The real problem with education

[Darth Wong]

You're kidding, right? That's the rule in Ontario?

You should see my son's report cards. I had to grill the teacher in order to get the straight scoop on my son's problem areas because the report card was absolutely glowing even though I knew he was having issues in certain subjects. That's when she hit me with the fact that the school board has directed them to do this. All comments are to be positive, with varying degrees of enthusiasm. No negative comments.

[RedImperator]

You're kidding, right? That's the rule in Ontario?

You should see my son's report cards. I had to grill the teacher in order to get the straight scoop on my son's problem areas because the report card was absolutely glowing even though I knew he was having issues in certain subjects. That's when she hit me with the fact that the school board has directed them to do this. All comments are to be positive, with varying degrees of enthusiasm. No negative comments.

That's totally fucked up. If that's been your experience with schools, then I can see why you'd be pushing for more negative reinforcement.

I couldn't say to parents, "Little Johnny is a total fuckhead," but if I certainly don't have to jump through semantic hoops to avoid saying anything bad about the kid. If a kid doesn't pay attention in class, doesn't study for exams, and is occasionally disruptive, I can say to the parents, "Little Johnny doesn't pay attention in class, obviously doesn't study for exams, and is occasionally disruptive, which is why he failed this marking period." The school district has plenty of bizarre, otherworldy directives for us, but nothing like "Don't ever say anything negative about the kids."

Christ, I can just imagine the reaction if the school district ever made us do something like that. The parents would be up in arms--if you'll allow me to generalize for a moment, African-American parents tend to have the LEAST tolerance for that kind of mealy-mouthed horseshit (certainly their kids can see right through it and have little patience for it), and 60% of our student body is black. 99% in my school.

[Edi]

I see that you did mention that in one of your posts; about shifting focus off athletic performance and onto academic performance - as to what I would interpret as positive reinforcement, I wouldn't list being a high school diploma (something that you have to put six years of effort) to be one of the 'already established' positive reinforcements. That is a goal or milestone. The fact that they give out too easily is neither here nor there.

Positive reinforcement - under what we were discussing - was for behaivoural modification in the class room (immediate results).

There we have the same problem, however; even report cards speak only in positive terms. Instead of saying that "Jimmy has problems with algebra" the report card will say something ridiculous like "Jimmy can perform at algebra with some assistance." The school boards actually hand out directives instructing teachers never to use any kind of negative language whatsoever; only variations of positive language. So you give a positive statement to the worst kid in the class, and a more positive statement to the best kid in the class.

You're kidding, right? That's the rule in Ontario?

Why so surprised, Red? It isn't particularly unique to Ontario. They switched from a number based grading system (scale of 4-10) to a verbal only grading with a prohibition of outright negative comments for the lower grades (1-6) here some years ago. They start getting number graded report cards only from grade 7, and grade 9 is the last one you absolutely have to sit in school. After that, you can go to high school, vocational school or straight into the workforce (if you can get a job, that is). That "reform" was not received particularly enthusiastically by most teachers.

Back when I was in school, we got number graded cards from grade 1 forward, and everybody knew exactly where they stood in relation to everyone else with the academic achievements. Social interaction was a different thing entirely. One of the highest performing guys in my class was also rather popular, while I was not (and we were tied for grades most of the time).

It should be noted that managing to get a 4 in some subject meant you weren't even halfway trying and almost needed to put effort into fucking up. Getting a 6 was not too uncommon, but 5 was really dismal. Also, getting a 4 in any one subject meant extra work for summer and fail that, you resit the grade. Get two or more 4s and you automatically resit the grade.

I've also said it before, the current trend of pushing everyone as far up the academic ladder as possible without regard to their strengths, weaknesses or inclinations is stupid and leads to a shortage of skilled tradesmen. Plumbers, carpenters and some other types of professional can basically set their own salaries here within a certain bracket, and they only need three years of vocational school after grade 9 to get the professional certification. The study councellor in my school was an idiot bitch who treated anyone who so much as mentioned vocational school like they had the bubonic plague and was constantly pushing everyone to go to high school. Many ignored her, went to vocational school and got pretty good jobs soon after. Those who went to high school didn't necessarily find what they wanted to do after and ended up in various places.

