I keep hearing people say this phrase all the time. Or.. when I was in school we had to do such and such which was so much harder then what you do now. Do you really think american youth are becoming dumber and dumber as the generations go by? **************************************************** 12-11-03, 06:17 PM DorianGreyed I graduated from high school in the 1960s, and from college in 1994. In the late 90s, I taught, both in public schools and private. The minimum requirement now required of students has dropped so much in that time that is is scandalous. I have spoken to many people who graduated from colleges and universities in both Illinois and Missouri, and several other states, and all reported about the same. This is not to say that the best students are less than what they were; if anything, they know a great deal more in most areas. (However, even the best are lacking in knowledge of history, literature, and the arts.) The average students know so little or those areas that it is frightening. I have seen students get a high school diploma not knowing who won the Revolutionary War, and teachers who knew so little of their subject matter that they would not have graduated from my high school at the time I was there. (I went to a large blue collar school in a steel mill town. It was not exactly a prep school for advanced students. My class was the first in the school's history to have 50% go on to college.) The US education system is in appalling shape, and isn't getting any better. Several friend who teach at private schools, all expensive ones in affluent areas, report the same experiences there.
12-11-03, 10:12 PM stampeding turtles Steve Allen wrote a book several years back about this called "Dumbth" that I read. It made a cogent argument about this "dumbing down" you speak of. He gave many ideas on the causes and how to remedy the situation.
To me it seems rather subjective and hard to pin down something as elusive as intelligence compared to others at another time in history. I don't think actual intelligence is any less, but perhaps the strengths and weaknesses are different, depending on the area of knowledge. The past generation had less to learn about in sciences, technology, computers as there has been an explosion of information in these areas.I do think they were better in literary skills(as we have a visual culture, except for Harry Potter books Wink), history, and the classics than today's youth. I see it as a matter of priorities with limited resources and time, in a system that wants or needs to educate vocationally, rather than in the liberal arts- or a "well-rounded" education. But the reasons are understandable in today's high tech world... that has to compete with Asia and Europe in math and science.
12-12-03, 03:04 PM JohnGalt Today's College Students Barely More Knowledgeable than High School Students of 50 Years Ago, Poll Shows
02-25-04, 01:32 PM PerfectPeach I dont think students are becoming "dumber." I think the fault belongs to our teachers. I've had very few teachers who actually taught me. There is a big difference between teaching and handing someone a book & worksheets and proceeding to babysit the class. That is what most teachers are... babysitters. I dont think there is enough discipline. Many teachers allow make up work at the last minute. Students have become lazy and the teachers allow it.
02-25-04, 04:06 PM Fritzzs Yes, the kids today ARE dumber than years ago, for the reason that they are not taught properly..
In History for instance, they learn nothing about WW11 because it is not politically correct, especially the Japanese kids....They (the Japanese) kids don't even know that Japan started WW11, but of course they know we dropped the "bomb"... Today, the PC thing to do is re-write history to fit todays adjenda...Talk about ********!!!.....
John, you are so correct in that article about kids 50 years ago vs today....So-called Public schools are highly lacking when it comes to educating our future leaders...Not all of course, but I would say the majority...
I used the term above "PUBLIC SCHOOLS"... That is wrong.... They should be called GOVERNMENT SCHOOLS....!
When I was growing up, we had teachers who KNEW HOW TO TEACH !!!!...And I can still name them today...And if you didn't learn , dammit, you flunked, and did the year over...
Lets not even go to the subject of class disipline...
Do you know that here in Florida (and I bet other states too) the minimum requirement to be a substitute teacher is that you have a high school diploma ????
Think about THAT !!!!
On the other hand, lets not put ALL blame on teachers..... The so-called parents have something to do with it too......
Boy 'O boy, there could be almost a book written on this subject.....Yes, I am being sarcastic.......
Geeeeeze.....Now I need a drink....! Errrrrrrr. Mad
[This message was edited by donrent on 02-25-04 at 04:20 PM.]
[This message was edited by donrent on 02-25-04 at 04:23 PM.]
[This message was edited by VivienneHa on 02-26-04 at 03:55 PM.]
02-25-04, 04:53 PM aminator2002 Comparing apples and oranges. I read through the report that Johngalt posted and am not surprised at all by the results. Quite a few of the questions would have been contemporary to the students of the 1950's whereas now they are history to the students of today. It is also not surprising that some of the Geography questions were very weak... we have heard this repeatedly and quite honestly it is proving everyday that it is irrelevant that more than 50% of students know that Maine borders Canada... it is a testement to the fact that it is useless knowledge.
