I've read over and over in various papers and magazines that Japan and China keep outdoing us in developing technology. Everyone blames our current education system. I blame it too, and for good reason. America is falling. You could say it's spiraling out of control.
Economists are saying we aren't a first-world country anymore. And all this revolves around education. Education is the center of everything. Withour proper education, people can't function in the world. In Africa, tribespeople educate their youth in the ways of survival. In Europe, civilized people educate their youth in Literature, History, and The Arts.
In both instances, the youth benefit with more education. In the good ol' US of A, education standards are being lowered so that more youth make better grades. But knowing 70% of the material is still knowing 70% of the material. You can't change how much you know, you only change the standards you are held up against. In my school, the grading scale was lowered so that to make an A you had to know 93% of the material, having been lowered from 95%. This only the first snowflake on the slippery slope. If the standards are lower, kids will graduate from school with less knowledge than the generation prior. This is horrible! If America doesn't change (i.e.- raise) its standards, we're going to see a nation that gets more ignorant with each passing generation. I don't know about you, but I love my country and I want to see it as a stable environment. If we don't change our ways now, crime rates are only going to get higher and entropy in the nation is only going to rise. Something needs to be done now! Raise the bar!
What I am proposing is the establishment of a federal grading scale that will be set at just below above-average. For example, if the average American high school knows 88% of the material, an A would be knowing 90% of the material. This would make kids try harder if they wanted to make better grades. Athletes would have to work harder if they wanted to stay on the team. And everyone would prosper. Of course, there will be the children in the extremes of knowledge. We'll always have our students with learning disabilities, and seperate grading scales will be provided based on the knowledge they are capable of learning. And we'll also have our children that will know 98% of the material no matter what. Those children''s grading scales will be set higher. But for the majority of students, they will have to work hard to make the grade. And this will result in more students knowing more upon graduation. Which will cause a better educated workforce. Thus, with less people being unemployed, there will be less crime. And with less crime, the government can focus on more pressing matters.
Raising the bar...
By sordenrace - Posted on February 10th, 2008
You might want to break this up with some space between paragraphs. It's a little hard to read.
-----
~Fallon~
“What is insanity, anyway? Is it when you scream and everyone else whispers, or is it when you fight for what's right, even when everyone else thinks your wrong?” Ethergoth
-----
So, if 88% is average, than 93% is excellent? And what will be the basis for judging the grades? Will it be tests? Will it take into account how hard the subject matter is? Will it take into account students who fell behind? Will different level classes be taken together or separately.
And of what material? I'm from NY. We have a thing called Regents, which are tests after you complete certain subject. Well, people weren't doing so great. (I only failed one, which was advanced math.) Whenever that happens instead of finding out why they aren't learning, they do two things. One, they make the teachers teach to the test even more and then they make the tests easier.
So, should the federal government regulate what and how to teach?
Or, perhaps, we should ditch no child left behind, get rid of these ridiculous proficiency tests and let teachers actually teach. And, if a child doesn't learn, make him repeat the grade. If he continues to fail, find out why. Get him help in a subject or, if he's just not smart (which must be accepted is sometimes the case), put that one person in an easier class.
"-bah!! Pardon the "bah!" I feel several "bahs!", but out of courtesy I only say one."
H.P. Lovecraft
What I think should be used is a combination of tests and teachers' thoughts. We all know that not everyone does well on tests, so to alleviate pressure, the students' teachers would be asked if the student does well on homework assignments and/or participates in class. Any student who works at the "excellent" level but does not do so well on tests will still be at the same pace as the student who aces tests, but doesn't fare well on homework assignments.
I think the government should have some sort of universal curriculum set before teachers, it will have much more topics than necessary and teachers will be asked to choose what they think will be the most demanded knowledge in the local/ national level.
I do believe we should ditch no child left behind. But I disagree with the thought of getting rid of tests. I, personally, don't do too well with homework. I hate the stuff, I understand everything taught in class and if I need more practice, I'll get it myself. But I do profoundly well on standardized tests. I have friends who are just the opposite. That's why I think a combination of both is the best way to go.
THINK! It's not illegal yet!
Here's the thing about the government though. For the most part, it isn't comprised of educators. And if you ask different educators what's important, you'll get different answers.
And I don't want the government rating me. Who cares? I'll tell you who should be rating you, the schools. When you have government interference, it will be natural for them to want to spend a lot of time with the trouble students, making things easier for them and what not. Hence, you have a lowering of standards. You have no child left behind. Etc. The best was to help a problem student isn't to lower the bar for everyone, but to have programs that are designed to help them. But that will be seen by some as discrimination, and those some are people who vote, unfortunately. Therefore, the government will focus on esteem raising nonsense.
"-bah!! Pardon the "bah!" I feel several "bahs!", but out of courtesy I only say one."
H.P. Lovecraft
And esteem raising nonsense is what we need to rid of. If we do individualize lesson plans, it will make things so much easier. But, alas, it's impractical. It would waste too much time. Something we can do, though, is make federal laws. That makes proper education compulsory. And proper education is what we need. Federal laws would make the education system much more streamlined.
THINK! It's not illegal yet!
The problem with more government intervention in the education system is that the people who vote for them will be pissed off when their kids are the ones who are held back, or put in a slower class. They make a ruckus, blame, not themselves or the kids, but the education system, and then they vote for people who pledge to not let kids get held back, or who pledge to increase graduation rates, and viola, you have lowered standards and no child left behind.
I think that it is schools that should be evaluating students, not the government.
"-bah!! Pardon the "bah!" I feel several "bahs!", but out of courtesy I only say one."
H.P. Lovecraft
I guess. Ultimately though, schools become just as bad as the government. And public schools are ultimately under the charge of the government.
THINK! It's not illegal yet!