NationStates Jolt Archive

here's a thougth. you are given full reign on how to improve your country's Education system. What would you do?
Would you make the community plan everything?
Would you turn all schools into private schools?
what kind of incentives would you make to encourage kids to learn, and parents to get involved.

would you change the methods of teaching?

what are your ideas on improving your country's Education System?

here's a thougth. you are given full reign on how to improve your country's Education system. What would you do?

Should I be realistic or can I pretend to have unlimited funds?

1. increase teachers' wages to attract more and better people into the profession - these are the people who are moulding our childrens' minds after all and setting up the next generation... only the best is good enough.

2. envelope all private schools into the state system - increase equality of opportunity

3. strengthen existing measures to ensure teaching quality is uniform, and bring all schools to the same capital standard. then raise that standard by investment

4. make the three sciences core subjects for all students until GCSE, as well as maths, critical thinking and philosophy

5. add streams of non-academic, more vocational or productive subjects around the core (such as specific GCSEs in plumbing or architechture for eg)

6. involve parents more in schooling directly - at least have seminars or information packs sent to parents outlining their critical role, perhaps more so than the school's, in their child's psychological and social development. more responsibility needed from some parents...


yeah, i'm assuming i have lots of funds here :P

If I were part of the BC government, I'd appease the teachers. If I were a BC teacher, I would refuse to strike. Whatever I could do to prevent kids from missing class.

I'd completely privatize it.

I'm going to cheat here and mostly just copy over something I wrote on another thread :-)

The main faulty premise I see in the current predominan education systems is that children of similar ages are sufficiently similar that they can be educated in large groups (between 20 and 40 at a time) and still meet their educational needs. "Special Education" exists because this is patently untrue for the extremes of intelligence and abilities.

This premise fails with any child who develops asynchronously. The child who can read at a fifth grade level, is learning calculus, but has trouble sharing her toys is an obvious example. Yes, she's also hypothetical, and exagerrated for effect. You're more likely to see a child who is half a grade ahead in one subject and half a grade behind in another. I would suggest that, with varying margins and subjects, this is true for most children.

In either case, a mass, age-based education plan will have the child struggling in one area while waiting for the mythical average child to catch up in others. The only solution I can see to this while maintaining mass education is eradicating the age-based system and having children either work independently on each subject in the same classroom (as one sees in a Montessori school, I believe) or have the child rotate between different classes for different subjects.

With increased use of computer technology, the former might actually become possible. It's unlikely to be implemented, however, because it is a "redo from start" rather than "tweak here and there to fix" option. The latter is seen in some high schools, and some very rare private schools; it would probably be difficult, developmentally, for small children. Were I to design the ideal system, I would start with five years in a Montessori-like child-directed learning environment, then test the children for placement in skill-based classes regardless of age.

I don't believe that this is particularly financially unrealistic in large cities, though in rural areas in would be fairly difficult. In the latter setting, the classes could be further individualized by using adaptive computer technology. Skill-based classes would still be necessary for co-operative learning, but individualized study software would allow a greater range of skills to be managed in one classroom.

Additionally, at students' or guardians' option, I would offer a national distance education program through the computer. Yes, I would go ahead and GIVE a computer to every school-aged child; it's not likely to be that much more expensive than textbooks, and it really opens up the possibilities for sharing teacher-created materials. For the distance education program, the software would be similar to what is used in classrooms and the curriculum would be directed by the teacher in cooperation with the parents. Live help would be available online or by phone for eight hours per day.

I believe that these school-based and distance education initiatives would allow each student to reach his or her potential while not disadvantaging classmates who might not learn at the same pace.

Free tertiary education! :p

One of the first things is a break before and after every lesson to decrease pro and retro active interference.

I would suggest better teaching and accelerated learning with a wide choice of subjects.

Make a two tier school system based on motivation. The kids who are not motivated and mess around ruin it for the rest so why not fling them into a different school.

Core subjects of English, Maths and the 3 Sciences plus a new 'Morality and Critical thinking' course.

More authority to punish children, detentions do not work.

"Stay for a detention after school"
"err... as if"
"if you don't, you will be excluded."
"just exclude me so I don't have to come here duhhhh"



Edit: Free University, it is stupid not too as for example I saved up money for a future just to lose it all by going to University.

Should I be realistic or can I pretend to have unlimited funds?
if you increase funds, you gotta take away from something else.

Recess every day! All of the day! ROCK ON!

1. High emphasis on the R's.
Readin', Ritin, ritmutic. And Religion, while we're at it.

2. Discipline as THE core-value.
When you walk into your class-room, you will walk in perfect order, following the Teacher.
Any form of backtalk will be punished.
Severely.
Furthermore, infractions of discipline will appear on your rapsheet.
Employers will be interested in noting that a teen had a habit of breaking rules.
They won't be hiring them.

