Quoting "Russell Coker" <russell@coker.com.au>
On Mon, 25 Nov 2013, Petros <Petros.Listig@fdrive.com.au> wrote:
Quoting "Jason White" <jason@jasonjgw.net>
I understand and appreciate the benefits of such a model; the question is whether people who are misclassified have the opportunity to overcome their educational disadvantage and move up into the more intellectually rigorous stream destined for higher education. There will always be people who are pushed into the wrong stream, and the real problem is for those who are "downgraded" inappropriately.
IMHO the German system creates losers. It is not very fluid. Kids are "stuck" from early age.
The selection happens in year 4, and it's based on teacher recommendations. Quite often, so it seems, it is more judging the social background of a child than the child's abilities.
But in a system like the Australian one where kids aren't streamed would such kids do much better? There has been some research to show that a teacher's belief in the ability of the kids has a significant effect on the educational results. So if a teacher believes that some grade 4 kids aren't going to learn much then they won't teach them much and they might as well be in a school for less intelligent kids.
I have seen more care for "outsiders" in schools here than I remember or hear of from Germany. I have friends with a slightly autistic child, he had a lot of support and understanding at school. They are moving back to Germany. We are frankly worried - I do not think German schools are that inclusive. Nothing is perfect but there is a lot good things to say about how people deal with each other, at least here in Melbourne.
(Don't get me wrong, I am not against considering environmental issues or other society-relevant ones. But that has to do with world views, and a school is, in my opinion, not the place to teach kids "how to think". Sometimes it helps to know some facts to form a view, not only to have an opinion. E.g. everybody who is reading a bit of the business part of a newspaper, and compares it with the general political pages, will understand what I mean.)
"How to think" would mean logical analysis of arguments etc and the "debates" about the environment provides many good examples where young children can see the flaws in arguments.
Hmmh, I feel a bit misunderstood. I do not have the feeling that schools are particularly good these days in teaching fundamentals. E.g. a friend from East Germany (we both studied IT together) moved to the country side and is doing studies in agriculture. She still remembers all that stuff about pH value, acids, salts.. and is amazed how much less a few of her fellow students know here even if they are much younger so shouldn't have forgotten that much yet. "We are harming the land, it all gets saltier" Okay, what does it mean if you do not remember anything about the basics? It's the talk of a parrot.
If "normal" in this case means anything like most schools then it's not helpful in developing social skills unless you are preparing kids for prison life.
My observation is that for boys socialisation in high school is largely based around how to use force to get what you want. Someone who graduates from such a school has probably learned a lot that would help them in a career dealing drugs, but for a career in IT (the original topic of this thread) it's not particularly useful.
That's a bleak picture.. It does not fit my observations..
People need to understand that there are things that they are good at and things that they aren't. If you're not good at something and working in a team then you should try and find someone else who's better in that area to help train you or help you do the work.
Agreed. I prefer to be praised for having good maths skills than to be put down for not being good in drawing.. I guess I figure out myself that my neighbour's pictures are much prettier.
Not that paying teachers better will necessarily improve things. There is a limited number of people in Australia with the skills to teach well. Of those people I think that the majority are already teaching.
I am not that certain. Being a teacher is nothing to be proud of. Teachers are lazy, have too much holidays, can't do anything with kids, at least not with my child - that's the public picture of a teacher I hear. I am the punch bag for everyone, and the money isn't good either. What's the incentive of being a teacher?
I think that the best thing to do is to reduce the amount of schooling. Encourage kids to leave school at 16 if it's not working for them and both reduce the number of classes (getting rid of some of the less capable teachers) and reducing the class size (some teachers who can't handle 25 kids can do well with 12).
There are kids leaving school at 16. Two of them quite capable apprentices in the factory here. Regards Peter