There are also a lot of foreign students in our universities and they have no need to know that Maine borders Canada. My mother can still recite all the states with their capitals... this was part of the requirements for her to graduate high school. Does it really matter that they dropped that from our education? I don't think it does. I can read a map just fine... and these days maps and books and information are available at any time.
To me it's like saying that because we can no longer recite the Bible that we are not as well educated as they were in the 1700's... we can all have a Bible of our very own these days so there is no need to memorize it.
A couple other things that soil the comparison between today's students and the 1950's...
-more people go to college now -there is more focus on specialized knowledge for technical fields now -we have a lot more foreign language students in our universities -colleges are actually businesses now and it doesn't pay to flunk your clients -education always has been and will continue to be what the student makes of it.
02-25-04, 09:30 PM coldfuse
quote:education always has been and will continue to be what the student makes of it.
Your last point really struck home with me, ami. There seems to be a societal trend towards "blamelessness" or "blaming others" for one's deficiencies. Yes, the teachers have a responsibility to teach, but the students can't control that. What they can control is their own responsibility - to learn! 02-25-04, 09:48 PM jusork
quote:Originally posted by donrent: In History for instance, they learn nothing about WW11 because it is not politically correct, especially the Japanese kids....They (the Japanese) kids don't even know that Japan started WW11, but of course they know we dropped the "bomb"... Today, the PC thing to do is re-write history to fit todays adjenda...Talk about bull thit!!!.....
Are you sure? I learned all about that throughout my schooling.
I think most teachers lay out the things we need to learn just fine.
And we did have to memorize the states and capitals in elementary school.
02-25-04, 10:06 PM coldfuse Jusork, I think omission of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor occurs in schools in Japan - not elsewhere.
02-25-04, 11:19 PM K.K. While this post is slamming the borders on acceptability as far as the world wide membership/fellowship concept goes, I find one point repeated and not substantiated.
The only AnswerPool.com member is Lungbutter, to my knowledge, who has ever spent time being educated in Japan. I would like to know if anyone who was formally educated in Japan can shed light on the matter of the omission of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor before any more diatribes are based on this concept. I have never seen a revisionist version of the events that shows that the Japanese educators are saying that someone else initiated the part of the war the got the USA involved, as the war was in full throttle before we ever fired a shot. I was Born in 1961, to set my era, but my two highschool children are covering material far more complex than I ever did and I was, for the bulk of my high school education in accelerated course studies. I guess it may depend on when and where you go to school but in Texas it is no walk in the park.
What students do with this available education is another matter. Three of my four children are honor roll students and the fourth is on and off of the honor roll.
I don't see nearly as many illiterate 20 year olds as I do 50 year olds. For whatever that is worth.
We have some real dolts running around out there but we have some brilliant minds that were cultivated in the United States public school system.
I am not related to nor do I have any friends who are teaching professionals. I usually disagree with these people's politics as well. But they are educating our children, and not doing too shabby with the ones I know. 02-26-04, 09:11 AM Fritzzs Jusork, you were in a much better school system than normal....Needless to say, school systems vary greatly from area to area...state to state...
Hugh: A couple years ago, (I think NBC), there was a program about how the Japanese were not taught the true facts about WW11...The newer generation had no ideal what really happen....
02-26-04, 11:11 AM aminator2002 Hugh:
Search The Rape of Nanking and you will find that a major dispute between China and Japan for the past 50 years has been that the Japanese will not take responsibility for their crimes of war against China. There are still a whole lot of very hard feelings between China and Japan about their actions during the war... not to diminish the attack on Pearl Harbor but we tend to see that as the worst atrocity committed and it is just one of many.
It is also a dispute between Japan and all it's surrounding nations who were attacked (including us) that Japan has been teaching their children a one-sided view of WWII. From what I've read, this history paints the Japanese as the victims of the A-bomb rather than the instigators of a major conflict in the Pacific. I believe that this is being addressed now though... I would like to learn more about it as well.
So... basically, this has nothing to do with whether the American school system has been dumbed down over the years.
02-26-04, 01:32 PM PerfectPeach
quote:Originally posted by aminator2002:
-education always has been and will continue to be what the student makes of it.
I can agree with that statememt. I am an honor roll student as well at my highschool. But I still feel as though my teachers don't really teach the best way possible. Most of them hand out grades so its not really hard to be in advanced classes and make good grades. For instance, my AP European History teacher reads over the tests (question and answer) then hands us the tests. There is no need for us to study and learn the material because we memorize the answers while she is giving the answers to us. In my AP Govt Class, the teacher was more concerned with getting her job "complete" rather than actually teaching the material to us. She was a bad teacher and made us suffer because of it. In the beginning of the year we spent approximately 3 weeks on each chapter. It was a very slow pace but she had a big mouth and talked off subject. Towards the end of the semester, she freaked out because we still had 15 chapters in the book left and there were only 2 weeks left. So she typed notes for those 15 chapters and we had open note tests every day for 2 weeks. I would have learned more if she had reviewed with us, explained, and lectured those 2 weeks than giving me an open note test.
