School system

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » June 8, 2004, 3:13 pm

These are the stories that should be upsetting us.

History Without History, Spelling Without Spelling

Friday, June 04, 2004

By Joanne Jacobs

American students learn how World War II affected Japanese-Americans, blacks and women, but not much about the actual war, writes Jay Mathews in the Washington Post. Students tend to learn social history but not military history.

Tiffany Charles got a B in history last year at her Montgomery County high school, but she is not sure what year World War II ended. She cannot name a single general or battle, or the man who was president during the most dramatic hours of the 20th century.

Yet the 16-year-old does remember in some detail that many Japanese American families on the West Coast were sent to internment camps. "We talked a lot about those concentration camps," she said.

The Post interviewed 76 teenagers. Two-thirds knew Japanese Americans had been interned during World War II. Only one-third could name a single World War II general; half could name a World War II battle.

Rosie the Riveter has trumped Patton.

Betsy describes how she teaches history to Advanced Placement students.

When I was in school, there was a lot less history. Vietnam was current events. After we "did" World War I, we'd have three days for the Depression, World War II and reviewing for the final. However, our fathers had served in the war, so we knew something about it.

Cutting class, Going to Prom

Students at a Chicago high school were warned they'd have to sit out prom if they let detentions pile up. Fifteen of 180 students ignored the warning. But they went anyhow. From the Chicago Sun-Times:

Jones College Prep Principal Don Fraynd thought he was giving his students a valued lesson in responsibility when he barred 15 seniors who had racked up anywhere from 50 to 300 unserved detentions each from prom.

What he got was a lesson in politics, when the students held a protest, their parents blitzed the Board of Education with complaints, and the board reversed him, allowing the chronically late and class cutters to go to the ball.

"My biggest concern in terms of the reversal is the take-home message for these kids, and for the other kids who have behaved so well," said Fraynd, a first-year principal at the top magnet school.

Students were warned they had to start making up detentions to attend prom. Some did. Others blew off the warning.

"Everybody was upset because they spent all their money getting suits and limos and all of that," said Remon Miller, 18, who said he had 302 after-school detentions and 102 Saturday detentions to serve.

The kid was allowed to ignore 404 detentions! No wonder he thought the warning was meaningless. And, thanks to the school board, he was right.

Cheater Sues

A British plagiarist plans to sue his university for not catching him right away. Michael Gunn, an English major at the University of Kent, admits downloading Internet essays, but claims he wasn’t warned not to plagiarize. He plans to sue the university for negligence.

"If they had pulled me up with my first essay at the beginning and warned me of the problems and consequences, it would be fair enough.

"But all my essays were handed back with good marks and no one spotted it."

Gunn's plagiarism was caught just before he was due to receive his degree. That does sound negligent.

The E-rate Boondoggle

The federal e-rate, which comes from a surtax on phone service, pays to wire schools, closing the "digital divide" between the rich and the poor. It overpays, writes techno-skeptic Todd Oppenheimer in The Nation. The e-rate is a boondoggle that ultimately widens the educational divide, he argues. Paying to maintain technology takes money away from buying “books, science supplies and other classroom necessities.”

And the benefits of technology are mostly hype.

...when business leaders talk about what they need from new recruits, they hardly mention computer skills, which they find they can teach employees relatively easily on their own. Most employers say their priority is what are sometimes called "soft" skills: a deep knowledge base; the ability to listen and communicate; to think critically and imaginatively; to read, write and figure; and many other capabilities that schools are increasingly neglecting. A report from the Information Technology Association of America, which represents a range of companies that use technology, put it this way: "Want to get a job using information technology to solve problems? Know something about the problems that need to be solved."

Poor schools have almost as many computers as rich schools, according to the Education Department. But students aren't learning any more -- especially if their teachers are wasting time trying to get the computers running.

Speling B

"Autochthonous" won the National Spelling Bee for 14-year-old David Tidmarsh of South Bend, Ind. It means indigenous. He'd previously spelled "arete," "sophrosyne," "sumpsimus," and "serpiginous."

Akshay Buddiga, a 13-year-old from Colorado Springs, collapsed on stage, then got up and nailed "alopecoid." That means like a fox. He came in second.

This year's bee was picketed. Seven members of the American Literacy Society carried signs reading: "I'm thru with through," "Spelling shuud be lojical," and "Spell different difrent."

The protesters' complaint: English spelling is illogical. And the national spelling bee only reinforces the crazy spellings that lead to dyslexia, high illiteracy, and harder lives for immigrants.

As Matt Rosenberg says: "Thay hv uh guh poyn. Aftral, solongzwe kenunstan chutha, s'probm?"