The thing is that in our system, high school is a good idea if you have even decent skills in academic subjects and don't quite know what to do after grade 9. You can always go to vocational school after that and you get a year or more off of the curriculum, plus you can go for the higher academic institutions if that is something that interests you. Or you can go to them later. It gives more options. But it is not and should not be automatic for everyone.

Edi

[drachefly]

Well, then the problem isn't positive reinforcement, since that's not what's going on!

What's going on us UNCONDITIONAL POSITIVE, and that's just stupid.

[wolveraptor]

Another issue: multiple choice tests. For fuck's sake, change them. This is what teaches kids to use bullshit methods like "Rule out two and guess" and such. The only reason we have them is because no one can afford to waste time hand-grading tests. That's why I think all multiple choice tests should have a "none of the above" option so people can't just rule out and guess.

[Edi]

Fuck multiple choice. Always when I was in school, you had maybe two or three multiple choice questions, and twice that number or more problems where you had to write out the answer and everything was graded by hand.

The more I hear about the North American system, the more horrified I am becoming. And I've known some of the problems for a long time.

Edi

[Lagmonster]

Funny thing, in my high school, I remember that almost everyone HATED multiple choice, because they felt that when they were given two or more choices that were *close* enough to each other that it was a trick and it confused and fooled them. Whereas I, and those classmates who weren't potatoes in the brain department, realized that with multiple choice you only had to be familiar with the subject matter to within a reasonable degree in order to guess correctly, and in some cases, you could do fairly well on a multiple choice test without studying at all and operating on only the foundations of knowledge you had from previous lessons.

[drachefly]

On the other hand, being a meticulous line-by-line grader, I must say it is very time-consuming. In the class I grade, it took me over half an hour to grade each student's most recent problem set. That took much of a weekend.


The 'none of the above' option is a decent tweak to the system.

Another one I'd use is making not all wrong answers equal. If one wrong answer is pretty close, and another is completely off-the-wall, well, these things are not alike.

Mixing the two could be a bad idea.

[RedImperator]

You can write a multiple choice test that's both a fair assessment of knowledge and not easily beaten with simple test-taking tricks. But that's a much trickier job than just writing a regular multiple choice test.

[phongn]

You can write a multiple choice test that's both a fair assessment of knowledge and not easily beaten with simple test-taking tricks. But that's a much trickier job than just writing a regular multiple choice test.

When I took AP Bio, the teacher usually did tests with choices A-D, and then "all of the above," "none of the above," and then different combinations you could choose from A-D. Make his multiple choice tests rather difficult.

[Ace Pace]

The more I hear about the North American system, the more horrified I am becoming. And I've known some of the problems for a long time.

Edi

Agreed, I used to think it can't get worse then the Israeli system with its mandatory courses and other BS. But this is just pathetic.

Theres a reason Israeli students here deride American style multiple choice tests, we practiclly beg for them because unlike the U.S, most of our tests are massive essay tests that actully test us.

And what the fuck is this verbal report BS? We've never left numbers and every is very clearly giving recieving the report cards they deserve. Maybe its because in the U.S, education is no longer the real goal of many parents. Here, it dosn't matter if you are a star athelete, parents always push for more education.

[Faqa]

Theres a reason Israeli students here deride American style multiple choice tests, we practiclly beg for them because unlike the U.S, most of our tests are massive essay tests that actully test us.

Maybe YOUR essay tests have value. The ones I took for Matriculation consisted of "Memorize dictated notes. Spew out all knowledge on question". Wash, rinse, repeat, till you finish the test.

Biblical studies tended to fare best in that regard. The answers were short and all about analysis, not memorization. Give an answer, back it up, and you'll be fine.


In other news, the US educational system is seriously fucked up....

I'd like to put in a point on Mike's idea of negative reinforcement - this will NOT win the system any points with the students. Build an atmosphere of ONLY fear, and you get bad results, doing what you have to do.

And, no, the positive reinforcement done nowadays just isn't it. Why? Because it engenders no respect, and respect is what makes the system work well. The whole "positive only" system engenders only contempt that it's easy to beat the system.

