I agree. It also shows how totally inadequate the electorate is to listen to 20 second blurbs on which to base their vote instead of really looking at the candidate's proposals and thinking of the consequence if those proposals are enacted
I agree. It also shows how totally inadequate the electorate is to listen to 20 second blurbs on which to base their vote instead of really looking at the candidate's proposals and thinking of the consequence if those proposals are enacted
Yes, and it exposes how inadequate our nat'l educational system is. One glaring mistake that has occurred in that regard is the terribly wrong tack that has been taken in the recent past, i.e., attempting to impose grand schemes from the top down rather than the reverse. Therefore,
1. Go to the administrators and ask them what their problems are and what they need to address them;
2. Talk to the teachers and ask the same line of questions esp. "what do you need?"
Here's what I think one would find: We need the money to hire ancillary help such as nurses, counsellors, tutors, mentors to teach studying skills, nutritionists, employees to act as go-betweens between the schools and parents, and whatever. Find out.
Talk is cheap, money buys beans. There's no free lunch. The biggest cliche of all is: Man can't live without cliches.
This would all cost money, lots of it, but if I had two dollars between me and starvation, I'd be willing to bet one of them that the total cost would pale in comparison to the annual budget
allocated for militarism which is fast approaching one trillion dollars.
WHAT SHOULD BE THE GOAL? The acquisition of knowledge to be sure, but more than that: CRITICAL THINKING. We would pay teachers more, much more to attract better minds into the profession. What makes an effective teacher? Someone with acquired knowledge AND the ability to pass it forward, i.e., teach others. Someone with hutzpah, animated, some acting skills, vivacious, someone who can instill the joy of learning in students who have been lolled into a semi-stupor by TV, computers, "smart phones" and the like. A substantial part of all this would be the use of the Socratic Method.
One cannot help but surmise, not without justification, that a large percentage of the governing class does not want the hoi polloi, the general populace, to be educated with critical thinking skills. Since action, here the lack of action, speaks louder than words, what else am I to think?
All of this accomplished, we would see fewer and fewer citizens voting to shoot themselves in both feet.
As a retired teacher, I totally support your position. Add one more thing VOCATIONAL EDUCATION and you'd have my complete support. We definitely need to teach critical thinking, starting in kindergarten. Critical thinking is definitely essential but will receive the most opposition, too many parents are terrified their children will not share their own prejudices and way of thinking.I taught chemistry, physics, and astronomy to 8th graders. But I always advocated for more technical training. The majority of students entering kindergarten will never graduate from college - for many reasons. But that is no reason not to train those who either don't want to continue higher education or cannot continue for various reasons. The majority of children are dumped at age 16 to 18 to fend for themselves, with no skill, no practical knowledge of how to support themselves or even manage a budget.
I have absolutely no problem with vocational schools if they also teach critical thinking along with the hands-on skills. I often say that not everybody wants to go to college and study Shakespeare. Another idea I've been chewing on is to establish a substantial organization containing a large cadre of the cognoscenti to hold weekend pop-up conferences or seminars in their fields of speciality: govt; law; history, etc. Done right, a lot can be taught in a weekend.
I agree. It also shows how totally inadequate the electorate is to listen to 20 second blurbs on which to base their vote instead of really looking at the candidate's proposals and thinking of the consequence if those proposals are enacted
Yes, and it exposes how inadequate our nat'l educational system is. One glaring mistake that has occurred in that regard is the terribly wrong tack that has been taken in the recent past, i.e., attempting to impose grand schemes from the top down rather than the reverse. Therefore,
1. Go to the administrators and ask them what their problems are and what they need to address them;
2. Talk to the teachers and ask the same line of questions esp. "what do you need?"
Here's what I think one would find: We need the money to hire ancillary help such as nurses, counsellors, tutors, mentors to teach studying skills, nutritionists, employees to act as go-betweens between the schools and parents, and whatever. Find out.
Talk is cheap, money buys beans. There's no free lunch. The biggest cliche of all is: Man can't live without cliches.
This would all cost money, lots of it, but if I had two dollars between me and starvation, I'd be willing to bet one of them that the total cost would pale in comparison to the annual budget
allocated for militarism which is fast approaching one trillion dollars.
WHAT SHOULD BE THE GOAL? The acquisition of knowledge to be sure, but more than that: CRITICAL THINKING. We would pay teachers more, much more to attract better minds into the profession. What makes an effective teacher? Someone with acquired knowledge AND the ability to pass it forward, i.e., teach others. Someone with hutzpah, animated, some acting skills, vivacious, someone who can instill the joy of learning in students who have been lolled into a semi-stupor by TV, computers, "smart phones" and the like. A substantial part of all this would be the use of the Socratic Method.
One cannot help but surmise, not without justification, that a large percentage of the governing class does not want the hoi polloi, the general populace, to be educated with critical thinking skills. Since action, here the lack of action, speaks louder than words, what else am I to think?
All of this accomplished, we would see fewer and fewer citizens voting to shoot themselves in both feet.
Ahem to that.
As a retired teacher, I totally support your position. Add one more thing VOCATIONAL EDUCATION and you'd have my complete support. We definitely need to teach critical thinking, starting in kindergarten. Critical thinking is definitely essential but will receive the most opposition, too many parents are terrified their children will not share their own prejudices and way of thinking.I taught chemistry, physics, and astronomy to 8th graders. But I always advocated for more technical training. The majority of students entering kindergarten will never graduate from college - for many reasons. But that is no reason not to train those who either don't want to continue higher education or cannot continue for various reasons. The majority of children are dumped at age 16 to 18 to fend for themselves, with no skill, no practical knowledge of how to support themselves or even manage a budget.
I have absolutely no problem with vocational schools if they also teach critical thinking along with the hands-on skills. I often say that not everybody wants to go to college and study Shakespeare. Another idea I've been chewing on is to establish a substantial organization containing a large cadre of the cognoscenti to hold weekend pop-up conferences or seminars in their fields of speciality: govt; law; history, etc. Done right, a lot can be taught in a weekend.
Good idea