Letters

Bryan Dilts of Enola, Pa., writes:

Twelve hours per week of homework is the goal in our high school for seniors, 11 hours for juniors, 10 hours for sophomores and on down to one hour a week for first graders.

It isn't just East Pennsboro high school, it is every high school in our area. Parents support it and kids do the homework.

It has been interesting to watch families move in from outside our county. The kids are initially horrified. Parents panic as they watch their kids struggle with homework for the first time in their lives. Then after three or four months the whole family starts to expect higher performance. Finally the kids and parents start commenting about how much more they are learning. They take pride in how high our standard public school expectations are.

Our college test scores are not extraordinary, but our kids know how to work. Learning to work long and hard will have more effect on their college grades and later success in life than more free time in the evenings.

Alan Kudravy of Hawthorne, Calif., writes:

When parents buy shoes at $250 per foot or Beamers for high school kids, my friend calls it "guilt management.” These parents can't or won't take time out for their kids, so they manage the guilt by sending their kids presents. Oh, I missed Tommy's award ceremony because it was the same day as my weekly golf game. I'll just get him a new car. Gee, why bother having kids?

My daughter, a sophomore, knows one kid who’s owned two cars -- and she doesn’t even have her driver’s license yet.

Joanne Jacobs writes about education and other issues at JoanneJacobs.com. She’s writing a book, Ride the Carrot Salad, about a start-up charter high school in San Jose.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » June 8, 2004, 3:24 pm

maybe Bush shouldn't pull teh funding for "No Child Left Behind" after all.

but regardless i don't believe a word that is printed in the Washington Post. Liberal Media conspiracy, etc...

(actual article if anybody wants to read it http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ar ... y27_2.html . not sure if it is substantatively different from Mid's author's characterization).

Sionistic · Post by **Sionistic** » June 8, 2004, 3:38 pm

I blame funding. With the usual fucking every president/cabinent gives to schools, schools must cut down on things. Now instead of learning about the actual conflict, they learn about the effects of the war, which are more important to know.

Pahreyia · Post by **Pahreyia** » June 8, 2004, 3:53 pm

Sionistic wrote:I blame funding. With the usual fucking every president/cabinent gives to schools, schools must cut down on things. Now instead of learning about the actual conflict, they learn about the effects of the war, which are more important to know.

The sad part is, learning about the actual events and then applying the social reprocussions of that can lead to a much better understanding of both the historical and social changes that have taken place. Unfortunately, that would require a teacher to spend time "Teaching" and for students to "Learn." Which we all know is the exact opposite of what "School" is supposed to be.

Niffoni · Post by **Niffoni** » June 8, 2004, 4:12 pm

Are you suggesting that public school is basically just a holding cell for young people to keep them off of the streets and out of society's hair during the daylight hours, and is not really an institute designed for the imparting of wisdom and preparing kids for the future?!

OMFG! Say it ain't so!!

As if I couldn't have guessed that by having gone through said system

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » June 8, 2004, 4:18 pm

That is why schools need to be held accountable. They need to improve. Also, you have to want to learn as well. You have to have parents at home who emphasize the importance of education. I don't think school is mearley a holding cell. I went through the system as well and learned a lot form my time in public schooling. I, of course, wish I listenined to my parents more and concentrated more while in school, but most of us probably feel the same way.

Aaeamdar · Post by **Aaeamdar** » June 8, 2004, 4:19 pm

Cool, an issue I can be conservative on again. Its been a while.

I'll agree with other posters in this thread and blame the funding. There shouldn't be any. Education is something the private sector can easily handle. You all should let it. It works well in the University system (yes, that system is a mixed Public/Private one - but the best ones are private).

Get the state out of the education system (apart from providing finacial support for the poor), and I think many of these issues you are so upset about would go away.

Most importantly, I wouldn't have to pay for your kids to learn anymore.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » June 8, 2004, 4:35 pm

the financial help for poor schools is a huge part of the problem.

what private company is going to invest in the education of persons in rural North Dakota?

the problem is that both lower income people pay disproportionately more for the education portion of their tax burden than rich people, as well as the fact that rich people's schools are better funded. The proportion of property taxes that go to schools are less in wealthy areas because they don't need to be high (the schools are well funded).

If businesses thought they could make money by funding education don't you think they would have successfully lobbied for it by now? every town in America (just about) has at least a few schools. Every single person is a 'client' at one point in their life.

in other words what i'm trying to say is, i don't see this as a plausible business model in the cases that need assistance the most.

i think most would agree that there needs to be "Accountability". Whatever that means. i guess it means you can fire teachers who suck. Thats great. Can you pay teachers who are worth a shit to come work in a school that is a dissaster? no you can't.

so "Accountability" is something that stretches beyond just the teachers. IT stretches to the parents, because lets be honest, if the parents are no good, the kid is pretty much fucked. But lets extend some accountability to the states and municipalities to fund schools equally. Not fund them depending on how rich the neighborhood the students are from.