3. No Nonsense!
Out goes anything involving sensitivity.
In goes learning by Rote and Drill.

4. Mandatory school-uniform.
While in school, you are there to learn the approved curriculum.
And not to express yourself.
You are not there as an individual.
You are there as a member of a group being educated.
It's teamwork.
Ain't no 'I' in team.

here's a thougth. you are given full reign on how to improve your country's Education system. What would you do?
Would you make the community plan everything?
Would you turn all schools into private schools?
what kind of incentives would you make to encourage kids to learn, and parents to get involved.

would you change the methods of teaching?

what are your ideas on improving your country's Education System?

Ahem. Well.

-Teachers are often poorly-trained despite certification requirements because certification is based on written tests rather than actual teaching performance. Improved teacher training is needed.

-Class sizes need to be optimalized.

-School counselors need to be better-trained and actually counsel people instead of being scheduling consultants, and peer mentor programs implemented.

-The primary goal of education should not be to impart knowledge, but to foster critical thinking, problem-solving, as well as personal and interpersonal skills.

-Students should be expected to first and foremost act with integrity and responsibility, not just follow the rules.

-There should be regular physical training and fitness courses and tests administered.

Those are just a few of the more important ones I can think of.

Leave no child behind!


kill the stragglers

1. High emphasis on the R's.
Readin', Ritin, ritmutic. And Religion, while we're at it.

I think religion should be seperate from education.

As a side note, I agree that there needs to be more emphasis on writing skills, particularly grammar.

-School counselors need to be better-trained and actually counsel people instead of being scheduling consultants, and peer mentor programs implemented.

Don't I know it :rolleyes:

I think religion should be seperate from education.

As a side note, I agree that there needs to be more emphasis on writing skills, particularly grammar.

Religion should not be part of it, but has to be.

The sad fact is that very few parents can be bothered to give their own children any form of moral education.

I don't mean 'Worship God' with that, I mean with that: 'don't touch other people's stuff, you little ( expletive deleted) '.

Since parents can't be bothered to carry out their obligation, it is up to us to resolve the matter by rote and drill.

Religion should not be part of it, but has to be.

The sad fact is that very few parents can be bothered to give their own children any form of moral education.

I don't mean 'Worship God' with that, I mean with that: 'don't touch other people's stuff, you little ( expletive deleted) '.

Since parents can't be bothered to carry out their obligation, it is up to us to resolve the matter by rote and drill.

I still disagree. There are other ways of teaching moral values then religion. Maybe there should be "apropriate behaviour" classes :p

I don't know that religion necessarily teaches morality anyway. I have come across immoral religious people as often as moral non-religious people.

It is sad that some parents are negligent, but that is something which is very hard to rectify. Maybe parenting classes would be more in order :rolleyes:

1. I still disagree. There are other ways of teaching moral values then religion. Maybe there should be "apropriate behaviour" classes :p

2. I don't know that religion necessarily teaches morality anyway. I have come across immoral religious people as often as moral non-religious people.

3. It is sad that some parents are negligent, but that is something which is very hard to rectify. Maybe parenting classes would be more in order :rolleyes:

1. The others have the decided drawback that they are not about Rote and Drill.

2. *shrug* :fluffle:

3. Ain't gonna work with smackheads and retards.
'Do as you are told' has the nice point that just about 95% of the human race can do it.
You can't order people to think.
You can order people to Shut The Fiddlesticks Up and do as you are told.

1. The others have the decided drawback that they are not about Rote and Drill.

But some of them do have the major advantage that they back up their morals with consistent reasoning, instead of just dictating commandments without revealing the underlying principles.

But some of them do have the major advantage that they back up their morals with consistent reasoning, instead of just dictating commandments without revealing the underlying principles.

Underlying principles are over-rated.

But some of them do have the major advantage that they back up their morals with consistent reasoning, instead of just dictating commandments without revealing the underlying principles.


Irrelevant.
Constistent reasoning has no meaning for those with an IQ below 100.
Education must work for the Retard as well.

You - as a class - seem to ignore that fact all the time!
Most people are quite dimwitted, the opposite of the NSG-crowd.

Underlying principles are over-rated.

If only that were true...

Though I admit most people do not care to think about *why* some things are good or bad and prefer to just do as they are told. So maybe the religious approach would indeed be more efficient to use in education.

If only that were true...

Though I admit most people do not care to think about *why* some things are good or bad and prefer to just do as they are told. So maybe the religious approach would indeed be more efficient to use in education.


I know of a person who refers to his place of employment ( a factory ) as the machine place. Thats where he earns his money.
The place where he loses his money is the machine place too.
It's some slot-machine-parlour.

