Wanderer78 wrote: » as you can see, from even your own post above, our educational system largely fails these different types of minds, and methods of thinking, particularly at the earlier stages, our educational system is academically biased, from primary level onwards. if your mind is not academically wired, you may forget about it! you ll probably spend your time chasing your tail within the system, eventually getting fired out, thinking, you re simply too stupid, this is wrong! society needs all sorts of differently wired minds, from academically, to trades, to creative, to this, to that, but our system doesnt facilitate these alternatives very well, if at all. dramatic change is urgently needed, but are we now willing to step into that world!
TheBlackPill wrote: » I just the listed the multiple alternative to the academic track in my last post, referencing the trades. If one is pursuing an academic course , not having the mind/basic skills to do the course, and struggling, it is not the system's fault as there are plenty of alernative, ie trades, LCVP LCAPs, post leaving cert courses, social care courses, beautician/hair dressing training, on the job training. The fault lies with the student and the parents
Wanderer78 wrote: » strongly disagree, again, our system prioritises academia from day one of a person entering the system, until they can no longer maintain their existence in it, regularly until secondary level, sometimes third level, this is a serious system design fault. the alternatives you mentioned, are poorly facilitated, and sometimes not included at all, particularly at the earlier stages of our system, primarily primary and secondary levels.
TheBlackPill wrote: » I disagree too. The supports in the system now are huge. There is a huge cultural cachet with academics and strong parental pushes in that direction, the system cannot be held responsible on this. Personally i would prefer my child to pursue a skilled trade rather than a "university " course they are not suited too
Wanderer78 wrote: » again, i largely disagree, talk to parents who have kids currently in the system, who may have complex disorders such as learning disabilities, developmental disorders, etc etc and you ll see something disturbing occurring. yes, we are becoming more knowledgeable in such issues, but we re ham fisting this knowledge into our ancient system, which is leading to serious problems after the fact, and is in fact exasperating many peoples actual needs. design a system with such serious flaws, and it will create flawed thinking and behavior from within and externally, parents behavior's etc. i would encourage a person to pursue a career that actually suits their personality and abilities, whether thats academically or otherwise, but the trades are not truly represented in our system, and its a critical societal need, this is currently very evident, as we re experiencing a major shortage in many trades
TheBlackPill wrote: » I agree there are big issues with learning supports for the cases you list above. But for 95% of the population the system provides the goods fairly. one cannot condemn the whole system because of poorer service for the outliers.
Wanderer78 wrote: » our system is far from fair, it only truly promotes a typical type of brain, and punishes those that do not have this type of mind, it has become one big joint competition, that ultimately fails everyone
Treppen wrote: » The leaving cert - 3rd level progression is only one option. I sincerely doubt everyone coming out of 3rd level has the same typical type of brain! Believe it or not some people don't fail coming out of 3rd level, they actually get a career and do quite well! It's the media that hype it up every year and wind up the parents. Plus the fact that other alternative programs are grossly underfunded. No need to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Wanderer78 wrote: » ... but the question is, is it truly working for all? again, drop out rates are relatively high, across many sectors of our system, including ones you outlined? many leave our system, even after third level, very poorly prepared for adulthood and the workforce. who exactly is our system truly working for?
rainbowtrout wrote: » Do you not think there is some parental responsibility in all of this? Every time I hear something in the media about problems with the youth of today or millennial adults etc, the stock answer is 'why isn't this being taught in schools?' and I wonder just how much people actually expect of schools today. If we are to spend our time teaching life skills to students, we will have to ditch a number of subjects. You can't have it both ways. There are plenty of things that prepare someone for adulthood that they should be learning at home.