At any rate, no way my kids are going to public school in Georgia, but i am still willing to pay for public schools as a portion of my tax burden.

i think it is easy to list off a bunch of things that are wrong, and there are a bunch of things wrong. But like many underserved groups (National Guardsmen not receiving good medical treatment at Ft. Benning GA for example), you are pretty much fucked if you are going to rely on the values or moral authority of this administration to do what is 'right'.

It's all about the $$.

Vetiria · Post by **Vetiria** » June 8, 2004, 4:37 pm

Great. Are you going to start elementary and high school versions of the military that students can join so they can afford to go to high school also?

Chmee · Post by **Chmee** » June 8, 2004, 4:46 pm

Aaeamdar wrote:Cool, an issue I can be conservative on again. Its been a while.

I'll agree with other posters in this thread and blame the funding. There shouldn't be any. Education is something the private sector can easily handle. You all should let it. It works well in the University system (yes, that system is a mixed Public/Private one - but the best ones are private).

Get the state out of the education system (apart from providing finacial support for the poor), and I think many of these issues you are so upset about would go away.

Agreed.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » June 8, 2004, 4:54 pm

The right to a free education is very important. It is to everyone's best interest to education the youth.

Also, Voro, I'm not sure why you would say school taxes are disproportionate. School taxes are collected from only homeowners and is based on the appraised value(sales price) of the home. Normal people live in $80,000 houses like me and pay a small amount. Rich people live in $300,000 + houses and pay more than me. /shrug

Forthe · Post by **Forthe** » June 8, 2004, 4:58 pm

Chmee wrote:
Aaeamdar wrote:Cool, an issue I can be conservative on again. Its been a while.

I'll agree with other posters in this thread and blame the funding. There shouldn't be any. Education is something the private sector can easily handle. You all should let it. It works well in the University system (yes, that system is a mixed Public/Private one - but the best ones are private).

Get the state out of the education system (apart from providing finacial support for the poor), and I think many of these issues you are so upset about would go away.
Agreed.

You guys are severely short sighted here. It is in everyone's interest that the population is educated. Imagine a scenaria where you have people who can't afford education similar to the percentages that can't afford health care and the adverse effects this will have on the economy.

Public education is self serving even if you don't have kids yourself. These children are going to make retirement possible and directly effect the value of your retirement assets.

Aaeamdar · Post by **Aaeamdar** » June 8, 2004, 5:04 pm

what private company is going to invest in the education of persons in rural North Dakota?

/shrug. The same private companies that put grocery stores, gas stations, eating establishments, bars, etc. Its a matter of costs and profits. It will get worked out. If you really believe that it can't be worked out to be economically viable, then all you are saying is urban families are paying for rural families.

If businesses thought they could make money by funding education don't you think they would have successfully lobbied for it by now?

Not sure how you can reach this conclusion. Right now there a tons of heavily subsidized (or really - completely subsidized) schools where parents get to send their kids for free. How do you compete with that? Likewise, where is the financial incentive to spend millions (billions?) on lobbying to cause that system to come to an end? Even if your lobbying were successful, barriers to entry for private schools would be small. The entity/person spending all the cash on lobbying would have no way to ensure a return on that investment.

Get rid of public funding of education, and you will see the private sector take over with profitable and high quality educational institutions. But you will never get the private sector to finance getting the current situatin changed, because it makes no finacial sense to do so. If it ever happens (it won't), it will have to come from a tax-payers politcal movement.

Aaeamdar · Post by **Aaeamdar** » June 8, 2004, 5:06 pm

Public education is self serving even if you don't have kids yourself. These children are going to make retirement possible and directly effect the value of your retirement assets.

Yeah, well thanks for the concern, but I think I can deal with my own retirement without having to pay to educate your child.

Forthe · Post by **Forthe** » June 8, 2004, 5:08 pm

Aaeamdar wrote:
Public education is self serving even if you don't have kids yourself. These children are going to make retirement possible and directly effect the value of your retirement assets.
Yeah, well thanks for the concern, but I think I can deal with my own retirement without having to pay to educate your child.

Well if the dollar devauluates I hope you have a (fuck the filter)lot of gold bricks stashed somewhere.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » June 8, 2004, 5:10 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:The right to a free education is very important. It is to everyone's best interest to education the youth.