My point is: many folks cant reason, and since education must work for them as well, education cannot be about reasoning.

Irrelevant.
Constistent reasoning has no meaning for those with an IQ below 100.
Education must work for the Retard as well.
You - as a class - seem to ignore that fact all the time!
Most people are quite dimwitted, the opposite of the NSG-crowd.

Yes, but that means one must either adapt the entire education system to the stupidest participant or provide different levels of education, possibly even tailored personally to the student (aaah, unlimted budget, how I need thee).
I prefer the second option, but do not believe it is wise to tell people completely different things. The "more advanced" people could get more detail and explanation while the "less advanced" just learn the basic commandments - but the two should not be blatantly contradicting eachother.

Firstly, I would scrap AS levels, and revert to the old system of one set of A level examinations.

Secondly, vocational subjects, including ICT, would be classified differently to academic subjects such as English, Latin etc.

The reams of new Labour directives would be scrapped, with lesson plans and restrictive curriculum dispensed with in favour of true academia. Those who fail either their year 6, or year 9, standard assessment tests, would be compelled to attend summer schools, and, in the incident that they failed to achieve a sufficient level, they would be sent to special school.

Teacher's pay would be augmented considerably, whilst Tuition fees would be dispensed with.

Yes, but that means one must either adapt the entire education system to the stupidest participant or provide different levels of education, possibly even tailored personally to the student (aaah, unlimted budget, how I need thee).
I prefer the second option, but do not believe it is wise to tell people completely different things. The "more advanced" people could get more detail and explanation while the "less advanced" just learn the basic commandments - but the two should not be blatantly contradicting eachother.

Budget is limited, the need to provide education for all is imperative, therefor:
Lowest Common Denominator.

Budget is limited, the need to provide education for all is imperative, therefor:
Lowest Common Denominator.

I strongly disagree. Expending millions to allow millions of mediocre students to achieve slightly better levels of mediocrity does not benefit society. Focusing on those students and establishments wherein political and economic leaders will be found allows the nation to develop.

I personally think that to effectavely teach people you do have to cater to their abilites. for instance; I was home educated through most of primary school. when I went in for the last part of P7 (I was 12 for these of you who aren't Scots) I was a year ahead of everybody else in maths. I know this because the textbook we used, I had completed the year before and had gone onto the S1 textbook and had mostly finished that too. During S1 I was given make-work in math ("oh you know this. OK here's another hundred questions of the same thing") and it totally killed my interest in math.
It was also the same with most the science we were taught.
On the other hand, I was behind in the English and language courses and I never did get the point of the English exams.

I truly think that having a "nobody left behind" educational setup is STUPID because there are always people who dont care about their education (neds, chavs, call them what you will) and there are also people who have a gift for particular subjects. Holding the smart people back for those who dont care penalises the smart ones.

So, my conclusion is that the best system would be some sort of system where the people who try get put into hgher classes and get to take their exams earlier.

The point about
Originally Posted by HotRodia

-School counselors need to be better-trained and actually counsel people instead of being scheduling consultants, and peer mentor programs implemented.

is a very good one. I had a bit of a hard time in secondary school and the counciler I had was pretty useless. I discovered if I needed anything done, I should go and talk to the rectorial team (headteacher and deputies) and they would sort it out.

I strongly disagree. Expending millions to allow millions of mediocre students to achieve slightly better levels of mediocrity does not benefit society. Focusing on those students and establishments wherein political and economic leaders will be found allows the nation to develop.


Categoric Imperative vz Utility.

I chose the former, you chose the latter.
I'm sticking to my guns.


Budget is limited, the need to provide education for all is imperative, therefor:
Lowest Common Denominator.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Alma Mater
Yes, but that means one must either adapt the entire education system to the stupidest participant or provide different levels of education, possibly even tailored personally to the student (aaah, unlimted budget, how I need thee).

two words mate:
home education
On the other hand, that would not solve the problem of people not caring about their education. hmmmm...... better solution needed

Categoric Imperative vz Utility.

I chose the former, you chose the latter.
I'm sticking to my guns.


Budget is limited, the need to provide education for all is imperative, therefor:
Lowest Common Denominator.

I commend you. However, justify it in relation to this; why on earth do the millions who will, in all probability, tile bathrooms, drive white vans and pave roads, require a specified degree of academic education? How does it better endow them to fix a pipe?

However, if one removes that financial burden, and focuses upon the progression of those with both the inclination and capacity to study, surely society will be enriched?

I commend you. However, justify it in relation to this; why on earth do the millions who will, in all probability, tile bathrooms, drive white vans and pave roads, require a specified degree of academic education? How does it better endow them to fix a pipe?

