don't all have the same hearts. Some have aberrations. I'm not saying everyone can be a Lance Armstrong. But we're all very much the same.

I think I'm saying we're more the same than we are different.

And then, of course, I don't really know.

[patrice]

154. I agree that MOST of the individual potentials are more nearly alike than they are different, but

that similarity does not mean that there are NO differences, nor that those small differences are not significant in important ways, under certain conditions.

And of course, it does imply that those fewer individual potentials, which are not included in that MOST, are more different from than they are alike the MOST, but, again, there's no way of knowing if those differences are significant or not in important ways, under certain circumstances.

Simply put, there could be conditions under which understanding subject:pronoun agreement could result in communication clarities that ultimately result in a more timely cure for ________________ which then saves the life of someone(s) who in turn create(s) other vital solutions. And there could be conditions under which the rare ability to do exotic calculi contributes nothing to the mediation needed to prevent a 3rd World War.

[sendero]

156. Conversely..

... I'm amazed at the number of people who conflate education with intelligence. Having worked with a broad spectrum of people I can say without reservation that advanced degrees MIGHT be a reasonable indicator of perseverance, they are useless at predicting intelligence.

[Swamp Rat]

44. I failed math in HS repeatedly and standardized tests, yet

I am a scientist working on my 4th graduate degree.

Under the system suggested in the OP (which is used in other countries), I would be relegated to a dark, dismal life with no chance for a decent education or upward mobility.

My family immigrated to the USA in order to have a chance at getting a higher education because it was not possible in Europe or South America due to this very type of elitist system, as well as age discrimination.

[jody]

48. Come on Swamp Rat, if you are "working on my 4th graduate degree" you know your post is a special

case and your post is an unsupported assertion, that is if you passed a Ph.D. course in research methods such as I taught many times.

[Swamp Rat]

62. I do not believe I am a "special case."

There are several unsupported assertions on this thread.

As for research methods courses, I do not see the relevance, though I will appreciate any further explanation you may provide.

[jody]

75. ROFL at your assertion "I do not believe I am a 'special case.'" Did you take a graduate course in

research methods for any of your four graduate degrees?

[Swamp Rat]

82. Ok, I am glad you had a laugh, but I did not "assert" anything.

As you quoted me, I said "I believe" I am not a special case. The reason I believe this is because I know several immigrants and Americans with similar situations.

Why is "research methods courses" germane to this discussion? :shrug:

[jody]

91. You cited yourself for an assertion and that's a special case "Under the system suggested in the OP

(which is used in other countries), I would be relegated to a dark, dismal life with no chance for a decent education or upward mobility."

Surely you know after four graduate degrees what is a "special case", don't you?

The OP was about "Science or Engineering or Math" not some other degree.

[Swamp Rat]

95. LOL!

Funny. :D

"Surely you know after four graduate degrees what is a "special case", don't you?" - Red Herring.

"The OP was about "Science or Engineering or Math" not some other degree." - Are you claiming this topic is closed to discussion of other degree programs?

Again, why is "research methods courses" germane to this discussion? Furthermore, why is your assertion that you "taught many times" research methods courses pertinent? :shrug:

[jody]

100. Happy New Year and goodbye. n/t

[Swamp Rat]

104. Aw! I thought you were going to answer my question why you brought up 'research methods courses'!

:( It could have been very interesting, since I am in expert in research methods! :D

Happy New Year to you too! :hi:

[neverforget]

149. Well played!

[Name removed]

84. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[patrice]

54. So, you dispute that there are people who, in fact, cannot understand certain things?

Or, as little as you know about OP, you have decided that s/he has never done enough for his/her problem students?

[FreakinDJ]

65. You deny there are Teachers that need to be retired ASAP

Seen it mostly in High school but even at College level

[patrice]

68. I did not say that. You are assuming that OP is one such, without any evidence other than his/her

post.

[patrice]

74. Teachers are the official scapegoats for everything that everyone else does wrong, especially

parents. Teachers are supposed to be everything to everyone of 25+ kids per 50 minutes, 6 times a day and they're supposed to do all of it perfectly, OR ELSE, and with little or no backing of any kind from anyone.

That does not mean that there are not teacher who SHOULD be OUT of the field, or who should never have entered it in the first place, but just let us do honestly recognize what their concrete situation is.

