Total Posts:38|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

How to change the out dated school system

teacheresting
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 2:30:10 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I have read many articles that say that the schooling system is still teaching for an industrial era. An era that no longer exists. I have to say that it does appear to be this way. I have read many critisms about the schooling system, but no many ideas that would change it radically to prepare the children of the future for the times we are living in today.

Alvin Toffler has suggested some good ideas, although a not very practical "yet" in this article.

http://www.eduleadership.org...

I would be interested to read any ideas that you have, the more radical the better.
nummi
Posts: 294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 2:50:59 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Within the current society with its inferior and downright idiotic values it cannot be changed. So much more must be changed as well, not just education.
vbaculum
Posts: 1,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 5:24:31 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 2:30:10 PM, teacheresting wrote:
I have read many articles that say that the schooling system is still teaching for an industrial era. An era that no longer exists. I have to say that it does appear to be this way. I have read many critisms about the schooling system, but no many ideas that would change it radically to prepare the children of the future for the times we are living in today.

Alvin Toffler has suggested some good ideas, although a not very practical "yet" in this article.

http://www.eduleadership.org...

I would be interested to read any ideas that you have, the more radical the better.

I think kids are able to intuit the needs of their society; they are naturally able to discover ways to contribute value to the world assuming they are given proper exposure to it.

For example, when I was in 3rd grade, I had a TRS-80 computer on which I tried to teach myself to program. Even at that age, I understood that computers were powerful and exciting and useful. However, I had no mentor and thus wasn't able to succeed in teaching myself and eventually gave up. If my school had been designed to take into account the self-driven nature of my education needs, I could have majored in computer science during elementory and highschool. As it turned out, I went to a typical government school and graduated without any marketable skills. It took me about a decade before I was able to teach myself programming and get a job in that field. My 'education' and my subsequent deschooling constituted a tremendious waste of time and money.

I think the fundemental problem with traditional elementary and highschools is that they simply are designed to produce people with no marketable skills, and to do so at a tremendious cost to tax payers.

I don't plan on sending my kid to a school. But if there were schools that taught relevent curriculum to students, and allowed those students to be self directed, I would reconsider. I think that's how to correct schools as they are now.

Have you looked into democratic and free school models like Sudbury?
"If you claim to value nonviolence and you consume animal products, you need to rethink your position on nonviolence." - Gary Francione

THE WORLD IS VEGAN! If you want it
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 6:31:43 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Tofffler cares about the format of education, like how many hours, when students begin education, and so forth. It would be nice if there were a lot of flexibility in those matters, but those are at best secondary issues. The big deal is what is taught.

I know exactly what was taught back in "industrial age" schools, since that was when I went to school. They taught reading, writing, basic math, basic science, geography, history, and literature. What of those subjects have been outdated in the post-industrial era? Are students better off by being unburdened by the learning of those skills?

I can see the case for elective subjects. Wood shop is pretty much out and computers are in. Penmanship is arcane; keyboarding is essential.

There is good evidence that, for example, reading comprehension skills have dropped substantially in recent years. So what is supposed to be making up for that?
teacheresting
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2014 2:53:05 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Sudbury schools look very interesting. I like these places where the children get to learn how to think and be autonomous.

A possibility for education in the future is that up until a certain age , lets say end of primary, children should be taught the under lying basics, maths science reading etc so that they have something to base all other knowledge on. After that, at the start of secondary children should be free to study what every they want, like an on going project.

They only need to be instructed on how to find and filter the information that they find. A teacher would help them to guide their studies and find ways in which to work the core skills within the areas that interest each student individually.

For example, a student could spend a year studying photography and using the internet they could almost teach themselves how to do it, a teacher could be on hand to push them in the right directions, and look for ways to include maths, english, history, art, science etc into their project. At the end of the year they could present the project and be evaluated on the work they have done. Every new year they could have the oportunity to study something different or conitune with the subject they are already studying.

In this way, children learn the value of learning, and everything they learn is relevant to them personally and has meaning.

