|
Post by lindaw on Aug 20, 2012 7:30:27 GMT -5
What's changed, according to the consultant, is definitely the amount of pressure put on young, developing brains. Good example is AP classes. Back in the late 70s, early 80s, most school systems would not let a kid take an AP class until senior year and maybe an exceptional kid in junior year. Now these classes are being pushed on kids as early as sophomore year, and according to the consultant, there's a huge body of evidence out there saying that it is of no benefit to anyone but the school itself, and detrimental to the kids. In fact, most colleges do not even care about early APs. Yet the kids are not told this by the school administration, in fact, they are pushed to take APs because it boosts school rankings. They know if the kids found out the truth, they would not take these classes until later; that only the kid pursuing Ivy would opt to take APs earlier (or those forced by their parents). The publics use our kids; there's no doubt about that. The consultant helps separate the myth from reality and lets the kids make important decisions in an informed, much less stressed manner. I don't doubt that a bit. I have argued for a long, long time that schools shouldn't be so focused on college prep. But, our culture has developed this attitude that if a kid doesn't go to college that they are a failure, and that's just flat out crazy. Exactly correct!
|
|
|
Post by Holy Schist on Aug 20, 2012 7:32:38 GMT -5
The 'lax morals' argument is vague and has been made as long as we have a written history of humankind. The myth of the golden age and all that... I wouldn't know if substance abuse is more now than in the past, so I can't argue that point. I'm sure we have more information about it, though, and I assume that more drugs are available to kids than when I was in school. When I was a kid (I'm 47 now), kids started smoking pot in the 7th grade. I remember starting junior high and all of a sudden there were all these 'stoners' (as we used to call them). Alcohol use was much less than pot (pot was cheaper and easier to get for kids), at least until high school and even then, there were rare cases where kids drank alcohol during school hours. Lots of weekend drinking, of course. I heard rumors of cocaine use but never saw anyone use it. My high school was kind of middle class to lower middle class, so most kids probably couldn't afford it. I never heard of anyone doing anything else, with the possible exception of mushrooms or speed, but it certainly wasn't popular. This would have been in the late 70s and early 80s, and I think most of the kids of my generation and where I lived had older siblings or knew older people who had done the hippie thing in the 60s. I grew up close to Berkeley, so there were lots of those people still around (still are!), and I think that for many of us (me, definitely), we made the connection between doing drugs and what it can lead to. What's changed, according to the consultant, is definitely the amount of pressure put on young, developing brains. Good example is AP classes. Back in the late 70s, early 80s, most school systems would not let a kid take an AP class until senior year and maybe an exceptional kid in junior year. Now these classes are being pushed on kids as early as sophomore year, and according to the consultant, there's a huge body of evidence out there saying that it is of no benefit to anyone but the school itself, and detrimental to the kids. In fact, most colleges do not even care about early APs. Yet the kids are not told this by the school administration, in fact, they are pushed to take APs because it boosts school rankings. They know if the kids found out the truth, they would not take these classes until later; that only the kid pursuing Ivy would opt to take APs earlier (or those forced by their parents). The publics use our kids; there's no doubt about that. The consultant helps separate the myth from reality and lets the kids make important decisions in an informed, much less stressed manner. Much of the pushing comes from parents. It's often when there are not enough funds for AP classes. The pushing can also come from parents, teachers and administrations where they want successful kids who can compete with the world. In an era where the public schools have to accept those rejected by the private schools or some who would otherwise be in institutions or jails you still have to try and get some who can make it in the better colleges and universities.
