97% of High School Students Fail Basic Test
- Thread starter TheLastMohican
- Start date
I'm not going to lie, I didn't do as well as I thought I would. I got six out of ten on the test in the op, I supposedly have a 133 iq and yet I still barely passed. Damn. ;_;
Edit: Mis-read a few questions, woos, my bad.
Edit: Mis-read a few questions, woos, my bad.
Last edited:
- Nov 12, 2008
- 14,153
- 1,334
- 0
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 1w2 sx/so/sp
While there are problems with the education system, with not pushing the students hard enough. I really think the core of the problem is with the students. So few of them actually try with things, or even care to learn. If I had my own college, I sure would be a lot more strict with who I allow in. The biggest deal breaker being; actually wanting to learn for the sake of learning. Not to just get an A or get by, and get a job.
S
Shai Gar
I'd have a high school that was locked down, and in a rural mountain setting. There'd be no sporting teams. There'd be no interaction with other schools except in a strictly academic setting. The library would be half the school.
The major problem of American Schooling is the method, not what is being taught or the students.
We base our teaching on a very left-brain sided favoritism. This doesn't help to develop other sides of the brain- even the art and music programs aren't helping because they all set up the same way.
A little while ago there was a guy, Dr. Calvin W. Taylor who was with the University of Utah who did a study about how students learn. I'm going to summarize it, but if you want to read about it in depth go here: http://www.indiana.edu/~intell/taylor.shtml
Essentially he believed that each person had one, two, even three unique talents that they outperformed the norm in. The difficult part was that with school, a lot of these kids only were taught a narrow range of academics and way of teaching would limit the discovery of these talents- they may never know how good they were at something until much later on in life, where it would be harder to craft the skill. He also believed that, once those talents are discovered, things need to be taught in the way that person will understand. He demonstrated that, if you were teaching about money in math, one thing you would do is take the kids out to a McDonalds and order something, and have them count out the exact change.
The point of the survies were really that everyone learns differently. A lot of people are visual learners, some are hands on and need to do it to see it. Some people are very atheletic and there was a way of teaching, a more physically active and involved way of teaching that got to them better than memorization. Artsy types, who tended to be more visual did better with models--- not models that you see on a projecter, but hands on models that they perhaps even participating in making.
A more active and exploritory style of learning that is seen in many private art schools is what needs to replace the current one.
We base our teaching on a very left-brain sided favoritism. This doesn't help to develop other sides of the brain- even the art and music programs aren't helping because they all set up the same way.
A little while ago there was a guy, Dr. Calvin W. Taylor who was with the University of Utah who did a study about how students learn. I'm going to summarize it, but if you want to read about it in depth go here: http://www.indiana.edu/~intell/taylor.shtml
Essentially he believed that each person had one, two, even three unique talents that they outperformed the norm in. The difficult part was that with school, a lot of these kids only were taught a narrow range of academics and way of teaching would limit the discovery of these talents- they may never know how good they were at something until much later on in life, where it would be harder to craft the skill. He also believed that, once those talents are discovered, things need to be taught in the way that person will understand. He demonstrated that, if you were teaching about money in math, one thing you would do is take the kids out to a McDonalds and order something, and have them count out the exact change.
The point of the survies were really that everyone learns differently. A lot of people are visual learners, some are hands on and need to do it to see it. Some people are very atheletic and there was a way of teaching, a more physically active and involved way of teaching that got to them better than memorization. Artsy types, who tended to be more visual did better with models--- not models that you see on a projecter, but hands on models that they perhaps even participating in making.
A more active and exploritory style of learning that is seen in many private art schools is what needs to replace the current one.
A couple of things, just for all things to be equal.
There is no such thing as a student who can't learn. If you find out a child's learning style, then nothing is closed to that child.
Some startling statistics: The United States is below most developed countries in students receiving high school diplomas. This means we have more dropouts than most developed nations. What's worse--? Only 27% of all people in the United States have a college diploma. Twenty-seven percent! That's horrible!
And we wonder why the jobless rate is so high in this country?
It has nothing to do with certain talents. The learning styles of students has not changed over the years; the curriculum, teaching styles, and school funding *has* changed. Otherwise, why would we have such a huge gap between home schooled graduates, private school graduates, and public school graduates? They all have to take the same standardized tests and they all have to learn a variety of subjects. They all have to know just as much.
The answer isn't a simple one, though. We can say it's this or that or the other thing, but really? It comes down to caring about the child in your classroom enough to help him or her succeed. Good teachers need the freedom to teach. Bad teachers need to GTFO. The curriculum needs to be based on what the child is expected to learn each year, not what tests are coming up. And parents need to be more involved with their child's education, rather than letting the state decide for them. How many parents go to school board meetings these days? How many parents actually find out about their school board members and vote when the school board elections come up?
I could go on and on. But as far as fixing it, I don't have any clear answers. Shai, I'll probably take you up on that challenge, but I have to do a bit of research first.
There is no such thing as a student who can't learn. If you find out a child's learning style, then nothing is closed to that child.
Some startling statistics: The United States is below most developed countries in students receiving high school diplomas. This means we have more dropouts than most developed nations. What's worse--? Only 27% of all people in the United States have a college diploma. Twenty-seven percent! That's horrible!
And we wonder why the jobless rate is so high in this country?
It has nothing to do with certain talents. The learning styles of students has not changed over the years; the curriculum, teaching styles, and school funding *has* changed. Otherwise, why would we have such a huge gap between home schooled graduates, private school graduates, and public school graduates? They all have to take the same standardized tests and they all have to learn a variety of subjects. They all have to know just as much.
The answer isn't a simple one, though. We can say it's this or that or the other thing, but really? It comes down to caring about the child in your classroom enough to help him or her succeed. Good teachers need the freedom to teach. Bad teachers need to GTFO. The curriculum needs to be based on what the child is expected to learn each year, not what tests are coming up. And parents need to be more involved with their child's education, rather than letting the state decide for them. How many parents go to school board meetings these days? How many parents actually find out about their school board members and vote when the school board elections come up?
I could go on and on. But as far as fixing it, I don't have any clear answers. Shai, I'll probably take you up on that challenge, but I have to do a bit of research first.
S
Shai Gar
The entire test is stupid. Pretty much every Australian would fail. Australian History is not taught in school.
We are expected to know that shit? I got 75%, I guess I was really lucky - I guessed right for Burnet, Eccles, Marshall and Cornforth even though I really can't remember who they are LOL. I think the questions are stacked so that you are more likely to guess the right answer.