c_f_p99 wrote: » To be honest, the biggest problem with the system is that there aren't enough advanced options for LC students. LC subjects are incredibly outdated and are incredibly far removed from how the subjects are taught in 3rd level. I'm just going into 1st year college Engineering and already I can see just how poorly the LC prepares students for the practical aspects of science such as labs and how low the standard of Maths is here. In the US, they have a nice system where their advanced courses (AP) are kept in line with what's taught at college over there, meaning that they can effectively skip over some introductory classes due to high AP grades. There is no reason why we can't implement a system like that for LC HL subjects; it's far more efficient than forcing everyone into the same courses. I also think it's necessary to introduce a "Further Maths" LC subject as we greatly lack advanced Maths in secondary school compared to the UK (they have Further Maths which makes LC look like a pisstake), France (the Science stream has a lot of advanced Maths) and even the US (a lot of high schools offer Linear Algebra over there!). We have a good base level of Maths (Ordinary Level isn't that easy and of a higher standard compared to the base level of those countries) but HL is barely harder. My proposal is to greatly increase the difficulty of all HL subjects or introduce Advanced HL subjects (or whatever). The latest PISA report even indicated that there are far less "gifted" people in Ireland than in other European and American countries so it's clearly something that needs to be done.
rainbowtrout wrote: » Maths used to be more difficult for LC. Particularly calculus. When Project Maths was brought in, a heap of statistics was put into the course at the expense of calculus and I would also say geometry. Maths in college, particularly engineering maths has suffered because students are no longer prepared for those courses. I remember a long experienced maths teacher in my school (since retired) telling me that there were quite a few people on the steering committee for Project Maths whose background was statistics and they were essentially furthering their own interests, because students don't take stats in college unless it's a compulsory module. Under the term of special needs, gifted students would be classed in this area, it's not just students with learning difficulties. And while students with learning difficulties quite rightly get the extra help through resource classes, those on the upper end who are more advanced don't get anything extra to push or challenge them. DES probably work off the basis that they will sort themselves out and their parents will pay for extra tuition or courses etc. It would make an interesting test case. I would say personally that the maths course was dumbed down to an extent with project maths, and to offer a further maths course that the standard of higher maths would have to be ramped up again. But I would also say that this has to start at grass roots level, i.e. primary school. There is far too much reliance on calculators which means students no longer do calculations in their head automatically, and I'd be a big believer in knowing the basics (even if that means a certain amount of rote learning) like times tables, so students are freed up to think about more complex problems. I have to wait more and more for students in class to do the basic arithmetic before we can actually tackle the bones of the problem. Career prospects are also an issue. Look at any thread recently on the Teaching forum. Before long there is an influx of non-teachers posting attacking teachers. It's popular to attack teachers for their 'cushy jobs', when the reality is that it can be hard to secure hours of their own, let alone full time hours. If you want good maths teachers in schools (as well as other subjects) then you have to provide proper career prospects, not some bitty part time contract where they are expected to be grateful for getting anything at all, the best will head to the private sector where they will do well with a maths degree. On the matter of further maths in the UK, given that many take between 2-4 A Levels, their courses are going to be more advanced as they are not as thinly spread as a student doing 7 subjects, plus all sorts of random stuff like religion.
Wanderer78 wrote: » you will find, one of the main default responses in these type of arguments is, 'personal responsibility', its effectively a cope out from not accepting serious systematic failure, of meeting peoples actual needs. our educational system was originally designed many decades ago, when single income households was the norm, this is far from the norm now, our educational system doesnt reflect this major socialtal change at all, we ve just ham fisted some changes here and there, but the system is largely the same in its fundamentals. the main reason why parents arent showing these critical life skills to their kids is the fact, theyre probably running around pulling their hair out, trying to make sure the mortgage gets paid at the end of the month, financialization of our economies is now failing a large proportion of people, probably everyone at this stage. it makes every bit of sense to introduce these critical life skills into our educational system, a lot of what we teach is largely unless when entering adulthood anyway. we could easily have both, cut down on the amount thought of the other subjects, introduce the other topics, which are probably more important for adulthood anyway, and would probably prepare these folks better for the workforce
rainbowtrout wrote: » In the last few years I've encountered students who couldn't put a duvet cover on a duvet, didn't know how to light a fire, don't know how to light a match (surprisingly common), wash dishes, cook very basic meals.... the list goes on and on. I'm not going to be getting hot and bothered about teaching whatever you think are critical life skills to students, if their parents can't be bothered to teach them extremely basic life skills. I trained to be a science teacher, not a substitute parent. And no matter how busy you think parents are 'running around pulling their hair out trying to make sure the mortgage gets paid at the end of the month', their kids don't have these skills because the parents are doing absolutely everything for them. So clearly they do have the time.