Also, Voro, I'm not sure why you would say school taxes are disproportionate. School taxes are collected from only homeowners and is based on the appraised value(sales price) of the home. Normal people live in 80,00 houses like me and pay a small amount. Rich people live in 300,000 + houses and pay more than me. /shrug

They pay more property tax yes. But the percent of their tax is that funds their school is likely to be lower, and quite possible their overall percentage of property tax is likely to be lower.

So lets say 1% of your income goes to property tax, half of which goes to the school district.

Rich guy may pay 0.5% of his income to property tax, a quarter of which goes to the school district.

obviously Richville has more overall tax revenue because the real estate value is on average higher. Therefore, they don't need to have as high of taxes. They also don't need to take as much of the property tax revenue and devote it to schools (they can devote to other community things).

My claim was not that Rich people don't pay their fair share of property tax. My claim is that the less you make, the larger percent of your income goes to funding public schools.

That is not in and of itself a bad thing (as there is a certain minimum absolute cost per student to be educated even in the cheapest place). I just think that if we are going to have public schools, they should not be only as rich as the people who attend. That does not seem particularly democratic to me.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » June 8, 2004, 5:13 pm

Aaeamdar wrote:
Public education is self serving even if you don't have kids yourself. These children are going to make retirement possible and directly effect the value of your retirement assets.
Yeah, well thanks for the concern, but I think I can deal with my own retirement without having to pay to educate your child.

better hope your company's insurance company decides not to drop your coverage after you retire and you don't get something like cancer late in life, since you are planning on covering all of your costs, etc. Which we all do appreciate by the way.

no i'm not saying you shouldnt plan to cover your own retirment. I sure as hell plan to cover mine, cause i dont want to live in a box.

Dar:

if this vast source of untapped profitablity exists as you claim, that is the necessary and sufficient motivation for groups to mobilize, incorporate, and lobby for the very thing which you claim they have no motivation to do.

masteen · Post by **masteen** » June 8, 2004, 5:27 pm

Y'all have no idea how many times I've heard a parent say "My child would NOT do something like that," even as we're watching the video of little Skippy beating another kid with a glass Snapple bottle.

Denial and ignorance seem to be what modern American families are built on. But it's the schools/states/feds fault. Dr. Phil said so!

Chmee · Post by **Chmee** » June 8, 2004, 5:29 pm

Voronwë wrote:Dar:

if this vast source of untapped profitablity exists as you claim, that is the necessary and sufficient motivation for groups to mobilize, incorporate, and lobby for the very thing which you claim they have no motivation to do.

There is also substantial motivation of people who benefit from the status quo to lobby against it.

The National Education Association is number three on the list of top 10 political donors for 1989 - present with a total of $23,302,684 (data from http://www.opensecrets.org). Yes, many individual teachers would probably actually benefit from working in a private environment (especially the very good ones). But there are still a lot of people that have a vested interest to oppose change.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » June 8, 2004, 6:54 pm

I don't understand what the problem is. They learn about WW2 history in world history class and they learn about the effects of WW2 on Japanese, blacks and women in American history. It's a seperate cirriculum. What is the point of the article?

The effects WW2 had domestically in the USA on those particular minority groups are fascinating and well worth exploring in my opinion. Of course, I'm not a fucking idiot, so your opinion may differ from mine.

Aaeamdar · Post by **Aaeamdar** » June 8, 2004, 7:07 pm

if this vast source of untapped profitablity exists as you claim, that is the necessary and sufficient motivation for groups to mobilize, incorporate, and lobby for the very thing which you claim they have no motivation to do.

That is just not the case. The person or person who put all the effort and money into getting the laws changed would be in no better or worse position to actually offer the service once the laws are changed. This is limitless. Its not like all you would have to do is organize a few people together and you have the entire group of folks capable of running schools. Anyone that can start up a medium sized company can start up a school. That is hundreds of thousands of people in the US. You are not going to be able to organize all those people to share porportionately with their expected profits the costs of lobying sufficiently to get teh laws changed. Since that is not going to happen, you have a huge freerider problem that results in it being impossible to profitablely invest in getting the laws changed for the purpose of then offering your services on the open market.

Let's say lemonaide is publicly provided in Smallville. John thinks he can run a profitable lemonaide stand, but it is going to cost him $100 to lobby to change the laws. He spends the $100 and then opens his lemonaide stand, charging $0.25 a glass. Of that $0.25, $0.10 represents costs, $0.10 cents represents his 2 year plan to recoup the $100 he spent on lobbying by selling 500 glasses per year. The last $0.05 represents his profit.

While initially his stand is a big success, within a few days, Jill puts up her own stand. Having not spent the $100 for lobbying, she charges $0.15 for exactly the thing John was selling. No one buys anything from John anymore, but Jill sure is glad John spent all that cash lobbying to to get rid of the Smallville lemonaide subsidy.