I know that most students are increasingly becoming more apathetic towards their grades. I know that since the beginning of this semester over 50 students have decided to get their GED instead. I know that the majority of it is the students lack of desire for knowledge. But I desire to learn and I dont feel that I am being taught the right way by most of my teachers. ( I have 3 out of 6 good ones this year... I got lucky Wink)
03-26-04, 09:55 AM Rakuchild I wish I'd had the resources to send my children to private school or to homeschool them when they were young. The bulk of the school year here seems to be preparing students to take proficientcy tests. My son took the high school tests (including the essay) in 8th grade and passed it all. He then asked for his diploma and was angry when he was denied. He believed he had proved that he knew all he needed to know and should be set free from the burden of school. In high school, he was placed in a "Fame" school for the arts but wound up dropping out and taking the GED in one day. He passed it all with flying colors. I can't say he isn't intelligent, but all he was actually required to do in school was pass tests from junior high on.
My daughter is not a test taker. In high school, she was still trying to pass parts of the proficiency test so she could graduate. The tests shook her confidence. She did just well enough on her ACTs to get into college, where she is doing better than she did in high school. She delayed going to college for a year though because she felt she wasn't smart enough- all because it had taken her all of high school to pass those damned tests. Finally her love of theatre won out and she's found enthusiasm for education.
Too much time spent on teaching students how to take tests here. It's not the teachers' faults. They are judged by how well students do on tests. Tests that have very little to do with what the teacher would like to be teaching. It can't be very exciting for students or teachers in public schools. If parents don't offer kids learning experiences outside of the schoolroom, they may become passive about learning and not investigate things. Creativity has to be encouraged and rewarded.
05-15-04, 02:03 AM Kaneda Japan did not start WWII, Germany started WWII.
Also, there are many 'facts' about Japan's involvement (including the events leading up to it's involvement) in the War that Americans are never taught about.
05-15-04, 06:21 AM Karrow Welcome to AnswerPool, Kaneda. Smile
I don't see where anyone has stated that Japan started WWII, nor have I known anyone to believe this.
Aminator did say Japan were "instigators of a major conflict in the Pacific". In other words that they attacked Pearl Harbour which brought the United States into the war.
What the members who posted on this were saying is that they had heard that until recently pupils in Japanese schools weren't given the full facts on Japan's attack on the U.S.A. in 1941, and only told about the A bombs dropped on Japan at the end of the war. In other words, given a biased account of history.
They commented on this to show how individiual countries and/or teachers could mislead pupils with their bias. And they weren't saying that this only happened in Japan.
As Hugh said "I would like to know if anyone who was formally educated in Japan can shed light on the matter of the omission of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor before any more diatribes are based on this concept. I have never seen a revisionist version of the events that shows that the Japanese educators are saying that someone else initiated the part of the war the got the USA involved.
If you were educated at a Japanese school, I'm sure everyone would be very pleased if you could give them factual information on how the history of WWII is taught there now, and if that differs from how it was taught in the past.
05-15-04, 06:55 AM Kaneda
quote:Originally posted by Karrow: Welcome to AnswerPool, Kaneda. Smile
Thanks Smile
quote:I don't see where anyone has stated that Japan started WWII, nor have I known anyone to believe this.
Donrent said it above, and Jusork picked up on it.
quote:What the members who posted on this were saying is that they had heard that _ until recently_ pupils in Japanese schools weren't given the full facts on Japan's attack on the U.S.A. in 1941, and only told about the A bombs dropped on Japan at the end of the war. In other words, given a biased account of history.
Everyone is given a biased account of history. There are many factors about Asia's involvement in the War that aren't generally taught.
quote:If you were educated at a Japanese school, I'm sure everyone would be very pleased if you could give them factual information on how the history of WWII is taught there now, and if that differs from how it was taught in the past.
I'm not actually Japanese, I'm an exchange student from England at a University in Tokyo. I'm going to ask my Japanese friends how they were taught about the war in school, I'll let you know what they say Smile.
05-15-04, 12:28 PM DvdGStwrt Post World War eye eye (WWII) saw a bright new future in education. The kids raised and schooled in the late 40s and through the 50s were given the best that America had to offer. Education was very important.
The theory was that if we educate American Youth America will be strong, American's will hold greater Power over the rest of the World, and to one degree or another this was true.