Wanderer78 wrote: » whos asking you to do it, you re clearly not the person to teach them this, you re clearly the person to teach science, and science related subject matters! again, mammy and daddy are probably pulling their hair out, trying to make sure the mortgage/rent is covered for the month! wow, and this is all coming from a teacher!
rainbowtrout wrote: » Well you're expecting to be done in the education system, so that would be teachers presumably??? Repeating a point about paying the mortgage doesn't make it true. A huge number of the kids I encounter everyday have everything done for them at home, they don't have to lift a finger. I can have that opinion and be a teacher at the same time.
TheBlackPill wrote: » Student resiliance and competance at 3rd level has fallen through the floor over the last decade,strangely mirroring the attitude the school should teach it not the parent.
Wanderer78 wrote: » ideally yes, but it doesnt necessarily have to be ..and you wonder why some people think, some public sector workers dont relate to some private sector workers! im sorry to brake it to you, but this is in fact our reality, again, this is a relatively new development in society, i.e. more than one income families, this is our currently reality for many, possibly most, and our educational system has changed to reflect this critical social change. are parents feeling guilty for their kids, for not being their for them, and compensate by doing things for them, in which they should being doing themselves? what i mean is, im alarmed that a teacher cannot see these possibilities, when in fact ive had indebt discussions with mental health professionals, some who inwhich interact regularly with our educational system, who more or less agree with me, again, im not asking you to do more, im asking the system to do more
rainbowtrout wrote: » Yes you are. If you want the education system to provide life skills to students, then it is teachers who will have to do it. Parents choose to have kids, they are ultimately responsible for raising them. There are still a cohort of parents who manage to instill life skills in their children and accept no nonsense. Lots choose the other. I'm not picking up the slack for mollycoddled children who are not used to being told no. Amazing that you manage to get a dig in about public sector workers into that, like PS workers don't have kids either, or have two working parents in their households. Really it just seems to be a thinly veiled dig at the public service when it comes down to it.
Wanderer78 wrote: » once again, what are the external factors most likely causing this, and please dont default to' 'personal responsibility'?
TheBlackPill wrote: » Parental responsibility
Wanderer78 wrote: » but i am not, this conversation is actually becoming somewhat disturbing now, again, im asking an educational system to teach these skills, not you personally, you are only one segment of a system, you arent a whole system., you are a part of the system, and a critical part at that. again, is there a disconnect between some public sector workers occurring and some private sector workers? im not having a dig, i come from a family of public sector workers, i still have family working in the public sector, theyre actually teachers, and they work damn hard, just like you.
Wanderer78 wrote: » ...i.e. 'personal responsibility', i could go around in circles here with this one folks, may i suggest the work of another fellow educator, noam chomsky, he does an exceptional job of explaining these critical social problems occurring, regarding our educational systems
rainbowtrout wrote: » It’s disingenuous to describe the conversation as disturbing just because people won’t row in with your opinion. If you expect ‘the education system’ to provide these skills, it is teachers who have to provide them. There are no two ways about that.
TheBlackPill wrote: » I am not budging. I am open to new ideas, and i have enough of the linguist turned polemists ideas at this stage of my life, strange i would never consider Chomsky an educator
Wanderer78 wrote: » by any chance do none teachers ever enter the system, to educate students? of course teachers teach, and teachers could of course teach alternative subject matters, again, you re clearly not the person to teach them these alternatives, as your area of knowledge is science:confused he is indeed, hes a professor
TheBlackPill wrote: » The professorship is his side hustle. And yes professors are educators too, providing advanced instruction and supervision to 3rd level students, not teaching these students the basics which they are meant to learn at home eg coping skills, proper attitudes, resilliance, consent(ie how to be a decent person) Even Chompsky would baulk at teaching some of the things you want educators to teach., unless he could use the teaching as a stick to beat America.
Wanderer78 wrote: » his professorship is not a side hustle, im sure he has worked very hard to achieve his successes in academia, you re not exactly painting yourself in glory here, attempting to deride a much respected educator. once again, im not asking you to teach these skills, your chosen element of education is science! ive explained why some students have failed to gain these critical life skills, but you have a refusal to accept this differing opinion, in which i have had professionals confirm my opinion, yes its entirely possible chomsky himself wouldnt be interested in teaching such things, like you, he has other interests