[FreakinDJ]

77. I agree with you

But after raising a son tested at Mensa Level Intelligence in the 5th grade I can give you a list a teachers who felt threatened by his intellect and responded rather poorly when he challenged him.

And at 15years old testing his boundaries is what he is supposed to be doing

[patrice]

96. I know a thing or two about that. I taught AP Psychology for 5 years to kids

taking full-boat AP schedules and that means including AP Chemistry, or Calculus, some of them. My own impression when I finally got to college was, "Why in heck did I have to wait so long to get to do this stuff?"

Especially since my curriculum was psychology, which I taught as science, I was quite used to being challenged by my students and, in fact, LOVED it and looked forward to them every day. The college board for psychology is scored 1/3 on writing; this gave us many opportunities for discussion and debate, plus the fact that my students earned 1/4 of their overall grade from participation.

My family also has its share of younger ones who test off of the scales. I am proud and somewhat humbled to say, that I am one of their favorite aunts, because I accept and participate, in their explorations. One of them is a freaky bright professional computer scientist now, who is also, and I say this with great caution, a true poet.

Yes, there are some bad teachers around. I am not certain it is that they can't deal with the challenge that some students pose, but perhaps more of an issue that they have never given themselves permission to think certain things, so they have not developed the skills and processes for how to do that.

[jody]

78. A close friend and school principal assigns students to classes starting with the top students, one

by one to each teacher so each teacher in theory has an equal mix of students based on potential.

IMO that requires each teacher to teach to the lowest student while hoping the better students will learn the required material on their own.

[FreakinDJ]

85. Not a very good scenario

I agree there should be levels. But know one should be "thrust into them" by the schools.

But schools have been cut and there are no more "Shop Classes". They are simply pushing all students into this uniform "Testing Aptitude", College Prep curriculum

[Odin2005]

52. Many smart people had sucky grades in high school.

Such a system would only allow for conformists and conventional thinkers that do well in the structured authoritarianism of the classroom. People that regurgitate facts but are incapable of thinking for themselves

[MichiganVote]

76. Sorry. We're barely paying for K-12 education these days so no go on the free tuition

Besides, if all goes well, these are career types that make plenty of money to re pay student loans if needed.

[stray cat]

81. Merit system -in India - students get evaluated and those who are at the top get a free ride

Those are serious students

[Tuesday Afternoon]

86. in this country, education is like justice -- one gets as much as one

can afford.....................................

[Edweird]

88. Why not just make it free for everyone regardless of HS GPA?

[Swamp Rat]

90. +1

:thumbsup:

[wtmusic]

94. Realistically - in the US - the low tolerance for paying taxes won't support it.

Education is expensive. In some states (CA and NJ offhand) half of state revenues are devoted to education. And California's public schools are still having budget problems.

[patrice]

97. That's what I think we should do. It would indeed make America stronger!!! nt

[aikoaiko]

89. high school and parents are still selling the lie of "you can be whatever you want to be"

its just not true. It may be a useful lie to a point, but the reality of limitations eventually kicks in.

[wtmusic]

92. Agree, that's ultimately harmful to kids' self-esteem. nt

[patrice]

101. B.I.N.G.O.!!!

[whathehell]

116. In my experience people want to do the things they like..

and they are generally good at what they like.

[aikoaiko]

119. Maybe, or maybe people like what they are good at.

[whathehell]

122. Which ever...Ends up being pretty much the same, don't you think?

[aikoaiko]

142. Not exactly,

I think most people gravitate to what they are good at and then they find the reward in that line of work or activities (not the other way around).

But there are some who "must pursue" certain careers. I'm in a psychology department and I see students who want to be counselors or, worse, clinical psychologists, but they fail the major courses repeatedly. These students want to do psychology and be a psychologist, but they aren't any good at the technical or critical thinking activities.

I watched one young woman retake a class fives times despite several faculty trying to steer her toward a general studies major. Eventually she dropped out. Now she has nothing but a terrible college record and student loan debt all because she believed that she could be what she wanted to be.

These cases are not the majority, but there are really too many.

[Edweird]

153. You can be whatever you want - there just aren't any guarantees you won't suck at it.

The trick is finding a way to enjoy what you have an aptitude for.

