18 May 16
Originally posted by normbenignNo need to think outside the box, just look at someone's else's box that is doing pretty well and copy what they are doing. As it turns out, it's not rocket science - you get good education when you train and hire good teachers.
Agreed! But the State determines the minimum education which it enforces on children to learn, and for adults to pay for. And it looks more and more like the choices of our education gurus aren't working.
Perhaps we need to think outside the box, which dictates publicly funded classes until age 16, which hardly qualifies anyone at that time even for ...[text shortened]... 't get much further, in another 8 years of public education.
Why not try something different?
18 May 16
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderthat is a matter of changing the school if it is not useful.
That "hippie moaning" happens to be true. And what skills are "essential" really should be decided by individuals rather than the State.
it is still preferable that children go to school rather than work in the fields. this is about child labour being a disgusting practice that needs to stop, not how good/bad/useless most schools are.
18 May 16
Originally posted by KazetNagorraToo lazy to research it...
No need to think outside the box, just look at someone's else's box that is doing pretty well and copy what they are doing. As it turns out, it's not rocket science - you get good education when you train and hire good teachers.
Do you know of any studies the measure the effect of more education of teachers with their effectiveness in the classroom?
My anectodal experience is that beyond basic education in classroom pedagogy, training teachers more and more in specific disciplines that they will teach yields diminishing (and even negative) returns on their effectiveness.
To teach 4th graders math, you don't have to be Terrance Tao. At most, you need to know math on a high school level. More important is your training in pedagogy, but even so, I've always thought effectiveness as an elementary school teacher is more a function of talent, learning from experience and willingness to adapt than it is a function of education.
18 May 16
Originally posted by no1marauderWe are not "competent" enough to even agree to a work contract below the minimum wage it seems.
Following that logic, why shouldn't children be able to support themselves by prostitution and/or selling drugs? IF they are competent enough to make enforceable labor contracts, they then should be able to do support themselves in those ways IF you are consistent in your "libertarian" principles,
Hence the nanny state telling us how we should work and for how much cuz we simply are not smart enough to figure it out for ourselves.
18 May 16
Originally posted by sh76With technology it is hard to understand why they still have teachers in every class room.
Too lazy to research it...
Do you know of any studies the measure the effect of more education of teachers with their effectiveness in the classroom?
My anectodal experience is that beyond basic education in classroom pedagogy, training teachers more and more in specific disciplines that they will teach yields diminishing (and even negative) returns on th ...[text shortened]... of talent, learning from experience and willingness to adapt than it is a function of education.
All you need are a had full of proven effective teachers creating an interactive program children can access at home via computer.
Funding schools is a huge waste of money.
18 May 16
Originally posted by whodeyI don't think it's smart to downplay the social development element of school.
With technology it is hard to understand why they still have teachers in every class room.
All you need are a had full of proven effective teachers creating an interactive program children can access at home via computer.
Funding schools is a huge waste of money.
I do agree that it's time for a radical shift in the way instruction is done though.
I don't know the best system with today's technology, but I'm pretty sure it's not 25 children at desks and a teacher at the front of the room lecturing to them.
18 May 16
Originally posted by sh76Social development? You mean kids can't develop socially without school? 😲
I don't think it's smart to downplay the social development element of school.
I do agree that it's time for a radical shift in the way instruction is done though.
I don't know the best system with today's technology, but I'm pretty sure it's not 25 children at desks and a teacher at the front of the room lecturing to them.
18 May 16
Originally posted by KazetNagorraI'm all for "good" public schools. One thing that would enhance their "goodness" is not forcing students to be there.
No need to think outside the box, just look at someone's else's box that is doing pretty well and copy what they are doing. As it turns out, it's not rocket science - you get good education when you train and hire good teachers.
18 May 16
Originally posted by no1marauderYes, those children who have the audacity to have stupid parents who don't want their kids to have an education should simply learn from their mistakes and take better parents the next time.
I'm all for "good" public schools. One thing that would enhance their "goodness" is not forcing students to be there.
18 May 16
Originally posted by KazetNagorraWhy not simply have the State just take away all the kids to decrease the intolerable risk that their parents might be too stupid to raise them in the way experts like yourself think desirable?
Yes, those children who have the audacity to have stupid parents who don't want their kids to have an education should simply learn from their mistakes and take better parents the next time.
20 May 16
Originally posted by whodeychildren aren't "smart" enough to decide for themselves, and parents don't always hold their best interests at heart or are sometimes so desperate they have no choice but to send a 10 year old to work.
We are not "competent" enough to even agree to a work contract below the minimum wage it seems.
Hence the nanny state telling us how we should work and for how much cuz we simply are not smart enough to figure it out for ourselves.
that's where the "nanny state" (we call it simply "the government", chosen by us) comes in. it enforces the very reasonable and obvious "no child labor please, under any circumstance". it should also create a society where there is nobody so desperate as to be a migrant worker.
Originally posted by Zahlanzi===no child labor please, under any circumstance===
children aren't "smart" enough to decide for themselves, and parents don't always hold their best interests at heart or are sometimes so desperate they have no choice but to send a 10 year old to work.
that's where the "nanny state" (we call it simply "the government", chosen by us) comes in. it enforces the very reasonable and obvious "no child labor ...[text shortened]... ". it should also create a society where there is nobody so desperate as to be a migrant worker.
Really? No government goes that far and prevents all child labor. I got a summer job when I was 14. For 8 weeks, I worked 9-5 cleaning rat cages and maintaining cleanliness in the rat cage rooms at a pharmaceutical company. Made $6/hour, which was a lot of money for a kid my age at that time. Allowed me to buy my very own personal computer. Was I abused?
20 May 16
Originally posted by sh76the law (or lack of) that allowed you to get a summer job means another kid much younger than 14 might get sent to work the fields in scorching heat and not to buy a luxury item. for much longer than a summer.
===no child labor please, under any circumstance===
Really? No government goes that far and prevents all child labor. I got a summer job when I was 14. For 8 weeks, I worked 9-5 cleaning rat cages and maintaining cleanliness in the rat cage rooms at a pharmaceutical company. Made $6/hour, which was a lot of money for a kid my age at that time. Allowed me to buy my very own personal computer. Was I abused?
no child labor, under any circumstance
20 May 16
Originally posted by ZahlanziLaws can (and do) regulate child labor without prohibiting it entirely.
the law (or lack of) that allowed you to get a summer job means another kid much younger than 14 might get sent to work the fields in scorching heat and not to buy a luxury item. for much longer than a summer.
no child labor, under any circumstance