But there was an unseen side effect to education, in the 1960's those educated youth were growing up, reaching Adulthood. They saw the world for what it really was and protested the injustices and the ignorances of America.
Oops.
The Riots and Civil Movements were caused by mass education. Education at all levels caused a generation of self thinkers to look around and say "Enough!"
The Civil Rights Movement gave birth to backward educational growth which is a purposeful Dumbing Down of America so the Government can maintain its control over population.
Mind there are others things going on as well. More laws that we can shake a stick at for one.
The Standards for Education are being lowered all the time. A dumber American is one who will be more prone to vote as told, will be more prone to be a follower instead of a leader. Will tend to buy the Daily propaganda dished out by the Major Media Outlets (owned by a very few individuals who have strong ties to politics).
America was based ont he notion of being a Nation of the People By the People. The federal Government is unconstitutional, it is not suppose to be as strong as it is - this was not the intent. If you Educate Americans to where everyone knows this, then you will have a rebellion on your hands.
The Feds know this, and they would really hate to lose that power and the money comes with it. Federal Government is big business, makes lots of money and provides many comfy jobs.
The facts are clear, American Education is nothing compared to other Western nations. We are becoming a Nation of ignorant Cattle who follow the leader to their own slaughter. This is what the Government wants.
This "No Child Left Behind" is just a pretty stage show, will cost a lot of money and do nothing for our kids.
Prop 13 in California was suppose to bring California Public Schools into the late 20th Century by forming a lottery which many play but which hasn't done much for the Schools. We still have class room over crowding, few teachers, less supplies and tools. We are still using schools which were used in my generation with trailers added to support the growing student body. The Promise of New Schools, More Teachers, Better pay for those Teachers, More tools, was a hype dream which made the Lottery (a big money producer which seems to fund other things) a reality.
This is why Private education and In home education is gaining popularity. Sure, the Media says its because of things like Columbine (a very small reason compared to the growing illiteracy rate and other failures of Public Education). Many parents who select alternative education for their kids know and understand that Public Education in America is a joke.
But what else can we expect from a society that pays millions of dollars to two men who step in a ring and beat each other to a bloody pulp while still paying its teachers barely enough for them to survive?
05-15-04, 02:34 PM DorianGreyed Number of school days in six countries*
1. Japan - 243 school days a year (238-243) 2. Germany - 230 3. South Korea - 220 4. Israel - 216 5. Netherlands - 200 6. Thailand - 200 (*The United States has 180 school days a year.) Source: World Features Syndicate
Perhaps that has something to do with the state of US education. Subtract from those days the time required to "teach the test" (the various state and national tests required to stay off watch lists and qualify for state and federal funds) and the half days during wihich nothing is done but attendance (but they count as a full day) and you will find that there is little time for teaching. Discipline matters also eat away at teaching time. The average hour long TV show has 44 minutes of actual programming. The 'hour" a teacher gets in front of students is actually 44-48 minutes. Subtract from that 44-48 minutes the time it takes to take attendance, get the students calmed down enough to actually pay attention, deal with discipline, collect assignments, give assignments, and do a re-cap of yesterday in order to get the students ready to learn (Thor forbid there should be a late arrival or a PA announcement.), and you will find that the "hour of class" is less than 30 minutes. All of my friends who teach spend hours in the evening and on week-ends grading, reading, and planning for their classes. (This is not to say that there aren't poor teachers; bad workers exist in every job.) There is not enough time during the day, even with the Planning Hour most get.
With regard to geography not being that important - In the 1990s, when tested, many US college students were unable to locate Mexico or Canada on a world map. US students scored lower than most European students, including the former Soviet Union countries. The US ranking when world history is tested is similar. How students like these can be expected to understand current events without knowing anything of how things got this way is beyond me. Yet we expect these people to make informed choice when voting. (This is not to say that this lack of learning did not always exist to some degree, and KK is right when he says that some students cover more complex issues today than was covered before. In AP we have people over 40 who apparently don't know what started WW II, who don't realize that many leaders in other countries are just as loved by their people as ours and in many cases less-hated, and whose understanding of history is 'less than accurate.' The fact that these people vote is just as frightening as the ones who couldn't find Canada getting to vote.)
The argument that there is more to learn now could be said at any time in history. Somehow that didn't stop students before. Further, why does is seem to be a problem for only US students?
There is no doubt that the best students that the US produces are among the best in the world. It is our average students that fall shamefully behind most other industrialized countries. Our systen is geared for the best students, with the enriched classes, and the worst, the ones in special education. The average student is almost an afterthought.
(Before it comes up that teachers only work part of the year, I remind those who would say that about the hours spent at home doing school work, and further say that many, if not most, states require teachers to take classes during the summer to further their own education.)