|
|
|
Post by thedude on Aug 20, 2012 7:48:09 GMT -5
What's changed, according to the consultant, is definitely the amount of pressure put on young, developing brains. Good example is AP classes. Back in the late 70s, early 80s, most school systems would not let a kid take an AP class until senior year and maybe an exceptional kid in junior year. Now these classes are being pushed on kids as early as sophomore year, and according to the consultant, there's a huge body of evidence out there saying that it is of no benefit to anyone but the school itself, and detrimental to the kids. In fact, most colleges do not even care about early APs. Yet the kids are not told this by the school administration, in fact, they are pushed to take APs because it boosts school rankings. They know if the kids found out the truth, they would not take these classes until later; that only the kid pursuing Ivy would opt to take APs earlier (or those forced by their parents). The publics use our kids; there's no doubt about that. The consultant helps separate the myth from reality and lets the kids make important decisions in an informed, much less stressed manner. Much of the pushing comes from parents. It's often when there are not enough funds for AP classes. The pushing can also come from parents, teachers and administrations where they want successful kids who can compete with the world. In an era where the public schools have to accept those rejected by the private schools or some who would otherwise be in institutions or jails you still have to try and get some who can make it in the better colleges and universities. I agree that it's not just the school's fault, and that it's our culture's as a whole. Just look at any feel good story over the last couple of decades or so where someone has reformed a troubled high school, and you will ALWAYS see them talking about college acceptance rates. That's what everyone - both schools and the public - have accepted as the gold standard of high school success. And, we all see the stories about how people with college educations earn more money than those who don't. ON AVERAGE, but little emphasis is made on which degrees account for higher earnings because it's not nice to say that an engineer has a much higher income expectation than a religious studies major. Then, we see another story about how college graduates with degrees that aren't in demand are having trouble finding jobs, and how so and so English major is waiting tables, etc. I could go on....
|
|
|
Post by donalgdon on Aug 20, 2012 7:55:45 GMT -5
The degrees are essentially becoming meaningless as the market is glutted with them. What are the skills that cause the successes to rise above the rest? I think the things that create success aren't something that are part of the standard curriculum model. Degrees are a dime a dozen. Quality people are rare.
|
|
|
Post by thedude on Aug 20, 2012 8:17:53 GMT -5
The degrees are essentially becoming meaningless as the market is glutted with them. What are the skills that cause the successes to rise above the rest? I think the things that create success aren't something that are part of the standard curriculum model. Degrees are a dime a dozen. Quality people are rare. I tend to agree, but I would frame it differently. I think what has happened is that there are so many people going to college, that too many of them don't have to excel in their degree in order to graduate. With grade inflation, colleges are doing the same thing that primary schools (meaning K-12) have been doing for years. That's part of the reason they are in those fields in the first place because it's simply easier to BS your way through an English degree than an a degree in Physics. That, in turn, floods the English degree market with marginal talent and then tends to devalue that field, etc. Consequently, we still have bright people excelling in all fields, but we have a lot of others in many of those fields as well. So, I wouldn't say the degrees are meaningless, but in many cases just not as important as they used to be.
|
|
|
Post by donalgdon on Aug 20, 2012 8:24:19 GMT -5
True. Reminds me of a strange story. While I was in college, I took a summer job at a local deli and bagel shop. The dishwasher there was a Russian immigrant named Boris (really). He was sort of a loner and kept to himself, but he was always reading on his breaks. In striking up a conversation, I learned that he actually had a PhD. in physics! Seems that he was having trouble getting his degrees officially recognised in the US, so he took the job.