However, if one removes that financial burden, and focuses upon the progression of those with both the inclination and capacity to study, surely society will be enriched?


I don't think I've recommended academic education for anyone, so I guess you'll have to fund your own. Unless resources somehow turn up.

I don't think I've recommended academic education for anyone, so I guess you'll have to fund your own. Unless resources somehow turn up.

I use academic in the sense of study of either English or Maths beyond the level required for the average, non-professional job.

here's a thougth. you are given full reign on how to improve your country's Education system. What would you do?
Would you make the community plan everything?
Would you turn all schools into private schools?
what kind of incentives would you make to encourage kids to learn, and parents to get involved.

would you change the methods of teaching?

what are your ideas on improving your country's Education System?
Finish my university education soon and become a German highschool teacher for English & Biology *nods* My plan since I came back from the States and finished German highschool. :D

here's a thougth. you are given full reign on how to improve your country's Education system. What would you do?
Would you make the community plan everything?
Would you turn all schools into private schools?
what kind of incentives would you make to encourage kids to learn, and parents to get involved.

would you change the methods of teaching?

what are your ideas on improving your country's Education System?

The best thing to improve education?
Remove everyone who doesn't want to BE educated. Send them to trade schools so that those who prefer to learn can do so without interference. And those in the trade schools will learn useful things like being a mechanic which will make them loads of money anyhow.

You can lead a kid to larnin', but ya can't make him think.

Next, but this would be a result of removing those who don't want to learn: smaller class size. At a ratio of 34:1, it's difficult to give everyone attention in a 42 minute period. At a ratio of 21:1, or even better 15:1, each student could be called on by name at least twice a period, and all the papers marked could be given a more through going over.

For instance: marking tests. Figure it takes four minutes to throughly read and comment on a paper:

There are 34 students in a class, and a teacher has five classes of thirty four.

It will take 11.3 hours to grade tests. And students want them the next day.

here's a thougth. you are given full reign on how to improve your country's Education system. What would you do?
Would you make the community plan everything?
Would you turn all schools into private schools?
what kind of incentives would you make to encourage kids to learn, and parents to get involved.

would you change the methods of teaching?

what are your ideas on improving your country's Education System?

Most important, thus first priority:

Tier education: Not everyone is 'going all the way' in strictly academic education... so let's just stop pretending they are.

Second: aptitude testing: Not everyone is going to be good at every subject... there should be minimums (i.e. make sure everyone can count their change, in Math, for example)... but test year-on-year for ability, and promote students into appropriate programmes based on that.

Third: make educational availability based on excellence, effort and attainment... rather than on how rich your parents are. The 'top tier' of schools, in a given field, will thus have the best applicants, rather than just the wealthiest.

Fourth: Make education available at ALL levels, and support that policy. Again - based on excellence. Say goodbye to students going to college because 'it's easier than getting a job'... base it on ability.

Fifth: As an adjunct to the third and fourth points - make education 'free' to the level of ability. If someone wants education that is OUTSIDE of their ability, they cn pay for it... but the core education system shouldn't.

So - if 'rich daddy' wants moron son to do advanced courses for a degree he'll never get, he can pay for it. On the other hand... disenfanchised youth X should be educated to whatever level she can manage, IF she has the ability.

Sixth: Make education more realistic... vocational training, work-placement, actual experience. Something to make a qualification MEAN something.

Seventh: Encourage non-standard education. Encourage policies of 'mentoring', where older students coach younger students, for example. This can act to reduce teaching costs, encourage innovation, and highlights those who are going to be the teachers of tomorrow.


I'm sure I'll think of more...

1. Pay teachers more. How the hell can we hope to have the highest standard in education when our teachers are either highly charitable people willing to give up better paying jobs, or people who couldn't get the better jobs? Most teachers fall in the first, but not nearly enough!

2. Make further educational training available to teachers. Teachers should have the ability to get a PHD in a subject of their choice while teaching (after all, we provide education to members of the army, why not to our teachers?). This benefits student AND teachers.

3. Make Tertiary education free to all students who are admitted to colleges. The number of people who are forced to go to community colleges rather than 4 year colleges for financial reasons is shameful and reflects poorly upon the attitude of the US towards intellectuals.

4. Create a seperate track for people inclined to go into trades and arts. With the sole exception of drama students, most artists do not need the majority of High School Education (and that which they do need can be provided on it's own, without the unnecessary). Similarly, people who intend to go into non-academic carreers can go to vocational High Schools rather than spending time on education they have no intention of actually using and no desire to actually have.

5. Allow 11th graders to declare a major. It is absurd to require that a student who intends to major in Political Science in college waste their time in an AP Physics class. Make more specialized classes available to students and provide more flexibility.