05-15-04, 02:35 PM jusork the dumbing down of american youth Yay. Thanks again, Kaneda.
"In the 1990s, when tested, many US college students were unable to locate Mexico or Canada on a world map."
I really find that mind blowing.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: jusork, 05-15-04 04:01 PM
05-15-04, 06:55 PM babthrower It would be hard to prove which students, those who graduated in the 1960's and those graduating now, were better educated.
I thought then that Americans (U.S.A.) had a poor grasp of world history. In Canada we learned a fair bit of world history but it was very Eurocentric. That is probably because of our strong ties with Britain, and the British influence on our education system. But both Americans and Canadians are ignorant of Asian history.
We could go back and look at old exam papers, but that would not be a fair test, because there has been quite a shift in emphasis in course material. No doubt we could find questions on the 1960's papers that children today could not answer. And no doubt we could find quesions on today's exams that children in the '60's could not have answered.
Also I'm a bit of a skeptic. When I hear a statement such as "Of 100 university graduates polled, only three could name the capital of the United States," I want to know who took the test and under what circumstances and so on. Was it a man-on-the-street poll? How do we know the subjects were university grads? Because they said so? How do we know all responses were counted? Did the questioner have an ax to grind? And so forth.
If in fact education is defective, should it not be the education system that should be vetted, and not the teachers? Vetting the teachers only works to weed out those that are below the norm.
05-15-04, 08:08 PM FredPuli You are not alone; a similar complaint is made in the UK and in France too.
What is most alarming to an outsider, viewing and hearing Americans is not that education standards there may be lower than ours (or not).It would not matter much if the President himself couldn't find Bangladesh or Qatar or Paris (France not Tx ) or Berlin on a map. That he may not know the date of Waterloo or Hastings cannot matter much.
What is worrying is when Americans think that history is not History unless it has involved America and Americans directly. If not, it might as well be Sanskrit poetry; interesting in its own way, to academics, but not relevant to American life, politics or the world . To that extent your education fails you very badly indeed. We hear Americans talk of 'the 1917 War'. That children are taught that WW2 'began' when America declared war on Japan and Germany.( I've seen texts that say exactly that ). This is more than sloppy language; it is sloppy, insular, perception.
It shows. It shows post 9/11. It shows in Iraq. It shows in US dealings with foreigners. It shows in polls in the US.It shows on AP where angry, indignant, but uncomprehending posts prove it. It shows in every mistake you make and then have to do a U-turn , a complete volte face, to try to remedy, doing what every old hand said you should at the outset.
Americans seem to believe terrorism, city bombings and the like really only began on 9/11. They have never learned and understood the idea that European nations have lived with terrorism, bombings, uprisings, rebellions, religious leaders, religious fanatics, and religious based wars for centuries. They do not understand that terrorists then were no different in planning and motive, thinking and roots, psychology and origins to those now. The Fenian or the Thug, the mad Mahdi or the Mau Mau, EOKA or the Provisional IRA are earlier, that's all. No wonder then that their response is that of a complete beginner who thinks it's never been done before
Coupled with that is the extraordinary way in which so many do not understand that foreigners are not Americans who never got around to emigrating Big Grin
Watch Americans and French people meeting socially or in business. Anxiety and hostility can arise. Why ? The Americans do not even begin to understand that the French were raised differently to them; it has never entered their heads to think or enquire of that. The body language, personal space, how children are seen by parents and others,social conventions, friendships, dating and courting,are all very different. From his or her earliest days that person has been becoming a French person; not a misplaced American. Yet to the Americans a French employee,builder, doctor,woman, voter or politician seems is just an American employee, builder etc who happens to be in France; and that's only the French case. Transfer this thinking to other foreigners, to Arabs , to muslims anywhere and you may guess what happens.
Americans have never ruled anybody. All the more reason to learn what it involved. That means history ,as well as foreign travel. The old Empires not only learned it but they sent hundreds of thousands of their citizens to experience the mechanics of it, to live in it and learn the foreign minds.The British were quite happy to talk of 'Johnny Foreigner' but they knew that the cultures and thinking were different; these might be 'hun' or 'dago' or wop' but the abuse was only in the slang name not in ignorance of how these people had to be handled. These Europeans were 'next door' and every leader had spent time with their people in between fighting them or creating alliances with them. Their history informed all sides.
Likewise you cannot rule hundreds of millions of people in India or anywhere else by force and against their will.They must at the very least acquiesce. When you have millions of Hindus alongside millions of muslims you learn fast how to handle them, to be accepted or you die. Again even a short acquaintance with the Indian Mutiny would have given a clue.