[aikoaiko]

157. I agree that one should find a way to be happy with the talents one has.

[1monster]

99. I don't agree with limiting those who want to try. Many high school kids simply are

not mature enough to care about grades and don't know what they want to do with their lives enough to know what subjects they want to cover.

I know of one high school chemistry teacher who is supposed to teach a really tough class. I've heard a couple of middle school science teachers complain that their children (who were honor roll students) were having trouble passing his class. They complained that he was teaching on an upper college level.

And I know that my son put in an absolutely minimal effort for that teacher and he pulled off a final final grade of C. (Now, he is considering a career in pharmacy or pharmacological research and development...

on edit: left out a very important word: trouble

[patrice]

109. These are some of the reasons why America should have lifelong educational opportunities. nt

[1monster]

132. AMEN! Sister! [phone] (etc.)

:)

[patrice]

148. It's really kind of stupid when you think about it: "You're done learning anything" is what the

system says at the end of grade 12, or "You know it all" after college, or graduate school, or post-grad is completed.

That kind of education isn't appropriate to everyone and junior colleges are still too dominated by the conventional model, so there is MUCH that is not available there after 5p or on weekends and there is no serious attempt to integrate older students, let alone to encourage REALLY older students in anything more than the relatively limited, short and highly specialized kinds of things offered by "adult education".

I know it's anathema to Public Education to say so, and I would NEVER abandon Public Education, but think what it would be like if it were run more like a mall or on a schedule like a movie theater, serving whoever shows up. There are a lot of problems associated with this idea that I haven't thought of, but I'm not certain that anything could be much worse than what we are currently doing.

[Name removed]

108. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[UndertheOcean]

110. I am not embarrassed , just suffering from bronchitis

[FreakinDJ]

111. I certainly wondered where you went too

Sorry your not feeling better

[cherokeeprogressive]

113. I'm sorry you're not feeling well and send my best wishes. I still HATE your way of thinking though

Your way of thinking means rich white kids whose parents can afford tutors for them will rule the world. Oh wait... that's already happening. Your way of doing things will simply reinforce what's been happening for decades, if not centuries. It will reverse gains made by generations who have quietly and not so quietly been trying to reverse the trend of white privilege.

I can't support it.

Get well soon.

[jody]

114. I'm a champion of equal education opportunity for all with potential but oppose wasting society's

resources on those without potential.

Thanks UndertheOcean for this thread. :hi:

[cherokeeprogressive]

117. "I'm a champion of equal education opportunity for all"

The fuck you are.

[jody]

128. You intentionally omitted "with potential". Nature endowed some with exceptional intellectual,

artistic, athletic, and other abilities.

I can understand why some may be jealous of people like superstar athletes et al but that's just the way things are.

[cherokeeprogressive]

131. Them that gots gets more. That's all a system like the one you'd like can accomplish.

"Hey John, your high school grades sucked. Trash collection... oops I mean Sanitation Engineer is what you're going to be. Take these gloves and report to your Supervisor in the morning."

"Hey Suzy, good grades! You're going on to higher education, and guess what? It's all going to be FREE!."

Yup. You support a system where them that gots gets more.

I don't.

[jody]

135. You intentionally misrepresent my position. What is your problem? n/t

[cherokeeprogressive]

150. I don't think it's a misrepresentation at ALL. I believe you support a system where

them that gots gets more. Reward intellectual talent with free education while shunting those without the same intellectual talent into low wage jobs.

Sorry, but that's how I see it.

[jody]

152. "without the same intellectual talent" does not mean "low wage jobs". I have several friends with

only high-school degrees who own service businesses and they are millionaires.

On the other hand there's little possibility that those with IQs below 100, that's 50% of the population, will be admitted to medical school even though they are forced into all the special tutoring programs etc. that you seem to espouse.

Society is not to blame if someone is born without exceptional intellectual, artistic, or athletic ability and I don't believe any amount of training or education will correct that condition.

[Pithlet]

155. Here's the thing though.

It appears as though proposals are being made where, rather than individuals directing themselves along these paths, others wish to pigeon hole others along those paths. Whether this is done through strict, hard and fast rules, or through economic incentives, the consequences are less than desirable, to put it lightly. There are many problems with doing this. People suffer greatly when they're incorrectly assessed and/or shuffled along a path not of their choosing. It also tends to foster social and economic inequality. It's much harder to overcome social and economic barriers when people cannot make their own choices to begin with, not to mention the biases that could more than very possibly come into play. People should be allowed to try and fail. We already have systems in place to guide people. We have this little thing called the SAT. Colleges have entrance exams and admissions boards. It's not as if colleges are forced to admit whoever they want.