Akaran_D · Post by **Akaran_D** » June 8, 2004, 7:24 pm

Want some problems with the public school system?
1: They don't hire people for their education. They hire the ones that passed the teacher's classes themselves with a B.. you can pass the rest (around here, at least, with a D - like algebra, or history, or whatever it is you're going to go teach)

2: The people put in charge who went THROUGH the education system and don't see the problems with it.

3: The people in charge of the Boards of Education? Buisnessmen, mostly. Not teachers. The people that can best suck up to the other BoE members or the voting public.

4: They are not held accountable.

5: The local BoE's have to make sure that EVERY school in their district has the same stuff.. so there can be no "favoritism", even if the money is supplied by outside orginizations.

6: The BoE does not care about the parents, and rarely cares about their opinions.. if ever.

7: The teachers are not required to explain, or even help. Once they get the information across, it is the student's responsilibty to know it - not the teachers to explain it if they don't.

8: The BoE offers little in redress for the parrents if there is a problem. They won't fire anyone at a parrents request unless it's for a "hot topic" like a teacher is gay and "they won't want that in their district" or some such.

I hate this country's education system. It needs to be redone. The people that are in charge of this need to be fired, and the people who caused this, need to be jailed.

Pahreyia · Post by **Pahreyia** » June 8, 2004, 8:21 pm

kyoukan wrote:I don't understand what the problem is. They learn about WW2 history in world history class and they learn about the effects of WW2 on Japanese, blacks and women in American history. It's a seperate cirriculum. What is the point of the article?

The point of the article was that the students were learning about the effects of WW2 and very little, if any, of the actual history. Separating the cirriculum would be nice if you could balance the two classes into consecutive teaching agendas, where the facts supported the social reprocussions. But in a single class, where the children are supposed to come out with a cursory knowledge of the historical facts and social ramifications, balancing too heavily on one side over the other doesn't do justice to either sides of the historical issue.

It's like teaching that women's sufferage happened in the 1920s without explaining the prevailant historical, even biblical, reasons that women's rights were restricted for so many years. It's all gravy now, but what happens when it's the gay's turn to get marriage rights? Without understanding both sides of the issue, how could you formulate a successful argument and counter-argument for it?

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » June 8, 2004, 8:42 pm

how many kids do you think know more about how minorities were effected domestically than they know about how the jews were treated or about the major battles like d-day?

I doubt school kids learn less about WW2 in history than they do about it's effects in social studies.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » June 8, 2004, 8:57 pm

kyoukan wrote:how many kids do you think know more about how minorities were effected domestically than they know about how the jews were treated or about the major battles like d-day?

I doubt school kids learn less about WW2 in history than they do about it's effects in social studies.

Probably a lot. That was kind of the point behind the article.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » June 8, 2004, 9:22 pm

you're a fucking moron if you think that.

oh wait, you're already a fucking moron!

some poor guy teaches a course on how minorities were effected in ww2 and all the neocons come out sobbing about the state of the education system merely because it is a "liberal" sounding course. seriosuly dude, get a fucking life.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » June 8, 2004, 10:26 pm

kyoukan wrote:you're a fucking moron if you think that.

oh wait, you're already a fucking moron!

some poor guy teaches a course on how minorities were effected in ww2 and all the neocons come out sobbing about the state of the education system merely its a "liberal" sounding course. seriosuly dude, get a fucking life.

Serious get a different rhetoric. Why don't you make a hot key for your responses. Most of us have them memorized by now.

Sionistic · Post by **Sionistic** » June 8, 2004, 10:53 pm

I'm with mid on this one, when I was in public schooling, I hardly heard anything at all about the actual conflicts. Maybe the battle of the bulge, normandy, island hopping, and the two big H's. I learned more about stalingrad through a movie then school. (enemy at the gates ROCKS)

This isnt just history either, all subjects are cutting back. Many schools are cutting back in extracurricular classes because of no funding. Schools that need help the most cant get it. It will eventually come to the point where you only have strictly academic classes. No student will like that, they will be even more bored then they are now. Funding needs to be increased badly.

Vetiria · Post by **Vetiria** » June 8, 2004, 11:05 pm

Why is it important to learn anything other than the major battles, generals, and important dates? Why should you learn the minute details of a war?

It's more important to learn what the causes and affects of a war are than the dates of every battle. If you want to go into detail about each war, there are entire classes in college you can take devoted to it.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » June 8, 2004, 11:40 pm

Going into a small groups experience during one of the most important wars ever, is getting in depth, and should be a seperate class for artsy types to take in college.