When all this is compounded by the ordinary American never leaving the States;not often owning a passport even; the need for education in geography, in its wider sense, and in history becomes paramount. You can only expect to have leaders and military who do not understand elected by people who do not understand , otherwise.
05-16-04, 12:09 AM Sherasi FredPuli, That was a very thought-provoking response and points out some flaws in American perception that I hadn't realized I possessed.
05-16-04, 11:36 AM babthrower Fred points out that if you study history you can learn from the mistakes of others.
The magnificent trilogy Heaven's Command, Pax Britannica, Farewell the Trumpets by the British historian James Morris documents many of the mistakes -- and the successes -- of the British when they had their turn at bat. Morris sees the rewards of imperialism as 'the hope of profit, the pleasure of aurhority, and the chance of doing good'. I think Americans would agree that these motives are present in themselves, when they consider the power which economic imperialism conveys to them today.
But I do think that Fred overstates his case a bit. Britain had a huge foreign affairs machine at one time, true. But it was not in the school system that they learned how to manage other nations, to the extent that they did learn to do that. (And it is the school system that is the topic of this thread.) (They had some disastrous failures: South Africa, Palestine, Northern Ireland, even India.) Nor was it in the school system that they learned the nice distinctions between the cultural norms of different ethnic groups around the world. It was in the field. They had a tradition of foreign service extending over several hundred years, from their first incursions into India in the 17th century until their final withdrawal, in the 20th century, from the imperial field.
In fact, one of the reasons given by some historians as to why the British lost their empire (or let it slip away) was -- their school system! The officer class studied Greek and Latin at university and then were put in charge of men more seasoned and having much more experience of warfare than these officers; but the ranks were filled by lower class men. And none of them, no matter how able, courageous or intelligent, were eligible for promotion to officer class. So Britain did rather well when at war with third world peoples, but less well when pitted against other Europeans. Still, it was a level playing field in Europe. The class system was prevalent.
In the school system, British children saw a map that showed huge areas in pink -- and were told that these lands were all subject to Britain: the British Empire. They were taught that these many nations 'belonged' to Britain. Britain had won the contest among the nations of Europe for domination of the nations of Africa, Asia, and the Pacific. Britain had retained two of the geographically largest colonies ever: Canada and Australia. But what the children were taught was Eurocentric, and focused chiefly on the British experience.
05-16-04, 04:01 PM FredPuli Babthrower :If 'some historians ' are right a system unchanged for centuries which did not cause problems suddenly (in 1948 and on ) lost us an Empire or let it slip away. What do the majority, not 'some' of the historians say ? I bet they say that the Depression followed by World War II bankrupting Britain and losing her the means, the men and the will to administer it, 'lost it' or let it slip away. That makes more sense doesn't it; rather than that the Indians (or we) suddenly, but belatedly, discovered the common soldiery knew no Ancient Greek and couldn't get above Regimental Sergeant Major (actually they could late on but why spoil it)? Big Grin We had bread ,food and clothing rationing remember and needed every man and penny we could find ; hardly the mood for empire !
British education:
It is a misunderstanding to think that, in those days, we only learned the people skills in the field ; as if, like a whole load of Americans suddenly shipped out to Iraq or Afghanistan we arrived in total ignorance of them with leaders who had to look the places up on a map or ask the Foreign Office.
The whole education of a boy here was built on the premiss that he would likely be employed in the Empire. Indeed most of the better-off families had at least one member in the Empire or Dominions.In the less well off clerical,type, of family the Empire was again a great lure. In the 'working classes' the military was an enormous employer. The chances of an ordinary soldier passing his career in England was nil.
[ BTW Even our slang reflects this shared experience. To an ordinary bloke 'take a quick look' is still 'take a shufti' ( from soldiery based in North or East Coast of Africa; it's Arabic) 'or 'take a dekko' (from soldiery based in India;it's Hindi )]
Now you do not imagine that our schools and schooling went on oblivious to this fact, do you?
When I was a boy we were still being taught about the lives of the tribes and peoples of Africa (how many American 8 year olds would know the domestic arrangements, life , economy and livelihood of the Masai or the Kikuyu or how manioc is prepared? ) and of the arrangement of India, Pakistan and so on. Of course we were. We would, when the syllabus was designed, have formed those who would administer or deal with it and these peoples.Even if we were not it was essential that we understood it and understood it early. Incidentally a bizarre thing I can remember was the number of pictures in books illustrating the heads and facial features of the various peoples; as though we were then or before, to memorise them. Confused This suggests the amusing idea that e.g. if stationed as novices in Kenya (twenty years on) we were expected to spot a Kikuyu from a Masai at a distance and so avoid dreadful diplomatic faux pas (asking the Kikuyu about his zebu herd for example ) Anyway the Empire and its ways and peoples were taught from day one.