I really believe that nowadays the need to gain as much knowledge as possible out of education is not needed. All the information they will ever need is at their finger tips. They just need to be taught how to find it when they need it.

It would be stupid to memorize a whole dictionary rather than just learn how to use one. Well the same applies to the internet.
PattyG
Posts: 1
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2014 5:42:46 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 2:50:59 PM, nummi wrote:
Within the current society with its inferior and downright idiotic values it cannot be changed. So much more must be changed as well, not just education.

Educationalist are still making kids learn and memorize from books stuff that probably doesn't work anymore and has no scope in the current economy. A lot of students complain that they cannot easily adapt to college academics as the learning gap is far too wide. I think that they should teach students to research at school level and ask them to turn in research papers and do independent study. that is the way, the only way students can learn new things.
Resource: http://www.writingjunction.com...
Value_LLL
Posts: 40
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/9/2014 7:58:28 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
If you look up some videos on YouTube of Sir Ken Robinson, he has some interesting things to say about education. He has quite a few TED talks for those that prefer that outlet. I actually very much enjoy listening to his lectures.
Blade-of-Truth
Posts: 5,025
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/10/2014 9:57:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/9/2014 7:58:28 AM, Value_LLL wrote:
If you look up some videos on YouTube of Sir Ken Robinson, he has some interesting things to say about education. He has quite a few TED talks for those that prefer that outlet. I actually very much enjoy listening to his lectures.

Yes, Sir Ken Robinson also has a brilliant one on RSA Animate! I'll share the link:

It's definitely worth watching.
Debate.org Deputy Vote Moderator
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DDO Voting Guide: http://www.debate.org...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a judge on your debate? Nominate me! http://www.debate.org...
kiryasjoelvillage
Posts: 190
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/11/2014 12:50:51 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 5:24:31 PM, vbaculum wrote:
At 3/3/2014 2:30:10 PM, teacheresting wrote:
I have read many articles that say that the schooling system is still teaching for an industrial era. An era that no longer exists. I have to say that it does appear to be this way. I have read many critisms about the schooling system, but no many ideas that would change it radically to prepare the children of the future for the times we are living in today.

Alvin Toffler has suggested some good ideas, although a not very practical "yet" in this article.

http://www.eduleadership.org...

I would be interested to read any ideas that you have, the more radical the better.

I think kids are able to intuit the needs of their society; they are naturally able to discover ways to contribute value to the world assuming they are given proper exposure to it.

For example, when I was in 3rd grade, I had a TRS-80 computer on which I tried to teach myself to program. Even at that age, I understood that computers were powerful and exciting and useful. However, I had no mentor and thus wasn't able to succeed in teaching myself and eventually gave up. If my school had been designed to take into account the self-driven nature of my education needs, I could have majored in computer science during elementory and highschool. As it turned out, I went to a typical government school and graduated without any marketable skills. It took me about a decade before I was able to teach myself programming and get a job in that field. My 'education' and my subsequent deschooling constituted a tremendious waste of time and money.

I think the fundemental problem with traditional elementary and highschools is that they simply are designed to produce people with no marketable skills, and to do so at a tremendious cost to tax payers.

I don't plan on sending my kid to a school. But if there were schools that taught relevent curriculum to students, and allowed those students to be self directed, I would reconsider. I think that's how to correct schools as they are now.