|
|
|
Post by lindaw on Aug 20, 2012 10:45:05 GMT -5
What's changed, according to the consultant, is definitely the amount of pressure put on young, developing brains. Good example is AP classes. Back in the late 70s, early 80s, most school systems would not let a kid take an AP class until senior year and maybe an exceptional kid in junior year. Now these classes are being pushed on kids as early as sophomore year, and according to the consultant, there's a huge body of evidence out there saying that it is of no benefit to anyone but the school itself, and detrimental to the kids. In fact, most colleges do not even care about early APs. Yet the kids are not told this by the school administration, in fact, they are pushed to take APs because it boosts school rankings. They know if the kids found out the truth, they would not take these classes until later; that only the kid pursuing Ivy would opt to take APs earlier (or those forced by their parents). The publics use our kids; there's no doubt about that. The consultant helps separate the myth from reality and lets the kids make important decisions in an informed, much less stressed manner. Much of the pushing comes from parents. It's often when there are not enough funds for AP classes. The pushing can also come from parents, teachers and administrations where they want successful kids who can compete with the world. In an era where the public schools have to accept those rejected by the private schools or some who would otherwise be in institutions or jails you still have to try and get some who can make it in the better colleges and universities. I've heard the 'pushing comes from the parents' excuse. I call it an excuse because it's the administration's job to keep the parents demands in-line and let the parents decide whether or not to keep their kids in that school. Tons of AP classes does not equal competing in the world, not by a longshot. That's the most quoted falsehood out there. Do you not think private schools accept students kicked out of public schools? My son's school has accepted kids kicked out of publics due to discipline issues, etc. What has happened almost universally is that kid completely turns around. Why? Smaller classes, more interesting subjects, a less-rejecting student body.
|
|
|
Post by lindaw on Aug 20, 2012 10:47:56 GMT -5
The degrees are essentially becoming meaningless as the market is glutted with them. What are the skills that cause the successes to rise above the rest? I think the things that create success aren't something that are part of the standard curriculum model. Degrees are a dime a dozen. Quality people are rare. Which is why colleges are changing their admissions standards. There's a trend away from needing to take the SATs/ACT because colleges are recognizing that high test scores doesn't provide them well-rounded students. Colleges are seeing too many "robots with legs".
|
|
|
Post by Holy Schist on Aug 20, 2012 11:12:18 GMT -5
Much of the pushing comes from parents. It's often when there are not enough funds for AP classes. The pushing can also come from parents, teachers and administrations where they want successful kids who can compete with the world. In an era where the public schools have to accept those rejected by the private schools or some who would otherwise be in institutions or jails you still have to try and get some who can make it in the better colleges and universities. I've heard the 'pushing comes from the parents' excuse. I call it an excuse because it's the administration's job to keep the parents demands in-line and let the parents decide whether or not to keep their kids in that school. Tons of AP classes does not equal competing in the world, not by a longshot. That's the most quoted falsehood out there. Do you not think private schools accept students kicked out of public schools? My son's school has accepted kids kicked out of publics due to discipline issues, etc. What has happened almost universally is that kid completely turns around. Why? Smaller classes, more interesting subjects, a less-rejecting student body. You're flying in the face of your frequent "personal responsibility" theme, and seem unaware of realities most public school districts face. You also have me confused because sometimes you join those who don't want public schools but want them for your own child. Figuring out how to get advanced course work in the school absolutely equates to kids being competitive but you might not see or understand that if you live in a more affluent area or where a nonperforming school has the problem rooted more in who attends vs who teaches. Keep in mind how the spectrum of coursework and where the bell curve is can be very different if a school or district serves blocks of middle or above America vs blocks of Section 8 and high crime. Getting advance coursework is also a mechanism for areas where more private schooling has changed the mix of students. That has worked well for one group of school pairings near us where by middle school one of the areas in the pairing has a high percentage of kids in private school. A lot of the kids from Section 8 areas don't perform regardless but some of them and some bussed in that paring get into the university because of those classes.
|
|
|
Post by Holy Schist on Aug 20, 2012 11:19:44 GMT -5
True. Reminds me of a strange story. While I was in college, I took a summer job at a local deli and bagel shop. The dishwasher there was a Russian immigrant named Boris (really). He was sort of a loner and kept to himself, but he was always reading on his breaks. In striking up a conversation, I learned that he actually had a PhD. in physics! Seems that he was having trouble getting his degrees officially recognised in the US, so he took the job. You don't have to be a Russian immigrant with advanced physics degree to have a problem with employment. A friend who took that path points out that it was his master's degree from the engineering school that made him a good job candidate. He jokes that otherwise his fellow physicists join those like the anthropologists and a few others trying for just a few jobs in academia. If your story dates closer to end of the USSR. the anecdotal evidence and stories from our Russain family members might explain. They point out how they were all engineers and pharmacists trained for the Soviet system and not what we have or had when they arrived.