All the funds for these programs can come out of the Welfare system, as it will cause a shrink in the number of people who need welfare.

I'd completely privatize it.

Yeh, because the only things of value in this life are things we can attach a dollar figure to and education would be such a profitable business.

here's a thougth. you are given full reign on how to improve your country's Education system. What would you do?
Would you make the community plan everything?
Would you turn all schools into private schools?
what kind of incentives would you make to encourage kids to learn, and parents to get involved.

would you change the methods of teaching?

what are your ideas on improving your country's Education System?


-Higher pay for teachers, and increased benfits, as to draw in better educated people to the field.
-Free education all the way through a 4 year college.
-Putting more resources and money into pre-k programs.
-Focus on Science, math, and social sciences.
-I would get rid of private schools, as to not let the rich snobby kids, have a better chance than people living in the projects.
-Tougher enforcement on truants, and tardies.
-Slightly raise taxes as to better pay for education. What is a few extra dollars a year on taxes, compared to have to pay $100 dollars to goto public schools. With the tax raises, money would also goto providing materials for all, so that no one is left out of any activity.

Thats about it for myself. I would get rid of all this BS standarized testing as well. Thats not teaching anyone anything. its forcing the kids to remember crap, and not how to apply it to what they are doing. Oh I forgot to mention something about vocational programs. There needs to be a definite increase in those as well.

Everyone missed my excellent points. :headbang:

Next, but this would be a result of removing those who don't want to learn: smaller class size. At a ratio of 34:1, it's difficult to give everyone attention in a 42 minute period.

So scrap the 42 minute period :-)

Honestly, if you remove unmotivated students the class sizes will not change much. If you send the unmotivated ones to vocational schools, guess where a bunch of your teachers need to go! It would be difficult to explain to the low-average people why their students deserve less per-capita expenditure than the high-average-and-above ones. Remember that half of the world is below average; that's a lot of votes to throw away.

There's also the possibility that a student may change his or her mind about the importance of education later. Shunting them into separate systems early makes changing stream much more difficult.

If you scrap the 42 minute period, and with it the lockstep mindset, you can teach both scheduling (you need to get -this- much work in -this- selection of subjects done in -this- much time, and I'm not going to ring a silly bell to remind you to switch) and have time to deal individually with each student during the day -- ideally based on the student's needs.

I'll reiterate the financially plausible way to make this possible: use the computer technology we have! Implement the same technology used in Computer Adaptive Testing to make sure that Alban Exiles' math is challenging enough . . . even if it's not what the student at the next desk is doing. (This would have the side effect of eliminating, "Psst. Alban Exiles! What did you get for question 10f?")

Teachers would still have a vital role mentoring and guiding the students but would not have to single-handedly juggle 34 different skill levels at the same time. Many subjects would still have to be hand-graded, but don't you think teachers also get bored by the fifteenth "short answer" paragraph explaining the causes of the second world war or the twentieth map of the school? Implement settings in the software that the teacher can manipulate so that a student can be given more or less challenging critical-thinking requirements, and we might even be able to develop critical thinking skills in students who don't initially present them. Delegating the regurgitatable fact-learning to the computer software would free up the teachers to concentrate on learning and reasoning skills, which are ultimately vital.

Using standardized computer-based software would also eliminate the need for stressful tests; all progress would be duly recorded, and it is actually ridiculous to test a subject and send the message, "Yes! You know everything about fractions!" when in reality fractions can and will get more challenging in the future. Tests are snapshots whereas daily work is video; I submit that daily work will give a more accurate view of a student's progress than a test that can be compromised by a single day's physical or mental state.

My suggestions to improve education.


Ban private schools.

Pour more money into education.

Teach kids things they need to know, not how to pass tests.

Set kids, (Yes it may seem bad but it makes teachers able to stay at one pace and not leave kids behind/teach a child to his/her full potential) for every subject.

Allow kids to chew gum in class. (Scientifically proven to help ;) )

Zero Tolerance for bullying, go as far as to seperate pupils of different fashions as an experiment.

No school uniform.

student unions granted more power.

Cut summer holidays, split into more terms.

One of the first things is a break before and after every lesson to decrease pro and retro active interference.

That is an excellent point, but how would you implement it? Recess, per se, is a ridiculously chaotic mess. Would you extend lesson length to a full day, so students can sleep on it? That would require more depth or integration in each lesson, which might be challenging for some subjects.

Make a two tier school system based on motivation. The kids who are not motivated and mess around ruin it for the rest so why not fling them into a different school.

Because it's hard for them to get out again if they straighten up, and it's wasteful to leave them stuck in a school that no longer challenges them enough.

Also, two tiers would never be enough. How would you deal with asynchronous students?