Wars are a part of our lives. They are our history and our future. It's important to understand and appreciate how you got to today. How do you think we have improved as a society? Our leaders have studied our history and done what they can to improve upon past mistakes.

I mean, that really is what life is all about. Everyday you make a new mistake. You can dwell on it, like many on this board do, or you can learn from it and move on.

Etasi · Post by **Etasi** » June 8, 2004, 11:59 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:Going into a small groups experience during one of the most important wars ever, is getting in depth, and should be a seperate class for artsy types to take in college.

Wars are a part of our lives. They are our history and our future. It's important to understand and appreciate how you got to today. How do you think we have improved as a society? Our leaders have studied our history and done what they can to improve upon past mistakes.

So are you arguing that students shouldn't study the internment of Japanese Americans during WW2 because they're a "small group"? I ask this because internment is one of the major issues mentioned in the article, and your post doesn't specify exactly which "small groups" you're talking about.

Having attended a fairly liberal university, I definitely understand the complaint that historical studies have become too compartmentalized and too specific to certain groups, to the detriment of a comprehensive understanding of the past. However, you're not going to have a comprehensive understanding of the past if you ignore minority (and here I don't necessarily mean racial or gender minorities) groups and their experiences. There should be a balance between the two. It 's very important to study the WW2 Japanese internment camps because they say a lot about whether we've "improved as a society" and how "we got where we are today." Similarly, to continue with the WW2 example, it's important to understand how WW2 affected things like female employment, because that was a pretty significant change and has greatly affected where we are today.

Honestly I don't think it's that much of a loss if high school kids don't know the names of WW2 generals, or if they can't name many battles. They should have a general understanding of the causes and effects of the war, and study a simplified timeline, but anything beyond that doesn't help them answer the question "how did we get where we are?" and "are we improving as a society?" which is really the point of studying history in the first place. Memorizing a laundry list of facts is pointless because you can't derive a greater lesson from that.

Aaeamdar · Post by **Aaeamdar** » June 9, 2004, 12:11 am

Small group or not, the Japanese internment was one of the greatest civil rights violations and certainly in the top 5 embarassing SC desicions in the short history of the US. failure to give it a great deal of coverage when learning about WWII would be a huge injustice to education.

Vetiria · Post by **Vetiria** » June 9, 2004, 12:13 am

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:Wars are a part of our lives. They are our history and our future. It's important to understand and appreciate how you got to today. How do you think we have improved as a society? Our leaders have studied our history and done what they can to improve upon past mistakes.

Which is exactly why you learn the causes and affects of wars instead of the minute details. Also, learning about Japanese concentration camps is not for "artsy" types. It's important to learn from mistakes so they are not repeated.

Arilain · Post by **Arilain** » June 9, 2004, 12:42 am

The problem with the education system in the US, is that educators focus on Math and Science and only pay lip service to History, English, and other educational principles. Often we lower the bar so more students pass than fail in order to say "Hey we are improving our graduation rate, please give us more money." A good example is the New Orleans Public school system which recieve millions of dollars a year from federal funding and local property taxes. In an audit done last year they found that the corruption was so deep and involved that they had no idea where half the money went. Now that the current superintendant has invited the FBI to take up shop in the school system to root out corruption the school board is trying to fire him. The New Orleans system is one of the worst in the country but typical of inner city schools. I know too many people that graduated from that system that could not even tell you where the nations capital was. I thank god I was spared going through that system.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » June 9, 2004, 1:39 am

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:Serious get a different rhetoric. Why don't you make a hot key for your responses. Most of us have them memorized by now.

it's cute that you think you've ever said anything in your life worthy of a response that takes more effort than a hot key.

say something intelligent and you'll get an intelligent response. although I might as well expect you to sprout wings and fly before you ever said anything halfway smart.

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » June 9, 2004, 2:21 am

Wars are a part of our lives. They are our history and our future. It's important to understand and appreciate how you got to today. How do you think we have improved as a society? Our leaders have studied our history and done what they can to improve upon past mistakes.

What I think he meant was... Yes, the history and lessons of the past are important. But why is it important to know which day the Battle of Midway started? Knowing about it and its significance is important.. The day and hour really serves no purpose unless you're on Jeopardy.

One thing I hated about history classes was the mindless memorization of bullshit trivia rather than an integrated understanding of the big picture.

vn_Tanc · Post by **vn_Tanc** » June 9, 2004, 6:00 am

It's important to learn about the causes (and dates) of war. It's also important to learn about the secondary effects such as internment.
But it's a personal value judgement to place one above the other in terms of "importance".
Frankly I'd consider the names and dates of battles and the generals who foight them to be specialist "Military History". Though I agree the "basic facts" of WW2 should be generally well known and by those I mean (in no particular order):
Hitler
Stalin
Roosevelt
Churchill
Eisenhower
39-45
Holocaust
Pearl Harbour
Atomic Bombs
D-Day
Germany started it by invading most of western europe.