Have you looked into democratic and free school models like Sudbury?
The most important implementation is the practical knowledge rather than the bookish knowledge.
kiryasjoelvillage
Posts: 190
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2014 1:16:53 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 2:50:59 PM, nummi wrote:
Within the current society with its inferior and downright idiotic values it cannot be changed. So much more must be changed as well, not just education.
The main motive of school education should be implementation of practical knowledge.So the system should be changes rather than exam system it should have other ways to check the intelligence level.
alicejohn
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2015 2:45:12 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
In order to change the outdated school system, the students and curriculum are to be targeted. Students pay online for essay " Irish Essays, which then helps them to change the whole scenario.
alicejohn
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2015 2:46:09 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
In order to change the outdated school system, the students and curriculum are to be targeted. Students pay online for essay " Irish Essays, which then helps them to change the whole scenario. http://www.irishessays.com...
Welfare-Worker
Posts: 1,173
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2015 6:59:26 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
The purpose of schools should be to enable students to be able to learn.
You cannot 'teach them how to learn', you can only guide them.
Fact are useless - meaningless bits of information that dry up and become dust in the wind.
Memorization of book knowledge (facts) has value in that it develops skills of memorization, always handy. The actual information is secondary.
Trying to prepare 15 or 20 year old with living and working skills they will need at age 40 is peeing into the wind - no progress should be expected.
If schools have a purpose, it is to satisfy the needs of an economic society, by preparing individuals to adapt in a changing workplace. The single most important factor in this effort is the teacher-student relationship. Teachers guide students, not systems.
Hospital systems do not cure people, doctors do.
Military systems do not win wars, foot solders do.
Government systems do not protect or serve individuals, civil servant do.
Scientific institutions do not make progress in scientific knowledge, scientists do.
Look at any human activity, and you will see that it is not organizations that matter, it is people.

There have been no significant advances in Philosophy of education since the time of John Dewey in the 1920s-30s. All improvements have been on his bedrock, with educators such as A.S. Neil and John Holt.
Maria Montessori also has her fans, although she approached education from a different prospective, was generally not well received by Neil, Holt, and others. She was a contemporary of Dewey, so those who differ from Dewey are probably fans hers.

Every decade or so some group tries to point out that the methods of 'teaching' are outdated, and need to get modernized. Not the tools mind you, but the basic methods and techniques. they try to reinvent the wheel.
One would think the human mind had made significant evolutionary changes in the last 100 years.
Or would think there have been major changes in language and mathematics - when there have been absolutely none below the University Graduate level.
Mathematics and language skills needed in 2015 are virtually identical to those needed in 1915. And yet the method of instilling these in the minds of students has changed half a dozen times, if not more. It is hard to keep up.

And yet there are still those who want to reinvent the wheel.

I see in Toffler's suggestions many ideas consistent with the Neil and Holt and the open classroom techniques I used in student teaching in 1974.
I agree with Toffler when he says "I'm roughly quoting Microsoft chairman Bill Gates, who said, "We don't need to reform the system; we need to replace the system."

The best way to change outdared schools is to scrap them, and the new system should allow for home schooling as a real, viable option. I am all for public education, and admitting that as a bureaucratic institution it is doomed for failure.

I was disappointed that in the expanded article ( http://www.edutopia.org... ) he never mentioned Dewey, Neil, or Holt, or even Montessori. He seems to be self serving, which is a slight detraction from his ideas.
AnthonyMatthews
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2015 12:45:11 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
The outdated system is already changing thanks to the advancement in e-learning. Online education helps students to be more responsible towards their studies, make their own schedules and promoted self-dependency due to an absence of physical teachers. This mode of education has created students that are more confident and self aware, than ones that follow traditional education systems. You can take a look at one of the best online education course system in Birmingham here: http://www.cob.ac...
aoneassignment
Posts: 1
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2015 5:36:09 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Keeping in mind the end goal to change the old fashioned educational system, the understudies and educational module are to be focused on. Understudies pay online for article Aoneassignment, which then helps them to change the entire situation.
Welfare-Worker
Posts: 1,173
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2015 5:56:08 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/26/2015 12:45:11 AM, AnthonyMatthews wrote:
The outdated system is already changing thanks to the advancement in e-learning. Online education helps students to be more responsible towards their studies, make their own schedules and promoted self-dependency due to an absence of physical teachers. This mode of education has created students that are more confident and self aware, than ones that follow traditional education systems. You can take a look at one of the best online education course system in Birmingham here: http://www.cob.ac...