We were even prepared for military leadership. Every " Public School" ( =private here ) had its Officer Training Corps. This was compulsory and part of the regular curriculum. ( Even I had to do it in the 1960s though they'd changed its name by then ). Boys began age 15 or 16 and were taught, under the supervision of professionals, begining as Private or Seaman, and were able to pass through cadet ranks; ready with some experience should the need arise, and some understanding if not.All had to do it whatever their intended career might turn out to be.
Now the US system does not, it seems, fom what we see and now read, prepare its children for America's role in the world at all. It prepares them only to survive in the shopping mall, the factory floor or the office in America with Americans. Nobody suggests that they are to rule somewhere for 200 years Big Grin But they need to understand at least the basics of what goes on and why and how, and why these mysterious 'foreigners ' do and think as they do. If they do not they are bound to have no judgment at all on those who lead them, on what is said or done in their name,even why any soldier is sent anywhere, and no understanding at all of what is the correct course for America.With that comes sad consequences for us all. Of outside they know nothing and care less; until suddenly they find their country having trouble with foreigners. It prepares its leaders not at all for steering the 'ship' that is the most powerful nation in the world; they proceed with neither chart nor seamanship.
05-16-04, 04:32 PM babthrower Fred:
You're right, not everyone agrees with the notion that the empire slipped away from Britain. I don't believe I said that they did.
Nor am I in any way glad that it did. Here in Canada we were proud to be part of the British Empire, and, later, the commonwealth. There were plenty of reasons. The most important one, as I see it, is that we were part of, and benefitted from, a great tradition of liberal democracy and humanitarian reform. It's also true that there was a great deal of racism (or as you Brits say, I think, 'racialism') but then in those days everyone was racist. (Except my father.)
Also having had uncles who fought in World War II I know from heresay about the desperate times in Britain during those years. It is really hard to imagine what would have happened in the world if Britain had not hung in, against terrible odds, against the Nazis until the U.S. joined us in 1942. Just speculating, but if Britain had collapsed, the U.S. would not have joined the allies, but would instead have taken a 'wait and see' approach, and the dominions (Canada and Australia) would have dropped out, because we would have had no base of operations in Europe. This would have allowed Germany to entrench herself in Europe, then expand her colonies. I'm not saying that we would all be under the jackboot, but certainly on humanitarian grounds we would be much worse off.
I believe my point was that preparation for carrying the 'white man's burden' (OOPS!) is not really a matter for the school curriculum. We all know that Americans have a reputation in Europe for not embracing the various cultures there. We all know that Americans today have little or no insight into the motives and experience of the various Muslim peoples of the world, and particularly those in the middle east. But that is not the fault of the education system per se . It is due to the barrage of propaganda to which Americans (including Canadians) have been subjected since the early Cold War days. First it was against the communist countries. After their collapse, it has been against the Muslim countries. In both cases the hatred that was engendered was planted and nourished by those with economic and political goals which they did not voice publicly, who were in positions of power and influence.
And like obedient dogs, we hate whom we are taught to hate.
So I did not mean any disrespect for the British people. Nor Americans, for that matter.
05-22-04, 01:16 PM cavmantwo The "Dumbing Down of America" not only concerns our educational system but also business, politics, etc. One can see this in the mind numbing commercials and the 30 second sound bytes that now pass for political ads. Why? Dumb people are easier to sell to. Dumb people are easier to govern. Just ask any dictator.
12-12-04, 02:52 PM SeattleRon the kids aren't dumb. it's the education system thats dumb. They focus on useless stuff. Stuff they should only be learning if they want to learn it. How is knowing who George Washington was gonna help them find jobs. Or knowing what an acute angle is verses an obtuse angle when you're out there getting mugged or ripped off. They need to teach classes on how to avoid getting scammed. How to invest your money. Police brutality, Teach classes on life lessons. Stuff like that. Then you'll see a smarter youth. Street knowledge is much for valuable than than some BS Gym class or social studies.
12-13-04, 12:12 AM DvdGStwrt
quote:Originally posted by SeattleRon: the kids aren't dumb. it's the education system thats dumb. They focus on useless stuff. Stuff they should only be learning if they want to learn it. How is knowing who George Washington was gonna help them find jobs. Or knowing what an acute angle is verses an obtuse angle when you're out there getting mugged or ripped off. They need to teach classes on how to avoid getting scammed. How to invest your money. Police brutality, Teach classes on life lessons. Stuff like that. Then you'll see a smarter youth. Street knowledge is much for valuable than than some BS Gym class or social studies.