Anything beyond that I would deem "specialist" knowledge.

Kylere · Post by **Kylere** » June 9, 2004, 10:55 am

Shocker here, I agree with Tanc. But I do think McArthur could be added to the list, as can Neville Chamberlain, the utterly failed concept of Appeasement, and how the seeds of WW1 led to WW2. If a high school graduate cannot tell me which countries were Axis and which were Allies, the dates of Pearl/DDay/Hiroshima/Nagasaki/Invasion of Poland, what the aattle of Britain consisted of, etc then they are not educated. They are merely graduated. But I realize that education is not the primary focus of the school system now, it is socialization. Otherwise they would stop concepts like social promotion.

Teaching cultural sensitivity in a way that detracts from teaching basic history is a failure of teaching. Schools are the experiment grounds for every nutcake theory on child raising that dominates that generation. Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it and all that, so if we do not teach history honestly we may as well face the failure now.

Not to get off on a rant here, or to steal lines from Dennis Miller, but the real problem is the entire Carnegie unit system and parents who think school should be day care mixed with a decidedly liberal slant among teachers.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » June 9, 2004, 11:33 am

why would you expect teachers to not tend to be Democrats? The GOP pretty much does "fuck all" (big ups Tanc) for their industry.

masteen · Post by **masteen** » June 9, 2004, 11:54 am

Kyoukan: It's not like these kids weren't able to name many battles; these ignorant pukes didn't know when D-Day or Pearl Harbor happened or even the years the conflict lasted.

The fact that they didn't have a clue about the war itself, but knew a lot about Japanese internment camps, says that their education on the WW2 era was severely lacking.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » June 9, 2004, 12:12 pm

If a high school graduate cannot tell me which countries were Axis and which were Allies, the dates of Pearl/DDay/Hiroshima/Nagasaki/Invasion of Poland, what the aattle of Britain consisted of, etc then they are not educated.

Hey! I can't remember those dates and I know a LOT about WWII! I just suck horribly at remembering dates

I can't for the life of me remember my parents' birthdays or anniversary heh.. thank goodness for calendars!

Dunno why, I can never remember dates or phone numbers...

Pahreyia · Post by **Pahreyia** » June 9, 2004, 1:27 pm

kyoukan wrote:I doubt school kids learn less about WW2 in history than they do about it's effects in social studies.

Doubt is fine. But what the article is saying is exactly that. Kids are learning more about social effects than historical facts.

You can't understand an effect without learning the cause. History and social studies are two different courses of study. You wouldn't expect some kid mathematician to be spouting off philosophy on a test. They're both useful and necessary courses, but don't mistake teaching one for learning the other.

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » June 9, 2004, 1:42 pm

When I say knowing dates isn't important I'm talking in the context of a general history class you'd find in a public school curriculum. I've been in more than one class where the exams basically consisted of memorization of dates rather than the causes and effects of what actually happened on those dates.

Obviously if you were to take a class on WW2 then yeah, knowing the dates would be something I'd expect.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » June 9, 2004, 8:26 pm

Well, being 20 years old and a recent product of our fine public education system, I can say this:

I never learned about Japanese-American internment camps. I didn't know about them until I heard references made when Guantanamo Bay was first a story, and did my own research to learn about them.

I didn't know that Hitler persecuted gypsies and homosexuals until I went to the holocaust museum in Washington DC. I only learned that he hated the Jews.

On the other hand, I did know an awful lot about the war itself. We read books about it in English and studied it in history in my freshman, junior, and senior years. I could easily rattle off dates, names, and battles. Maybe it was just my school.

the article wrote: at her Montgomery County high school

This is Montgomery Country, Maryland? Maryland has one of the worst public education systems in the country. Anyone with a bachelors degree (in anything) can get a job as a teacher. Sometimes you might have to do something like "take the SAT's to prove your skills." I wonder if they could have picked this location intentionally?

pahreyia wrote:Doubt is fine. But what the article is saying is exactly that. Kids are learning more about social effects than historical facts.

Sure it is. But then there's this little gem:

the article wrote:The Post interviewed 76 teenagers

Real authoritative. So I guess you'll forgive Kyoukan for having her "doubts." What do you think the margin of error would be on this survey if it were to be applied as a representative sample of the entire nation? 50%? Do you think they even chose the subjects randomly? It doesn't say so.