What we need? TEACHERS WHO KNOW THE SUBJECT. This pissed me off in high school, and it seems to be failing in America, too. A teacher should both know their shit, and act it. Far too many that I've seen were either burnouts(understandable, but it doesn't really help), unenthusiastic or gushing to cover up their lack of compentence. If a teacher can get the support from the system to know their shit and take none from the students, that's half the battle right there.

Once you have injected RESPECT back into the system, THEN such negative reinforcement will work. Because the system's contempt is worth something then.

[Archaic`]

I see a helluva lot more want ads in the newspaper for skilled trades than for qualified historians or even people with "business" degrees. What the fuck is a business degree for, anyway? Every person I knew in university with a business degree was learning how to be a CEO. But the last time I checked, nobody hires kids out of college to be CEOs; they have to start at the bottom, and as far as I can tell, these "business" grads have no more real skills worthy of acquiring an entry-level job than a high-school kid.

There's no reason at all for undergrad business majors. The only useful major at the undergrad level that is business-related is economics, and only as preparation and groundwork to go to grad school in it. The rest of it is pointless and just produces office monkeys.

I don't think undergrad business is totally useless, though having just completed an undergrad business degree, I'm of course going to be biased and defensive there. Certainly, you'll get people thinking they can become CEO's if they get the degree, but that's not how it should really be treated. You really do need to go into it with a (realistic) goal in mind, and pick specializations that work towards it, otherwise you just get a mish-mash of everything, and get nowhere. For instance, I took subjects in Japanese language, Asian economy and business practises, Cross Cultural Communication and Negociation, and Logistics, with the intention of getting involved in import/export.

One other point in its favour. I don't know about how Business degrees are done where you are, but here, the undergrad unit in Economics that everyone is required to take, actually presents itself as a soft science slowly turning into a hard science, and teaches its students the scientific method, and its importance. If for nothing else, I wish that more Arts students were doing the business degrees, simply so they could be exposed to this. And even if they do become office monkeys...well, better that than more unskilled manual workers.

[Keevan_Colton]

I've got a friend on a business degree who I ghost write work for on occassion. I average around an A- to B+ without taking a single class in it or attending even one lecture when it comes to the coursework...needless to say, I'm not too impressed with it.

[wolveraptor]

Once you have injected RESPECT back into the system, THEN such negative reinforcement will work. Because the system's contempt is worth something then.

Uh, have YOU tried to gain the respect of a fucking ornery, hormone-addled teenager?

[weemadando]

Yes. Beating them generally helps.

[Simplicius]

What we need? TEACHERS WHO KNOW THE SUBJECT. This pissed me off in high school, and it seems to be failing in America, too. A teacher should both know their shit, and act it. Far too many that I've seen were either burnouts(understandable, but it doesn't really help), unenthusiastic or gushing to cover up their lack of compentence.

When a history teacher who loves his subject chooses to work in a grocery store instead of teaching, when a skilled math teacher gets sacked despite being impeccably qualified in math because he didn't meet some asinine requirement for English (by which I don't mean proficiency in the English language), and when a part-time flake-and-a-half ed. tech. is assigned to teach economics, things are seriously fucked.

[RedImperator]

Once you have injected RESPECT back into the system, THEN such negative reinforcement will work. Because the system's contempt is worth something then.

Uh, have YOU tried to gain the respect of a fucking ornery, hormone-addled teenager?

I have. It's tricky, but it can be done.

[Master of Ossus]

There have been some psychological studies that suggest that people feel "accomplishment" (ie. that they've actually done something good and worth doing) if about 3% of everyone who attempts it fails. I can definitely see some good in flunking a few kids for bad attitudes to try and get the other ones back in line. On the other hand, doing so would require some sort of vocational education for the kids who were failed unless society wants to totally dissociate itself from them.

[Stark]

Mike, with reference to your sons reportcards, I have a friend who worked as a teacher who encountered the 'political test'. It's the primary test they base selection on (ie, not qualifications, empathy, teaching technique etc) and it's full of PC questions on equity, bullying, and a variety of other touchy-feely stuff. The only way to get hired by state education is to get an almost perfect result, and they care little about your actual teacher skills. I assume this results in a department full of touchy-feeling feelgood teachers who never criticise, etc. I only learned this recently (I was discussing this thread, actually) and this has happened since I left highschool in the mid/late 90s. And yes, Queensland is full of idiots/bogans/addicts/welfare bums who honestly consider themselves knowledgable or qualified in all manner of areas where they are not.

