harri
Junior Member
Posts: 54
|
Post by harri on Jan 15, 2006 12:02:20 GMT -5
Finnish public school system has no similar competition as the Belgian system has, yet Finland took the overall top spot in PISA 2000 and PISA 2003. So I don't think competition is a key factor, though it might be beneficial to a degree.
|
|
|
Post by anodyne on Jan 15, 2006 17:12:54 GMT -5
Yes, but teachers in Finland are higly qualified because of the rigors the state sets for them. Apparently they all have a masters degree. Only 10% of applicants to educational program are admitted. The incompetents get weeded out right off the bat. Also, from what I gather there isn't a strong teacher's union that can hold the students hostage. Seems not to be necessary since teachers are allowed a great amount of freedom, which is fine when they're so highly educated.
|
|
|
Post by nymos on Jan 15, 2006 18:22:22 GMT -5
Interschool competition is by no means necessary to have an effective educational system. And I'm not even sure whether it's implementable in U.S. ----
Here are some basic interdependent problems with the educational system:
Teachers - Many unqualified or incompetent teachers - Unmotivated teachers, partly due to low pay
Students - Little or no respect towards teachers or the teaching profession - Education is not valued - Focus on immediate gratification rather than long-term goals
Parents - Don't instill the value of education in their children - Little or no respect for teachers
the whole bureaucratic system - Believes throwing money at the problem will fix things - Would rather lower standards for students, than address the problems - Unqualified teachers are not fired - other foolish, misguided, counterproductive policies
|
|
|
Post by anodyne on Jan 15, 2006 18:49:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by phrost on Jan 15, 2006 19:02:54 GMT -5
I would incorproate into the list: A better educational systems would help too. More funding to schools as well. More public libraries and funding for more books etc. You get the drift.
|
|
|
Post by anodyne on Jan 15, 2006 19:07:33 GMT -5
Phrost, every decade we see more money getting spent on the school system in the US and the results are worse. The SATs have been dumbed down twice in the past 12 years.
You should see the math books they used in the 1920s and compare them to the ones used now. It's humbling.
|
|
|
Post by alaina on Jan 15, 2006 19:43:44 GMT -5
The SATs have been dumbed down twice in the past 12 years. I wouldn't say that the SAT's have been 'dumbed down.' There was a careful move not to have the test focus more on aptitude and problem solving skills instead of being a straight test of what people learned in high school. Which is an understandable move, if you consider the vastly different amounts of preparation a student has who went to Sheepshead Bay (terrible public highschool in Brooklyn) and the Ross School.
|
|
|
Post by Drooperdoo on Jan 15, 2006 19:54:25 GMT -5
There is no such thing as "average American IQ" because there is no such thing as a genetic American. There are negroes with 85 IQs for an average, whites with 110, and Mexican-Indians with IQs hovering around the 90-range. So when you "average" it out, it comes to about 98-100.
America also has a quarter-of-a-billion population--compared to Belgium and Finland (that both have populations that are less than one US city: New York.) There are literally more people in New York City than in all of Belgium and Finland--combined.
So those factors put the European nations at an advantage--homogenous countries and small population.
* I know that the Belgians will scream, saying that they're diverse, too--now that they have 122 Arabs and 3 Nigerian engineering students. And the Finnish, too--with their aboriginal population of Lapps. But come on: Who are we kidding? --Compared to the United States, these nations are lily-white, with no massive minority groups bringing the averages down. The US has a 12% black rate, and a 12% Hispanic rate [mostly Mexican Indians]. Together that's 24%. Throw in South East Asians (whose IQ-rates hover around the Sub-Saharan African range in contradistinction to Northern Asians) and you get several more percentage-points. So when a European nation manages to get more than 30% minority rate, then you can compare youself to the U.S. Germany's entire Turkish population is like 2% of their total population--and they can't handle it. France has a 2% Arab population, and they're freaking out. Wimps.
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on Jan 15, 2006 19:59:03 GMT -5
Well said.
|
|
|
Post by anodyne on Jan 15, 2006 20:10:02 GMT -5
Good point.
The American school chosen was above average academically compared to the rest of the nation.
|
|
|
Post by nymos on Jan 15, 2006 20:14:58 GMT -5
The SATs have been dumbed down twice in the past 12 years. There was a careful move not to have the test focus more on aptitude and problem solving skills instead of being a straight test of what people learned in high school. Which is an understandable move, if you consider the vastly different amounts of preparation a student has who went to Sheepshead Bay (terrible public highschool in Brooklyn) and the Ross School. Is the "not" supposed to be there? ------------ A good example of the dumbing down effect is the NYS Regents.
|
|
|
Post by alaina on Jan 15, 2006 20:21:28 GMT -5
There was a careful move not to have the test focus more on aptitude and problem solving skills instead of being a straight test of what people learned in high school. Which is an understandable move, if you consider the vastly different amounts of preparation a student has who went to Sheepshead Bay (terrible public highschool in Brooklyn) and the Ross School. Is the "not" supposed to be there? ------------ A good example of the dumbing down effect is the NYS Regents. You are correct, the 'not' is not supposed to be there. As for your last comment, that's simply silly. I make no mistakes in grammar or leave out commas like I see the 'well-learned' people in the 'anthro' section do. Btw, I never took the Regents. I returned to homeschooling after a short stint in public high school. Smart move, I would say, considering where I am now, and where my classmates probably wound up.
|
|
|
Post by stella22 on Jan 15, 2006 20:32:29 GMT -5
Alaina, I've heard some interesting things about home schooling. Is it true that you only are required to study for 2-3 hours a day?
|
|
|
Post by nymos on Jan 15, 2006 20:35:37 GMT -5
Is the "not" supposed to be there? ------------ A good example of the dumbing down effect is the NYS Regents. You are correct, the 'not' is not supposed to be there. As for your last comment, that's simply silly. I make no mistakes in grammar or leave out commas like I see the 'well-learned' people in the 'anthro' section do. Btw, I never took the Regents. I returned to homeschooling after a short stint in public high school. Smart move, I would say, considering where I am now, and where my classmates probably wound up. Alaina, that comment wasn't directed at you. I'm not so prudish and judgmental to insinuate something like that. I was just citing an example for the dumbing down effect. I think NY State Regents is a better example than SAT.
|
|
|
Post by alaina on Jan 15, 2006 20:36:54 GMT -5
Alaina, I've heard some interesting things about home schooling. Is it true that you only are required to study for 2-3 hours a day? NYS had (and still does) ridiculously stringent requirements for their home-schoolers. My mother had to complete a six hour day with us, and submit a portfolio (which they never read) detailing her curriculum. It's silly, IMO, because to homeschool, no one needs all that time. We don't have the distractions that public schools have. A lot of public school time is consumed with discipline and other non- educationally related matters. To fill all the time, my mom made us do fifty math problems from our Saxon Math book a day. When we went to public high school, we were surprised that we had only had fifteen-twenty homework problems for math!
|
|