In regards to our education system: There's enormous problems, but they're not nearly as simple as they're often portrayed. Look at Maryland for instance. Getting a job as a teacher requires nothing more than a bachelors degree in any subject, along with (possibly) some cursory standardized tests and (maybe) a night class or two. Then you get paid $30,000 a year to teach shit you don't know to kids who don't give a fuck about it. Plus you have to worry about all the guns roaming around the shitty Baltimore public school you probably got stuck in. Maybe you guys expect a lot out of some 25 year old, undereducated, underfunded, underqualified and underappreciated dude in these circumstances, but I live in reality.

Simply increasing funding is not a viable solution. Sure, we need better teachers, and we need "accountability." But do you want to give the aforementioned 25 year old asshole a big raise just because he's a teacher? I don't. And do you think that telling him that he needs to be "accountable" for raising his students achievement is going to do a damn bit of good? Get real. You can't fire him. Who the fuck else would take his job? If you've got a surplus of highly qualified teaching candidates hanging around, please let me know: I could put them in touch with some schools that have been searching for someone like that for years.

If we continue our public education system, and don't privatize it as 'Dar and Chmee advocate, a concerted, long-term effort will need to be made to raise the quality of our teachers. This would involve raising qualifications and increasing salaries, but it would also involve a slow purge of a number of older, underqualified, incompetent teachers. Instead of absorbing the bottom tier of the college-educated class, schools should be attracting qualified and motivated candidates. To make this change would require a systemwide restructuring that I don't believe anyone has the slightest idea how to do.

Marbus · Post by **Marbus** » June 9, 2004, 8:56 pm

Excellent topic Mid, many of the points are right on target IMHO.

Marb

Knibble · Post by **Knibble** » June 10, 2004, 7:57 am

Agree with most of you.
The elementary school where my daughter's went had extra learning programs free of charge a few being foreign language,computer class,reading,math.They wanted to do it so I made it a point to take them every morning.The teachers volunteer their time to do this.
Now since we moved a while back the elementary school my son goes to is what they basically call a poor school due to the neighborhood it's in and the lack of parent participation and does not offer such programs there.Lack of funding at the school as well and we save box tops for points and it goes towards paper products,computers etc for the kids at the school.
I called the other school to see if I could possibly tote his butt across town to their school so he could attend these classes and was told he was more than welcome.
My oldest daughter now takes French lll in 11th grade and the other takes Spanish ll in 8th grade and enjoy every minute of it.Although I just know they swear in those languages!
Also to keep paper and pencils in the classes for these summer classes each parent brings some in.*every lil tablet helps*
Maybe if more schools did what this school does it would be better for the kids.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » June 10, 2004, 8:45 am

This is where I believe the Norwegian school system is better than the American. We start learning English in third grade and French or German in 7th (they changed things around a bit since I was that age but that should be about right). We also learn a lot of history which focuses on the Why and Where and not on memorizing dates (although you are expected to know some dates). Additionally we learn about all religions (well all major), and basically a lot about the world outside of our own region. Add to that a bunch of creative classes like music, woodshop, learn how to cook etc..

I strongly believe that learning more about countries/languages/religions will make you more understanding and tolerant towards other people. Furthermore, I believe that widening a kid's horizons like this will lead to more creative kids who are used to mental and intelligent challenges.

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » June 10, 2004, 8:52 am

The entire history part of the article boils down to, "They didn't learn the same things as I did so they must be wrong".

Honestly.. what exactly is the importance of knowing about Patton, MacArthur, Monty? They're interesting as hell, and I eat up any movies,documentaries or books that cover these individuals, but how does knowing their names help kids learn how to think?

If you wanted to get upset about education, look more closely at the amount of times teachers present their personal opinion as fact. The amount of times I've had a kid tell me something was a fact because Mr(s) Teacher told them it was so and I had to show them in print the opposite/counter before they would even start to think for themselves is scary...

Kylere · Post by **Kylere** » June 10, 2004, 9:07 am

Kelshara you are right for once, the United States schools as a whole teach foreign languages poorly. They offer very little selection, and have semi competent instructors most of the time. My High School only offered Spanish, French, German, and Russian. No Japanese, Chinese, Arabic, etc were available at all.

I took German for 4 years in High School, and Russian for 2, as a result I can get by in German and have a kiddie knowledge of Russian, but I had to beg plead and argue to take both languages along with English.

Of course to be fair, English is the world language.

Adex_Xeda · Post by **Adex_Xeda** » June 10, 2004, 11:12 am

There are government schools that do a top notch job, and there are government schools that fail miserably.

The main difference between them is most definately NOT funding, but rather

*drum roll*

parental involvement.

Belive me I've been educated in both types of schools.