If students are the future of America, why are we not investing in them heavily? Education is a system that was established and added onto but seldom looked at from a macro level. The system is tricky and often allows for disparities between schools not only in different districts but sometimes the same. Could an investment in the education system of the U.S. drive another technological revolution?
I believe that greater investment in education will allow students to develop a greater curiosity, the strongest intrinsic motivator we have. Stronger motivation to learn post graduation would lead to an increase in advancement. Also, reallowing trade programs to flourish in public schools to catch any student who aren’t interested in research or education but want to have a career path that will show them the results of their work (i.e., A general contractor sees their project move along in steps and gives them dopamine when the project completes each step). How could this be accomplished? What hurdles need to be overcome to shift a societal view on public school?
I think even before we get here, we have to define scope and purpose of public education. Historically, in the US, this was to give people a basic education, and prepare them for the world. This education could get you an ok job and the education was valuable. Now I think we have a hard time trying to determine its purpose.
@Theodore
The purpose of education is to give the student the intellectual tools to analyze, whether verbally or numerically, and to reach conclusions based on logic and evidence. - Thomas Sowell
Mentor said: @Theodore
The purpose of education is to give the student the intellectual tools to analyze, whether verbally or numerically, and to reach conclusions based on logic and evidence. - Thomas Sowell
I don’t disagree that’s what it should be but I am not sure all agree. Also if that’s what the goal is, how do we address some of the severe intellectual disabilities that the school had to deal with?
@Theodore
It’s more about stopping social promotion. Intellectual disabilities would definitely be an area to invest but we need some expectation on outcomes.
@Theodore
I agree many schools now have units that contain severely to moderately mentally handicapped individuals (in the old fashioned un-PC parlance “the mentally retarded” while I agree these children deserve care and education I’m not sure the public schools are the best choice as they appear to pull resources from students who will eventually live and work on their own.
@zane
Children with disabilities are our neighbors who deserve an appropriate education. They “pull resources” from society whether or not we dehumanize and exclude them, and ranking some children and their families as less important is an ugly and poorly educated for a society to treat its own citizens.
@MissNicklaus
Yes, but appropriate does not always mean “in the same class/school as everyone else.” In fact, that’s often completely inappropriate. Some students simply need more than public schools can provide. That’s just a fact. I’ve lived it, as have many others. It’s not fair to the disabled students and it’s not fair to the other students who have their education disrupted on a daily basis. The problem is that too many people focus on the “least restrictive environment” part of the phrase "least restrictive environment that is appropriate. We need more day schools that have the level of support that some students need to thrive. To say otherwise is disingenuous and shows a complete lack of understanding of what really goes on in schools.
zane said: @MissNicklaus
I’m not criticizing simply pointing out that the schools and their budgets weren’t originally intended for that mission.
True, but Congress gave them that duty with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, which predates the department of education. Every single child in the United States is legally entitled to a free and appropriate (for them) public education. And many of the individuals in these classes gain social skills that they would need to be able to hold any sort of productive capacity job for which they would likely be qualified. Without the social exposure of typical peers it is likely many more of these students will become even more expensive to take care of as adults when they have to be institutionalized.
zane said: @mason
Question is did congress give them the funding?
The courts have held that lack of funding is not an acceptable excuse for not providing services to these children. States are required to do so or will lose in court every time.
I like Sowell just fine, but learning for the sake of learning is only an intrinsic motivation, and doesn’t work in a practical world. The unspoken goal was that education would help kids make a living for them. But that ship has sailed in late stage capitalism or present day cronyism, insiderism and all other isms. As Aristotle concluded, it is better to be rich than to be smart. Rich being a relative term, where the bottom half is getting basic needs and retirement needs met without having to kill themselves doing it.
Mentor said: @Theodore
The purpose of education is to give the student the intellectual tools to analyze, whether verbally or numerically, and to reach conclusions based on logic and evidence. - Thomas Sowell
That’s not what school is doing today. It’s what it did for my generation, and we need to fix it for future generations.
Mentor said: @Theodore
The purpose of education is to give the student the intellectual tools to analyze, whether verbally or numerically, and to reach conclusions based on logic and evidence. - Thomas Sowell
Which is the VERY last thing the owners of the “United” States want.