Core subjects of English, Maths and the 3 Sciences plus a new 'Morality and Critical thinking' course.

I strongly disagree with a "Morality and Critical Thinking" course. Morality and Critical Thinking are not discrete subjects; they should be integrated into every subject, including physical education, plus recess.

English is not a single subject. One has literacy, literature, and composition at the very least. The first level of education should probably emphasise literacy and artihmetic (with integrated morality and critical thinking) since, in a worst-case scenario, those two subjects will allow one to teach oneself the others.

More authority to punish children, detentions do not work.

Some feel that punishment does not work, period. Any chance we could move to a reward-based system? I don't mean something like stickers and toys if you're good, but leveraging privileges and playtime?

Free University

No education is free. Either the taxpayers pay for it, you do so yourself, or you and the taxpayers split the costs.

That said, I do believe that it would be in society's best interests to fund the tertiary education of students who have the aptitude . . . especially since what one could get with a secondary school education when it became publically funded is now only generally available with bachelor's degree.

Allow kids to chew gum in class. (Scientifically proven to help ;) )



Is it really? I have always been banned form chewing gum, especially in spanish class, even in my university spanish classes.

1. High emphasis on the R's.
Readin', Ritin, ritmutic. And Religion, while we're at it.

2. Discipline as THE core-value.
When you walk into your class-room, you will walk in perfect order, following the Teacher.
Any form of backtalk will be punished.
Severely.
Furthermore, infractions of discipline will appear on your rapsheet.
Employers will be interested in noting that a teen had a habit of breaking rules.
They won't be hiring them.

3. No Nonsense!
Out goes anything involving sensitivity.
In goes learning by Rote and Drill.

4. Mandatory school-uniform.
While in school, you are there to learn the approved curriculum.
And not to express yourself.
You are not there as an individual.
You are there as a member of a group being educated.
It's teamwork.
Ain't no 'I' in team.

Gah. I would have run away from your ideal school by a week into the school year. I can't imagine how anyone could really learn much of use in the environment you've described.

As for my ideas on education:

- Like half the posters here have said, pay teachers more! Teaching isn't an easy job by any stretch of the imagination, and warrants a salary large enough to make people who aren't fabulously altruistic consider it.
- Once we have more people willing to teach, decrease class sizes. About 15 students per class tends to be perfect, I think. More than 25 is almost certainly too large.
- Free education through college sounds lovely to me! I'm still paying off student loans, and will be eating ramen noodles and PB&J sandwiches for lunch for years yet because of it. :p
- My pet idea: teach logical reasoning in elementary school. Have kids look at simple valid or invalid syllogisms and figure out why they're valid or invalid. (Eight-year-olds might be scared of the word "syllogism," but I have no doubt that most of them could figure out that there's some problem with "Rubber ducks are yellow. School buses are yellow. Therefore, school buses are rubber ducks.") Encourage kids in general to question why something is or is not true.
- Increase funding for the arts (I'd say "especially music," but I suspect that may just be my own preference coming out) in schools. All of them encourage dedication, a good work ethic, and creative expression, and expose students to life options that they may not otherwise have the opportunity to consider.
- Increase funding and support for gifted and talented programs. In too many places, the only option for a smart kid who actually wants to learn is to transfer to a private school, which may or may not be affordable. Parents shouldn't have to shell out thousands of dollars just so school isn't a complete waste of time for their children.

I'm sure I have more ideas, but those are the ones that spring to mind offhand. :)

Is it really? I have always been banned form chewing gum, especially in spanish class, even in my university spanish classes.

Yep :)

Eating or chewing causes chemicals to be released that increase awareness.

I'd focus on ways to involve the parents on their children's education (shouldn't they do this on free will?) and I'd strive to enhance the rigor and quality of the learning process overall - college teaching included, after all that's where teachers are formed. I'd have to have enough money to employ the teachers necessary to having around 18 student classes and extra help for troubled students.

Well, here's a goody for me because, guess what, I am a teacher! (Physics and Maths)

For the English System- Scrap it. Look to the Scottish system and learn from it. The English system requires legislation to do everything, however the Scottish system is delegated such that the Scottish Executive give broad directives to the Scottish Education Department and they implement it.

The major problem with the Engliish system is that it tries to teach too little of too many subjects. They sit 12-14 GCSE exams (please collect your GCSE Certificate from the dispenser on the toilet wall), so that there is not enough time to teach each subject thoroughly. I have met University students that have a GCSE in English that cannot write a coherent argumentative essay.

Your teachers are too poorly trained.

The Scots system is arranged so that you take English, Maths, 1 Science, 1 Language, 1 Social Science, 1 Technical, 1 Arty subject and 1 other from the five selective areas. This gives breadth and depth to those who wish to be educated.