They need to learn how to learn long before college.
Paper mills that produce diplomas will soon be irrelevant - you heard it here first.
Tobyyoung
Posts: 1
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/28/2015 4:54:08 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I think the major problem lies in the methods of teaching. There is no competition among the students. A healthy competition must be generated for them to gain any interest in the studies. I think the methods of teaching also include live demonstration of things via electronic media. A picture is worth a thousand words and students find it more engaging than mere reading books.
http://www.dissertationfirst.co.uk...
PaulaD
Posts: 1
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/3/2015 3:44:56 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
It would be interesting to know how many people who have commented on here have actually been in a classroom recently. My young children are learning through inquiry using Chromebooks and there is a big focus on being internet savvy. They learn practical skills for the non - internet world, like hand writing and how to actually communicate face to face. They also learn how type and the ins and outs of the internet.
The world in the classroom is changing. I think you have to look around and choose the school who meets your philosophy of teaching.

In my country not all high school students do exams. They have the choice to be assessed via their skills throughout the year or do exams or both. I agree that we do teach many skills that seem unnecessary, but change is coming slowly. It is best to be a part of the solution - like taking on apprentices - than just remembering how it was for you and hoping it is better for the next generation. :)
Harper
Posts: 374
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2015 4:16:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2014 2:30:10 PM, teacheresting wrote:
I would be interested to read any ideas that you have, the more radical the better.
I think that the only mandatory classes should be as follows:
* Language-- pretty straight forward, just learning how to read and write. I think it should be mandatory up to the 4th grade level.
*Basic Math-- Another pretty straight forward subject, just to teach the basic operations and mathematical thinking skills. I think it, too, should only be mandatory up to the 4th grade level.
*Emotional intelligence-- Understanding your own emotions, and how to exert master control over them is something I think is indispensable, especially in our day and age, where businesses and political interests use emotional appeals to manipulate public opinion.
*Logic-- logic stretches into every subject, every corner of a person's life. It's a mystery that they don't teach formal logic, as it teaches you great thinking skills. In this class, I think they should also introduce students to computer programming, not only is it a very pertinent skill for the modern student, it is also relevant as a way of applying logical skills.
*Free Thinking-- This ties into the logic class, but it is different in that it's supposed to teach you to be skeptical, how to use thought experiments, how to catch your own biases when considering subjects, how to think from other perspectives, etc. (I've detailed what I meant by "free thinking" in this forum post: http://www.debate.org...)

The above are mandatory only because they are pertinent to every person's life. They are the most important skills the modern person should be familiar with, everything else should be up to the student. The school's role, then, should be only in providing students the opportunity to learn what they want, so long as they end up with something to show for it. (The video in this link is how school, aside from the mandatory classes I've listed, should be run: http://www.debate.org...)
sophie8
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2015 4:43:34 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I think it is very hard to change school system. I think it has so much drawbacks. But changes require much time.
Essay help service online
PyschoticWiz
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/27/2015 7:19:59 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
In order to change the education system for the better, we must look toward countries that are the forefront of education. Finland, for example is renowned for it's excellence in education and has very differing views from that of the UK and the USA. The UK and USA have quite similar systems in terms of standardised testing and the early age at which children enter the system.

The biggest issue is standardised testing, which in recent years have put pressure on schools/teachers to cater to the exam criteria in their teaching rather than the intellectual stimulation of future generations. In the UK, this was started by Thatcher in the 80s as she attempted to marketise schools and make them more competitive in an attempt to raise standards. It's this focus on raising standards that has had adverse effects on education as there is now so much pressure on pupils to excel in their exams. I think the main reason the education system is now failing is due to the pressure on students to excel in all areas of study rather than in specific areas, as they were in the past. For example, in modern schools there are a handful of 'top-performing' students that do well in all subjects whereas in the past, different students were recognised for their excellence in different subject areas i.e Maths/English.

