25 Nov
2013
25 Nov
'13
12:18 p.m.
Quoting "Jason White" <jason(a)jasonjgw.net>
Russell Coker <russell(a)coker.com.au> wrote:
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.
In East Germany we went to school for ten years together, afterwards
only a few went to finish year 12 and go to Uni.
The East German schools were in some ways "old-fashioned", with the
teacher in front of the class, all kids facing the teacher.
Interestingly, even after 23 years of unification (and more or less
adapting the East German school system to the West German), the East
German students still achieve better results in scientific subjects
and maths, compared to West Germans.
We could not choose between different subjects in that area, maths,
physics, chemistry, biology were mandatory and separate subjects.
I find the "modern" way of lumping the subjects together as "fluffy".
Quite often I think the results are not impressive. Then there is all
the "environmental studies" stuff etc.. I am not sure whether that is
a waste of time.
(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.)
I like the idea of SEAL classes, selected entry accelerated learning,
as my daughter is in now. It challenges them as well as keeps them in
a "normal" school background, helpful in developing social skills.
I can imagine Faye's problem. I hear a similar story from a German
friend over there. I don't think it is easy to solve.
The SEAL classes are a step in this direction, I think. The teachers
there have an understanding how to deal with brighter kids.
At the end, schools reflect culture. And, IMHO, Australia's system is
helping kids having self-esteem and be positive "can do people". It is
a value too.
If I had a wish, I would get rid of all this private school stuff and
use the money to pay teachers well. That's money better invested than
in a million dollar concert hall or a super-gym.
Regards
Peter
I think that the current system of giving all
secondary schools the
same goals
is a bad one. The needs of kids who are destined to drop out at
16, the kids
who will finish school but not do university, and the kids who are going to
university are very different and would be best met by different schools.
Some systems separate children into these categories quite early.
for example,
apparently the German school system has separate curricula.
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. 
25 Nov
25 Nov
2:34 p.m.
New subject: Should I feel sorry for Queenslanders?!
On Mon, 25 Nov 2013, Petros <Petros.Listig(a)fdrive.com.au> wrote:
Quoting "Jason White"
<jason(a)jasonjgw.net>
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 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. (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.
I like the idea of SEAL classes, selected entry
accelerated learning,
as my daughter is in now. It challenges them as well as keeps them in
a "normal" school background, helpful in developing social skills.
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.
One major advantage of home schooling is that kids learn social skills
relevant to relating to adults in ways that don't involve violence - skills
that are going to be useful in most of their life. Many of the alternative
schools such as those following the Sudbery Valley meme also apparently do
well in this regard.
At the end, schools reflect culture. And, IMHO,
Australia's system is
helping kids having self-esteem and be positive "can do people". It is
a value too.
Part of the problem in this regard is that most people seem to think that the
only options are foolish attempts to boost self-esteem (such as giving every
child a prize which even a 5yo can see through) and dog-eat-dog competition.
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.
If I had a wish, I would get rid of all this private
school stuff and
use the money to pay teachers well. That's money better invested than
in a million dollar concert hall or a super-gym.
The multi-million dollar expenses of private schools are just monuments
designed to make people feel important. In most cases there is little benefit
over cheaper facilities.
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. Higher pay for high
school teachers might get some of the better university lecturers to change
jobs, but otherwise probably won't change things much.
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).
--
My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/
My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/
4:22 p.m.
New subject: Should I feel sorry for Queenslanders?!
Russell Coker <russell(a)coker.com.au> wrote:
"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.
True. Those skills are important to cultivate in so far as this can be done.
I would argue that they're essential to civic responsibilities: if someone
can't understand and assess the arguments made in the media by politicians,
political commentators, researchers and others, then it's very difficult to
engage meaningfully in public discussion or to make an informed vote at
election time.
The same skills are of course useful in many aspects of life, from decisions
about health, family and relationships to managing the demands and
opportunities of a career.
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 school experience was much better than that, despite difficulties at times.
There were opportunities for social engagement, but I'm not sure that they
developed my social skills as such; I would credit those, such as they are, to
growing up in a supportive family environment, and later having the
opportunity to study and collaborate with highly successful people
(successful, that is, both intellectually and socially, among other
dimensions).
I've heard it argued that computing technology, as a profession, tends to
attract people with undeveloped social skills (leaving aside autism, which is
a different matter entirely). I've never encountered actual data to confirm or
dispute this claim, and most of the people I know in the technology profession
are very socially adept. However, they're also in roles that would be
problematic for anyone with undeveloped social skills, for example standards
committees and leadership responsibilities in organizations and research
departments.
Of course there are the exceptions, and I've met a number of those; but I'm
not sure whether there are more of them in technology than in other fields
(especially other intellectual pursuits).
I'm sure there are technical jobs which are not highly collaborative and
perhaps better suited to those for whom social interaction is more of a
problem.
3413
days inactive
3413
days old
2 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Jason White -
Petros -
Russell Coker