For the non-academic in Scotland, there should be more vocational courses, which is starting to happen through courses in construction, hairdressing etc.

Tuition fees have been abolished in Scotland, now we just need to return to grants not loans for tertiary education. The grants have seriously stifled people from lower social groups from entering tertiary education.

Thank God for the McCrone Agreement and England, learn from your Northern Neighbours. I was living there and saw how poor the education system was so I returned to Scotland to give my son a better learning experience!

I agree with GNI
I think a close eye should be kept on what is taught to ensure the vast majority actually helps with the sort of work at the end of that stream.

I also agree mostly with KSP
We should pay teachers more - Teachers get paid less because of a market failure where we treat bad teachers as equivalent to god ones because it is hard to tell the difference. We need to put more effort into that. particularly in primary school which is often flooded with people less intelligent in an absolute sense than some of the children.

I’m not sure we can make Tertiary education free - the problem is that you don’t want to have people doing degrees they don’t need - that is a black hole for resources. what you could do is pay people to do the degrees that are good for society (as some countries do for doctors, I would add engineering biotech and a few others - probably some trades depending on the demand).

Gah. I would have run away from your ideal school by a week into the school year. I can't imagine how anyone could really learn much of use in the environment you've described.

I think the issue is a definitional one. What is "of use"? A lowest common denominator rote-and-rules approach will result in a population that is easily ruled, but tends to discourage the development of leaders. If one wants a stable dictatorship, this would be very much "of use".

Yep :)

Eating or chewing causes chemicals to be released that increase awareness.


Ill have to remember that for Span 327. :D

That is an excellent point, but how would you implement it? Recess, per se, is a ridiculously chaotic mess. Would you extend lesson length to a full day, so students can sleep on it? That would require more depth or integration in each lesson, which might be challenging for some subjects.

I know recess itself it chaotic, but I think it is best to have breaks even if organised cool down or something.


Because it's hard for them to get out again if they straighten up, and it's wasteful to leave them stuck in a school that no longer challenges them enough.

I know, always a difficult issue. The issue here is that lots of people generally don't care for education. So they just turn up and go home because they are forced to by law. If you speak to the average girl she mentioned about "getting it up the duff" to live in a council house and benefits money. I believe people who want to learn should and not held back. People who are unmotivated and uncaring should be allowed not to bother with it. I don't nessecary mean seperate schools but I think if you hated RE for example, you got a choice to drop/change it. (Except for core subjects.)

Also, two tiers would never be enough. How would you deal with asynchronous students?

What I said above. Actually, I think there is a school like that in Britain based on the humanistic principles of learning.

I strongly disagree with a "Morality and Critical Thinking" course. Morality and Critical Thinking are not discrete subjects; they should be integrated into every subject, including physical education, plus recess.

Yes, but morality and critical thinking are skills to learn. Seperate class to cover these will improve awareness and understanding skills of those who take part. Critical thinking is obviously the breaking down of arguments and should base morality on Kohlberg's points. Naturally people will use their skills in their other subjects.

English is not a single subject. One has literacy, literature, and composition at the very least. The first level of education should probably emphasise literacy and artihmetic (with integrated morality and critical thinking) since, in a worst-case scenario, those two subjects will allow one to teach oneself the others.

I agree, I think the schools at an early age concentrate on the skills which then can be applied later. Emphasis on literacy teaching how to use the language and being able to make calculations or know how to get the answer.

Some feel that punishment does not work, period. Any chance we could move to a reward-based system? I don't mean something like stickers and toys if you're good, but leveraging privileges and playtime?

Skinner's behaviour modification?



No education is free. Either the taxpayers pay for it, you do so yourself, or you and the taxpayers split the costs.

Cut military budget and funnel the money from that into education? Yes, the taxpayers pay for it.

That said, I do believe that it would be in society's best interests to fund the tertiary education of students who have the aptitude . . . especially since what one could get with a secondary school education when it became publically funded is now only generally available with bachelor's degree.

I shouldn't have to spend my life savings on affording university. :(

I think the issue is a definitional one. What is "of use"? A lowest common denominator rote-and-rules approach will result in a population that is easily ruled, but tends to discourage the development of leaders. If one wants a stable dictatorship, this would be very much "of use".

Fair enough. I guess I just want children to grow up to be people rather than sheep. :)

-chewing gum-
Yep :)

Eating or chewing causes chemicals to be released that increase awareness.

And makes school more expensive as you are covered in the stuff.

I know, always a difficult issue. The issue here is that lots of people generally don't care for education. So they just turn up and go home because they are forced to by law. If you speak to the average girl she mentioned about "getting it up the duff" to live in a council house and benefits money. I believe people who want to learn should and not held back. People who are unmotivated and uncaring should be allowed not to bother with it. I don't nessecary mean seperate schools but I think if you hated RE for example, you got a choice to drop/change it.

