RE: flexibility in schools (was: Ethics in a void)

From: Chris Russo (
Date: Thu Jan 25 2001 - 20:34:00 MST

At 01:25 +0100 1/26/01, denis bider wrote:
>Samantha Atkins writes:
>> > Overall, I think the preprogrammed nature of the school
>> > system as we have it (the concept is the same over there
>> > as it is here) is a problem in itself. The basic premise
>> > of education is that adults determine what kids should
>> > learn, and then these facts are rammed down children's
>> > throats. And kids who
>> Huh? If that is what education is then it would be a pretty
>> wrong-headed enterprise.
>Perhaps I was wrong to assume that US has it the same as we do over here.
>Speaking for our country, the system is such that from age 7 to 19, you sit
>in a classroom with 30 other kids 6-8 hours a day and endure the Chinese
>torture that is listening or pretending to listen to the teacher. This can
>be fun and exciting if the teacher is good and can motivate you, but too
>many teachers (most of them) aren't good enough to be able to do that.
>Hence, if your luck with teachers is bad enough, 13 years of boredom.

Notice that you started out blaming the system and forced curriculum,
but then admitted that the problem is more directly associated with
poor teachers. Not that I'm completely against more flexibility in
determining your own curriculum, but how would it solve the problem
of having poor teachers?

Shouldn't the first priority be to improve the quality of our teachers?


Chris Russo

"If anyone can show me, and prove to me, that I am wrong in thought 
or deed, I will gladly change.  I seek the truth, which never yet 
hurt anybody.  It is only persistence in self-delusion and ignorance 
which does harm."
              -- Marcus Aurelius, MEDITATIONS, VI, 21

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:56:25 MDT