|
|
|
Post by lindaw on Aug 20, 2012 11:42:14 GMT -5
I've heard the 'pushing comes from the parents' excuse. I call it an excuse because it's the administration's job to keep the parents demands in-line and let the parents decide whether or not to keep their kids in that school. Tons of AP classes does not equal competing in the world, not by a longshot. That's the most quoted falsehood out there. Do you not think private schools accept students kicked out of public schools? My son's school has accepted kids kicked out of publics due to discipline issues, etc. What has happened almost universally is that kid completely turns around. Why? Smaller classes, more interesting subjects, a less-rejecting student body. You're flying in the face of your frequent "personal responsibility" theme, and seem unaware of realities most public school districts face. You also have me confused because sometimes you join those who don't want public schools but want them for your own child. Figuring out how to get advanced course work in the school absolutely equates to kids being competitive but you might not see or understand that if you live in a more affluent area or where a nonperforming school has the problem rooted more in who attends vs who teaches. Keep in mind how the spectrum of coursework and where the bell curve is can be very different if a school or district serves blocks of middle or above America vs blocks of Section 8 and high crime. Getting advance coursework is also a mechanism for areas where more private schooling has changed the mix of students. That has worked well for one group of school pairings near us where by middle school one of the areas in the pairing has a high percentage of kids in private school. A lot of the kids from Section 8 areas don't perform regardless but some of them and some bussed in that paring get into the university because of those classes. Yeah, not really. See the thing about personal responsibility is that you can't push yours on others - you own it. So if a parent has X expectation for their child and pushes on the administration to change for their kid, they are forgetting the responsibility of the administration is to educate all the kids. If you want a tailored program for your kid, then it's your responsibility to switch to a school that provides it or choose to guide your own child so they get the most out of whatever school they are attending. My daughter wants to attend the public. I could force her to attend private but that's not my way of parenting. She's internally driven so I know that she will get good things out of any school system, but given she's chosen public, hiring a consultant will help us work a large system to our advantage. I am not talking about section 8 schools. Those schools, in my opinion, are already lost. Tons of money are poured into them and still little changes. Which is why, as you say, getting them out works. Public school systems have caused their own issues by hiring unions that protect teachers and not students.
|
|
|
Post by blowtorch on Aug 20, 2012 12:04:57 GMT -5
I think way too much emphasis is placed on the college track today. I would like to see a renewed emphasis placed on having the option to pursue more vocational schooling. There are reams of jobs that can't be filled in manufacturing, because no one has the skills, and it would seem that most youngsters don't want to learn them.
For a large percentage of people, college is a waste of time and money, because honestly, the degrees they receive don't translate into a job skill.
|
|
|
Post by naill on Aug 20, 2012 12:54:57 GMT -5
I think way too much emphasis is placed on the college track today. I would like to see a renewed emphasis placed on having the option to pursue more vocational schooling. There are reams of jobs that can't be filled in manufacturing, because no one has the skills, and it would seem that most youngsters don't want to learn them. For a large percentage of people, college is a waste of time and money, because honestly, the degrees they receive don't translate into a job skill. I am more impressed with those with marketable skills who have attended trade schools than the same age group with college degrees. I heard recently that it was a challange to find 22 year olds who knew how to work. This is less likely if you are in trade school I would think.
|
|
|
Post by zenmaster on Aug 20, 2012 13:06:05 GMT -5
I think physicians come out of college with marketable skills.
|
|
|
Post by naill on Aug 20, 2012 13:14:45 GMT -5
I think physicians come out of college with marketable skills. There are no physicans coming out of college. They come out with degrees like everyone else. They go to medical school to study medicine and post graduate intern and residencies to become physicians. Surgical residencies can last 5-7 years in some cases. This is the trade school of medicine.
|
|