Assuming that RE maps to Physical and Health Education . . . I would have loved to drop it. I found away around it in high school. I'm not at all sure that this was best for me, though. A modified course geared to my skill levels and interests would probably have been better. (To this day, though, I have panic attacks if required to play volleyball. This is not a success of the physical education courses I studied; the goal of such courses should be to encourage an active lifestyle in adults by teaching the children skills and enjoyment of those skills. Health education, including comprehensive sex education, is also advantageous to society; it empowers people to keep themselves safe and healthy, reducing a potential drain on the healthcare system.)

Yes, but morality and critical thinking are skills to learn. Seperate class to cover these will improve awareness and understanding skills of those who take part. Critical thinking is obviously the breaking down of arguments and should base morality on Kohlberg's points. Naturally people will use their skills in their other subjects.

It's interesting that you bring up Kohlberg; different levels of morality, by his system, would result in vastly different choices being made. Do you expect to be able to set a "common" morality level for each grade? Remember that he claims one can only understand moral reasoning one step above one's own.

Skinner's behaviour modification?

With fewer electric shocks :-)

Yes, though; operant conditioning in general can have some fairly amazing results. There are limits to how much one can manipulate primary reinforcers (such as food) in a classroom environment, though. I suppose that's the main draw of punishment; while finding motivators can be tricky, finding aversives is fairly easy.

Cut military budget and funnel the money from that into education? Yes, the taxpayers pay for it.

As long as it's in the taxpayer's best interests to pay for it. Paying for me to go to university would serve the taxpayer well; paying for my blue-collar-idealizing brother to do so would have been wasteful.

I shouldn't have to spend my life savings on affording university. :(

I shouldn't have no access to jobs that suit my aptitudes because I can't afford university.

I'm going to cheat here and mostly just copy over something I wrote on another thread :-)

The main faulty premise I see in the current predominan education systems is that children of similar ages are sufficiently similar that they can be educated in large groups (between 20 and 40 at a time) and still meet their educational needs. "Special Education" exists because this is patently untrue for the extremes of intelligence and abilities.

This premise fails with any child who develops asynchronously. The child who can read at a fifth grade level, is learning calculus, but has trouble sharing her toys is an obvious example. Yes, she's also hypothetical, and exagerrated for effect. You're more likely to see a child who is half a grade ahead in one subject and half a grade behind in another. I would suggest that, with varying margins and subjects, this is true for most children.

In either case, a mass, age-based education plan will have the child struggling in one area while waiting for the mythical average child to catch up in others. The only solution I can see to this while maintaining mass education is eradicating the age-based system and having children either work independently on each subject in the same classroom (as one sees in a Montessori school, I believe) or have the child rotate between different classes for different subjects.

With increased use of computer technology, the former might actually become possible. It's unlikely to be implemented, however, because it is a "redo from start" rather than "tweak here and there to fix" option. The latter is seen in some high schools, and some very rare private schools; it would probably be difficult, developmentally, for small children. Were I to design the ideal system, I would start with five years in a Montessori-like child-directed learning environment, then test the children for placement in skill-based classes regardless of age.

I don't believe that this is particularly financially unrealistic in large cities, though in rural areas in would be fairly difficult. In the latter setting, the classes could be further individualized by using adaptive computer technology. Skill-based classes would still be necessary for co-operative learning, but individualized study software would allow a greater range of skills to be managed in one classroom.

Additionally, at students' or guardians' option, I would offer a national distance education program through the computer. Yes, I would go ahead and GIVE a computer to every school-aged child; it's not likely to be that much more expensive than textbooks, and it really opens up the possibilities for sharing teacher-created materials. For the distance education program, the software would be similar to what is used in classrooms and the curriculum would be directed by the teacher in cooperation with the parents. Live help would be available online or by phone for eight hours per day.

I believe that these school-based and distance education initiatives would allow each student to reach his or her potential while not disadvantaging classmates who might not learn at the same pace.


Awesome, Awesome, Awesome. I love this post. I intend to send my children to Montessori schools. My neice goes to one and it is wonderful. I also think that voutures (why can't I spell?) are an extremely valid idea. If you look at what is being spent per student in the worst school districts, it is more than enough to pay tuition at a good private school. Throwing more money at the problem is not going to fix it. You have to find the root of the problem and address that.

Skinner's behaviour modification?

Behaviour modification with an emphasis on rewards and shaping desirable behaviours. http://boston.com/news/daily/15/school_report.pdf has an excellent example of Skinner's behaviour modification being implemented very, very wrongly.