12-13-04, 03:56 AM
SeattleRon It's not that I don't believe in education man, but you should be educated in the kind of stuff that will help you out in life man. If people were willing to educate their children a little bit better in street smarts, then I wouldn't be sitting here at age 22 owning a 3 bedroom house with 2 cars because I used to sell and deal drugs. You don't learn that stuff in school. These kids and teens need to learn about life in stead of stuff they don't need to know about unless they want to.
12-13-04, 10:48 AM babthrower Think about it this way, Seattle. Suppose someone ratted on a former drug dealer before the statute of limitations runs out. Suppose that former dealer decided to head for either Mexico or Canada or some other host country until the coast is clear. Wouldn't if be nice if he/she could locate that country on a map? Because if he/she had to ask someone how to get there, it's just possible that information would get to the 'wrong ears', so to speak, know what I mean?
It's just amazing how much information a human brain can hold. It can hold street smarts, woodlore, music stuff, stories and tales and folklore, science information (such as how to operate a meth lab safely), values and ethics so that one can make wise choices in life, all sorts of things that are useful to all sorts of folks. Don't sell the potential of these young minds short.
12-13-04, 02:58 PM DvdGStwrt
quote:Originally posted by SeattleRon: It's not that I don't believe in education man, but you should be educated in the kind of stuff that will help you out in life man. If people were willing to educate their children a little bit better in street smarts, then I wouldn't be sitting here at age 22 owning a 3 bedroom house with 2 cars because I used to sell and deal drugs. You don't learn that stuff in school. These kids and teens need to learn about life in stead of stuff they don't need to know about unless they want to.
See with each kind of life style comes with its own set of negatives and positives. For you the positive is a house and 2 cars. The negatives are drug issues, alcoholism, and most recently losing a broad to Gigli. All of those Street Smarts may have gotten you a lot of money, but did it buy you happiness? Did those street smarts give to you a sense of purpose a sense of accomplishment?
Maybe knowing an acute angle from an obtuse angle is worthless at the point of a gun, however it does come in handy when you are building a house, or furniture or many other things which require a basic understanding of engineering.
Not everyone is confronted with a mugger, but everyone will (at one time or another) build something or need to know something along the lines of basic engineering, especially if they own 2 cars or a 3 bedroom home which will sooner or later require some engineering work done to them. Sure you can hire somebody who knows those things, but those who are ignorant of things usually end up getting a “spare transmission” or paying out the nose for their lack of knowledge.
The Majority DO NOT live in the streets. The majority lives in a civilization and has never had a need for “street smarts” which in reality is street ignorance and usually comes with a pompous attitude bred out of ignorance of how the real world works.
The Majority are not wrestling with alcoholism, drug addiction and contemplating bailing out their “friend” from jail. Because they and their friends are more concerned with making an honest dollar and climbing the social ladder, attaining those material things (houses and cars and crap like that) through credit, work and a deeper sense of social placement in the hierarchy of the food chain.
That food chain, that society relies heavily upon knowing social studies, science, mathematics and how to spell without spell check. That society is built upon men like George Washington who being educated and part of his society knew and understood the importance of literacy and when it is best to pick up a gun and fight for those ideals and, more importantly knew when to sit down and talk it out.
Street Smarts will only get you so far. Trust me during the next couple of decades you too will come up hard against the wall of reality and when face to face with that reality that Street Smarts aren’t that much in the scheme of things, I hope you can recall those “useless” skills taught to you in school.
How do I know this? I lived it dude, been there, done that. Fortunately for me my attitude toward education and knowing those useless skills wasn't too dark and I discovered later on that all that street smarts couldn't bail me out and I had to rely once again on those "worthless" studies of my childhood.
12-13-04, 06:54 PM aminator2002 The fault is not with the schools but with the students, parents and culture that says that only relevant training type educational activities are useful. Why learn high level mathematics when you can't use it in the real world? Why learn about history if you are going to be an engineer? "Street smarts is what will get you a house in this country".
Education is meant to broaden horizons and make people better thinkers. To learn about history, literature, language, and mathematics is about knowing this world we live in. Parents and students who hold no value for learning for it's own sake will never be anything more than that engineer, drug dealer, auto mechanic, etc... we are more than our occupations and we should educate ourselves and encourage our children to appreciate learning.
It isn't about making sure you can hold down a job, but that you can make a good life for yourself. Let's face it, after a few years in the real working world, we all learn that we need more in our lives than work and training. We need to be able to understand programs, appreciate good music, literature and understand world events. or to hold an intelligent conversation about what is happening in the world. Those people who don't bother to lea
This message has been edited. Last edited by: DorianGreyed,