The education system is extremely elitist in this sense as students who are labelled as 'below average' often find themselves being ignored by the system. The first step toward a fairer and more modern education system is to scrap private education. This in turn would prevent the cycle of deprivation in which the rich continue to gain high status jobs in society such as MPs while the poor are forced to take on the jobs that the rich don't want i.e Bin Men. While society is in need of a varying workforce, the education system should ensure that the workforce are chose based on their intellectual ability and not their economic ability to buy a better education. The comprehensive school system should have done this when the Labour government attempted to create a meritocratic education system however they failed to completely modernise the system and we were left with educational injustices like private schooling. Rich children are in no way more deserving of an education than any other social group.
debatability
Posts: 1,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/30/2015 1:51:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2014 2:30:10 PM, teacheresting wrote:
I have read many articles that say that the schooling system is still teaching for an industrial era. An era that no longer exists. I have to say that it does appear to be this way. I have read many criticisms about the schooling system, but no many ideas that would change it radically to prepare the children of the future for the times we are living in today.


What does teaching for an industrial era actually mean? I feel like the article doesn't do a very good job of specifying exactly what it means to be teaching in an "industrial era." I think there is also such a thing as too much personalization. In elementary school and middle school, many students would choose to opt out of important subjects that they could need later on in life. Even in high school, many students still don't know what they want to do with their lives, and giving them the option to opt out of core subjects like language arts and mathematics would only hurt them in the future.

I think that @thewelfareworker brings up a very good point. Part of school is teaching kids to learn. I took AP World history a year ago and I gained a lot of skills from that class entirely unrelated to history. My teacher made it a rigorous course, causing my reading comprehension and endurance when it comes to studying to drastically increase. Even if a student does not wish to pursue a career in science or history, they will not be negatively impacted by taking such a class. If a middle schooler decides they want to pursue a career in music, and they opt out of other classes that are deemed pointless, they run the risk of majorly regretting their choice. However, if that same student had taken core classes along with working on their music, they would have a back up plan.

Maybe I'm totally misunderstanding what this article is suggesting, but I feel that high schools and middle schools are flexible enough in their current state (at least where I live).

Alvin Toffler has suggested some good ideas, although a not very practical "yet" in this article.

http://www.eduleadership.org...

I would be interested to read any ideas that you have, the more radical the better.
dbatspac
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2015 10:46:24 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
First things first, we shall analyze and make one specific definition about out dated school system. I believe Finland is the best reference to reform our educational system as they did all the counterpart things to their school and students, compare to others countries.

Do you agree?
katie.snappy
Posts: 108
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2015 2:21:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/10/2015 10:46:24 PM, dbatspac wrote:
First things first, we shall analyze and make one specific definition about out dated school system. I believe Finland is the best reference to reform our educational system as they did all the counterpart things to their school and students, compare to others countries.

Do you agree?

I agree 100%. I did a 25+ page research paper comparing Finland and the United States. I also polled 400 students globally (including Finland and the US) and analyzed the results which, not surprisingly, showed that America is failing in preparing students.
hvartika
Posts: 1
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2015 6:54:24 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Antediluvian practices take long time to fade. Once a norm is established, every unit will behave in that manner. Same is the case with the old school system practiced everywhere. If one wants a change, then you can't expect a change in a large scale. One can change the system by adopting an alternative but choosing an alternative is a trickier task as it is not analyzed thoroughly. According to me, e-education is the best education. It reduces cost (to be noted), saves paper and is accessible from the remotest part of the world. Provide everyone with the laptops and internet facility, the scope of education will widen.
katie.snappy
Posts: 108
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2015 8:28:58 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/28/2015 6:54:24 PM, hvartika wrote:
According to me, e-education is the best education. It reduces cost (to be noted), saves paper and is accessible from the remotest part of the world. Provide everyone with the laptops and internet facility, the scope of education will widen.

I agree, but e-education is not realistic in some areas of study (such as lab sciences) and would be difficult to individualize among students. A huge benefit of e-education would be access to the best teachers, so instead of each class having a mediocre teachers, the whole region could have a single, extremely good teacher. Unfortunately, it would be hard to sell because teachers unions have an very strong presence in Washington.
molly6
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/3/2015 11:45:19 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
It is not easy to chane a school system. It requires much time and useful innovations . But there is http://custom-essays-online.com... where you can order original academic papers of superior quality ;)