Quoting "Russell Coker" <russell(a)coker.com.au>
On Mon, 25 Nov 2013, Petros
<Petros.Listig(a)fdrive.com.au> wrote:
Quoting "Jason White"
<jason(a)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