[Sabriel]

166. Was it "nature"?

Or was it:
--excellent prenatal nutrition
--housing free of lead and other toxins
--adequate postnatal nutrition
--access to good health care
--mental stimulation
--consistent, committed caregivers
--educated parents/caregivers who spoke academic, middle-class English
--freedom from want and worry
--access to reading material presented at appropriate levels
--adequate income
--well-funded schools and consistently strong educators

For some folks, society stacks the deck against nature.

[jody]

168. Believe as you wish but all credible research confirms the contribution of genes to people's ability

[Godhumor]

120. Gee, I believe that those who truly need support should be given every opportunity to succeed

Siphoning money from special needs and "normal" students to entitlement programs for those who believe they have birthed a genuine genius in public schools would be a terrible move.

[Pithlet]

123. And that's exactly what's so objectionable.

Who decides who has that potential? For instance, if there happen to be a lot of Republicans on a board at any one time? How do you think that's going to go? Exactly.

[Brilliantrocket]

144. The race card is so old....

Stop making everything out to be about race... it's getting old. How is ANYTHING the OP said racist? If a student is simply not interested in learning there's nothing to be done. What does that have to do with race? There are plenty of students from every race who are eager to learn and whose grades support their ambitions. In today's youth there's a pervasive anti-intellectual mindset. This probably stems from all the corporate bs we're subjected to ,but that's another story. We shouldn't waste money sending kids who will never succeed to college.

The " Everyone can succeed" mindset is bullshit and you know it. There are students who simply lack either intelligence or drive and there's nothing that can be done about that. Allocating resources to the kids most likely to succeed is not racist. It just makes economic sense. Spending money on kids who ,based on their grades, will likely fail is what doesn't make sense. If the system ends up favoring one race over another then there is a deeper problem that needs to be addressed.

In the end, I feel that giving preference to a B student over a C student is fine. You may say a student is not mature enough to try hard. Maybe you won't like this ,but tough luck. If there is an A student in NEED of financial aid for education , they should receive it. We are concerned with educating those students who are most likely to do well, and on a budget. Students who are motivated are priority #1. On average, an A student will do better in college than a C student , and because of limited funds, this is the main benchmark, along with tests, that we should look at to make a decision. I will of course admit that there are exceptional students who may be in a poor educational setting, this is an issue that needs to be addressed.

Using a completely race blind selection system would produce that highest number of graduates for the lowest price. I don't see how you could argue any other way.

[joshcryer]

115. Here's a thought: let's get rid of the educational institution entirely.

:D

[mahina]

121. Or redesign it around integrated problem solving

rather than ivory tower academic segregation.

[1monster]

136. They are working on that now. Give them another ten years and it will be

done.

Unless we wake up in this country and takes that damned, ignorant about education politicians and corporates (like Bill Gates) out of the process. I wouldn't mind Gates helping, but he wants to drive the train without the slightest knowledge of the subject.

[lumberjack_jeff]

124. Agree.

The country needs more engineers and scientists.

But I'm not sure that HS grades are the best metric, the 100 level classes should do it. Lots of kids screw off when there's nothing at stake. The freshman year of science is free. If you get good enough grades, you can get the tech scholarship.

[cherokeeprogressive]

126. Yeah! Let's give free continuing education to rich white kids whose parents can afford tutors!

Let me know how that works out for everyone else...

[UndertheOcean]

130. So you are saying only white kids are smart enough to get good grades ?

Are you sure "I" am the racist ?

[cherokeeprogressive]

134. How many minority parents can afford tutors?

And I never called you a racist. Did I call you a racist?

Complete this scenario... Let's say I get EXCELLENT grades in an inner city school where the teachers do not give a shit.

What then?

[UndertheOcean]

141. Then you get free college education in the subjects you excelled in . simple.

and tutors are not necessary for good grades , students who need tutors tend to be C students at best.

[Pithlet]

143. So, just a discount then, in other words.

Because no one goes college for just one subject.