[Simplicius]

On the other hand, doing so would require some sort of vocational education for the kids who were failed unless society wants to totally dissociate itself from them.

Where I'm from, the Mid-Coast School of Technology does well in that regard, though it doesn't have a large curriculum - so, as far as I can say, vo-tech works. If shop programs were to get better funding than they do, they could do a similar thing on a smaller scale.

Shop was a course requirement but not an interest for me, so I just built model rockets and paper gliders to pass the time ("studying wing configurations" - this was my aero engineering phase). My younger brother, though, with a different shop teacher, used it as an opportunity to learn about circuitry and wiring. I would call that a good value for time spent.

[Gandalf]

You're kidding, right? That's the rule in Ontario?

It's caught on here too.

When I entered Year 6 (1997), I'd come from six years of actual marks and grading. It was usually a number mark with a corresponding letter.

Then I entered a very PC school when I came to Sydney. The report card told you fuck all, it was all worded in a way similar to what Darth Wong was saying.

Most games had rules edited as to prevent people losing, I remember a game of basketball in which putting the ball through the hoop from any location scored one point, and the game was abruptly ended when a tie occurred. What made things worse was that there was never any real physical education happening. Just sports for the sake of it. And when it came to inter-class competitions, the lowest performers were picked in the name of fairness.

[RedImperator]

You're kidding, right? That's the rule in Ontario?

It's caught on here too.

When I entered Year 6 (1997), I'd come from six years of actual marks and grading. It was usually a number mark with a corresponding letter.

Then I entered a very PC school when I came to Sydney. The report card told you fuck all, it was all worded in a way similar to what Darth Wong was saying.

Most games had rules edited as to prevent people losing, I remember a game of basketball in which putting the ball through the hoop from any location scored one point, and the game was abruptly ended when a tie occurred. What made things worse was that there was never any real physical education happening. Just sports for the sake of it. And when it came to inter-class competitions, the lowest performers were picked in the name of fairness.

Jesus Q. Fuckface, I've heard stories about that kind of idiocy, but I never imagined it was that widespread.

In my grad school courses, we sometimes hear about programs which have abolished grading, or modify how it's done. But they've done so in order to replace it with more individualized assessment systems, and every one of them comes with a different model of schooling. "We'll teach them the same old way but we'll mollycoddle them come report card time" is complete bullshit, and it's sure as fuck not doing the kids any favors.

[RedImperator]

Mike, with reference to your sons reportcards, I have a friend who worked as a teacher who encountered the 'political test'. It's the primary test they base selection on (ie, not qualifications, empathy, teaching technique etc) and it's full of PC questions on equity, bullying, and a variety of other touchy-feely stuff. The only way to get hired by state education is to get an almost perfect result, and they care little about your actual teacher skills. I assume this results in a department full of touchy-feeling feelgood teachers who never criticise, etc. I only learned this recently (I was discussing this thread, actually) and this has happened since I left highschool in the mid/late 90s. And yes, Queensland is full of idiots/bogans/addicts/welfare bums who honestly consider themselves knowledgable or qualified in all manner of areas where they are not.

Good Christ. I never thought I'd be praising any of Philadelphia's policies to the skies, but so far it turns out I can be thankful for honest report cards and hiring policies that aren't completely asinine.

[Stark]

I thought my school was full of basically unskilled generic Teachers(tm) back in 97 (mainly Dip.Eds, Principal and my history teacher with masters), but it sounds like it's much worse now. Interestingly, prospective teachers now need 4 years education (B.E with a year in x subject, or Bx with Dip Ed, I think) instead of 3 previously. So on the one hand they make it harder to become a teacher, and then shelve all the teachers who don't tow the 'don't offend anyone' 'everyone is right' 'don't make anyone cry' line. Considering the growing Australian problems of growing illiteracy/innumeracy, this attitude seems insane.