Tutors may not be necessary for some, but they can make a difference for many. They certainly are an advantage for those who can afford them.

[UndertheOcean]

145. What discount ?

say you get A+ in Math , A in Physics , but a D in music or a C in History.

Then you can study Engineering or any of the Sciences for free (which includes any minors you are interested in , like history). But it does not make sense for you to major in History AND have the state pay for it.

very simple concept , why do people keep getting confused by it is beyond me.

[Pithlet]

146. Why should'nt they pay if they choose something else?

That's what's hard for me to understand. What I was getting at tongue in cheek was, why pay for those other subjects since you're so focused on subjects they're good at. But I guess it went over your head.

[cherokeeprogressive]

147. And students who GET tutors tend to be children of parents who can afford them.

Pity you can't see that from your ivory tower.

[jwirr]

151. As someone who has always had a perception block in math I understand

what you are saying but I doubt if that kind of law would be upheld in courts. Counselors should talk with students about these things.

[MadHound]

163. Personal experience can be a very narrow view of things,

First of all, a kid getting less than a 3.0 in high school can be due to a number of factors. For instance say you are abused, the last thing on your mind is grades. Same could be said for a number of other common scenarios that high school kids face.

Second of all, you are emphasizing Science, Math and Engineering over other areas of study, why? They aren't the most important subject, for honestly, there really is no subject that is more important than another, they each have value and need in our society.

Third, what ever happened to letting the person decide what path they're going to take? Having seen a number of academic committees in action, I wouldn't trust one to decide the future of anybody, especially an eighteen year old.

Sorry, but your solution will simply cause more problems.

[timtom]

164. I like it.

[Tumbulu]

167. I support the idea. Especially the free part.

And if someone wants to study something not free, that is fine. Perhaps after a 2 yr Junior College as well.

[clyrc]

169. I didn't do well in HS

It was partly because I was sick all the time, with asthma, allergy and stomach problems, partly because I moved around all the time, and I went to 12 schools altogether, 5 of them high schools, partly because I suffered from undiagnosed depression, and partly because I just didn't like the school part of school so much. I wanted to go to college for vague reasons, and of course with my grades I had to start out at a community college, but when I got there I loved it, and I did well. Before I graduated I attended two community colleges, two universities and one college, but I did fairly well and I learned tons and tons and tons of things. I'm so glad I had the opportunity to go to school like I did, and I want that opportunity for other people who may have similar situations to mine. Or for anyone who didn't do so well in HS for any reason, but who wants to continue their education anyway.

[JonLP24]

170. I don't agree at all

Especially the part about assigning fields and making that free while forcing people to pay for other fields of study.

I also don't like the 3.0 or above to enroll in math, etc. idea. There could be a variety of reasons a student may have lower than a 3.0 that aren't related to the ability to receive and understand the information. Also motivations can change. I know I self taught myself a lot of things and I learned far more stuff on my own than I did high school and the primary reason is a motivation to learn stuff. Plus there are many things that I find interesting such as science that I didn't like at all in high school.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

173. Instructors need to be aware of learning modalities.

I learned about this when my daughter was going to a Montessori school.

There are 3 learning modalities: visual, auditory and kinesthetic. Everybody has a primary and secondary mode.

I'm primarily auditory and kinesthetic. I'm a musician. After I learn music visually from sheet music, when I play it's a combination of sound (hitting the right notes) and finger memory (kinesthetic).

My music teacher told me that Arthur Rubinstein had a fabulous visual memory, that he would visualize a piece of music in his mind, and read the notes in his mind. He was a famous pianist.

In college I had to go to class and take notes to learn. Reading the book wouldn't work.

Reading the book was visual. I could read the book and not absorb it.

In class I had to listen to the teacher (auditory) and write down notes (kinesthetic-physical action) and I could learn.

I can flip into visual mode for courses like art and art history.

Montessori education teaches in all three modalities.

People whose primary senses are smell and taste are either perfume blenders or professional chefs.

[Prometheus Bound]

175. Yikes! Sounds like Communist China before it opened up.

Happily things are changing for the better with people not being 'assigned' what they will study.

[fishwax]

177. why not just waive tuition as long as they're making suitable progress in their major?

I don't see the advantage of having fields assigned.