People sure are fond of using TV shows to back up opinions.

As I mentioned - the reason these shows exist, the reason for newspapers printing stories about drugged up kids, the reason for the TV news running stories about kids assualting police is simple.

It is rare.

How many tv shows/news stories centre around Bill Jones, who drives a Corsa to work, stops at three set of traffic lights and forgets to pick a pint of milk on his way home?

Not many, because this is very ordinary.

How many stories do you hear/read/see of kids and young people doing good for the community? Or even doing nothing for, but not taking either?

Answer, none - or very few. Why?

Again, because it is ordinary - waaaay in the majority.


I'm sorry to take this atitude, but it really stuns me, that really clever folks can sometimes be so stupid (yes, that is the word I'm afraid) to use TV programs (created for entertainment!!!!) as evidence to support views! These are not reliable sources of information!

Perhaps YOUR education wasn't so good after all. Chums.

 

You do realize 1chance is almost exactly what you just described? Worked in a high school for 40 or so years?

Hey Bill, don't make me older than I am!!! 40 years ago I was in high school myself. (I've got 24 years in officially as a teacher--stayed home with my children for 10 years). By the way, I agree with many of Sparky49's comments. When you get the respect of the students, you don't have discipline problems. I haven't had to send a student out of my class for behavior issues for many many years while some of these same students may misbehave for other teachers on a daily basis. It's not about being their buddy, you have to present the lessons in a manner in which they want to pay attention either because they feel the information is necessary to know or at least interesting. I try to do both. I do find a number of the parents these days a royal pain in the butt, as they are forever making excuses for their kids. I wish they would simply be parents (not best friends to the student) and appropriate role models. It is not cool, but unfortunately very common, for mothers to wardrobe swap with their teenage daughters. They both end up looking like cheap hookers. In general, I see more students gravitating to the high end and to the low end with very few left in the middle. If you have a heterogenous class like history, this creates a big problem. If you have specialized classes, like math levels, it is no big issue at all, if you have the appropriate classes available. At my school, we have doubled the high end math classes and also expanded the low end math classes while reducing the number of "regular" level math classes. Part of my job as department chair is to make sure we are offering the right math classes to meet the changing needs of our students. So I pay a lot of attention to what is coming up through the pipes from the lower levels (i.e. elementary classes). Combine that with the ever changing state and national standards, and it keeps one on his/her toes. My last comment is that if you don't enjoy teaching, then you should not be teaching. Teaching takes more dedication and commitment than any profession that I know of.

 

You do realize 1chance is almost exactly what you just described? Worked in a high school for 40 or so years?

Thanks Bill, I saw 1chance's posts about being a teacher but did not realise that she had 40 years experience.

I would REALLY like to hear her opinions on whether schooling is now better or worse than in the past. Schools here in Australia have gone downhill big time with lack of discipline, gangs now run rife, graduates can no longer even read and write competently etc etc.

...
As for discipline, there is still a great deal of discipline - just not of a physical kind.
...
Nowadays, we have a much more remedial approach, making people think about their actions. What caused them? What made you mis-behave? How did the other person feel about that?

Trust me, it works. And when it works - it REALLY works.

Don't be so quick to buy into the new "politically correct" fashion that all physical discipline is bad and all new-age counseling type discipline is good. Both have their place and it's important to understand when a screwdriver is the best tool and when a hammer is the best tool. When someone starts preaching to me that a srewdriver is always best and a hammer is always bad I know they've been indoctrinated into the latest bigoted fashion mentality and need a good dose of wisdom.

It's a fact that discipline of young people is less and behaviour of young people is worse. (And no that doesn't mean EVERY young person). If you really want to dispute that you can check the stats for crimes on school grounds or underage crime stats over the decades. You will see just how well this new fashion of "talking" the bad guy into being good is working.

(edit) Changed reference of 1chance from "him" to "her". It was my ignorance, no offense was intended.

 

Opps. Sorry.

Consider me suitably chastised.

I strongly disagree that kids have changed that much, only their surrounding circumstances do. Instead of looking at the kids, look in a mirror instead.

I have raised 3 kids, I think I may have done a poor job sometimes, but now it is up to them. I am also a youth advisor for a bunch of teen boys. I think they are pretty cool people, even if occasionally one or two act out. It really is a rough time.

 

hey thnx guys enough input, i think!!!

 

Goods points RB.

However, one must consider this - are the higher figures due to an actual increase in crime and bad behaviour, or is it due to an increase in reports of crimes?

In one of your previous posts, you mention that if your father would be belted if he did something wrong - just as other children would have. But I would bet that many of their actions were not reported. They were simply belted and that was the end of it.

Nowadays, it's possible for a child to be caught sneaking sweets or whatever, and being reported to the rozzers and having a criminal record. Whereas before, they were just belted and that was that.

So we must be careful with how facts and figures are presented to us, and not take them at face value.

"graduates can no longer even read and write competently"

I'm sorry, but I don't see how this is relevant? Even when people were being belted, you still had those who were academically less able, and even then there were people who couldn't read and write perfectly.

Just as there is today.

And don't worry, I'm not entirely biased. If you read my posts thoroughly, you'll see that I make the point that the current system is not perfect - I admit it, there are those for who the 'softer' approach will not work.

But there were those who weren't affected by the physical discipline either.

Choosing quotes from my piece like that does give the impression that I'm hardcore set in my beliefs - please read the WHOLE post.

 

...
"graduates can no longer even read and write competently"

I'm sorry, but I don't see how this is relevant? Even when people were being belted, you still had those who were academically less able, and even then there were people who couldn't read and write perfectly.
...

I see it as relevant as a reduced level of discipline means someone who will not work as hard, and can not be TOLD to work as hard or made to work as hard.

In the past students were punished for failing to meet standards of discipline and also standards of performance, like getting detention for not doing homework etc or caned for playing up in class and not paying attention. With a generalised reduction in discipline comes a reduction in work ethic and reduction in work output and work quality. That is not a big leap.

"Not only does it find that the average literacy of college educated Americans declined significantly from 1992 to 2003, but it also reveals that just 25 percent of college graduates -- and only 31 percent of those with at least some graduate studies -- scored high enough on the tests to be deemed "proficient" from a literacy standpoint,"
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2005/12/16/literacy

"* The percentage of high school seniors performing at or above the basic level in reading on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) decreased from 80% in 1992 to
73% in 2005 (NCES, 2007).
* Over the same period, the percentage of high school seniors performing at or above the proficient level decreased from 40% to 35% (NCES, 2007)."
http://www.betterhighschools.org/docs/nhsc_highschoolliteracy.pdf

The drop in performance is very worrying. Of course I'm not trying to attribute the entire drop to discipline alone, but I'm pretty sure someone disciplined into reaching performance goals has a much higher performance than someone who slacks off and is given a gentle new-age "talking to".

I bet the armed forces graduates still meet their performance requirements...

 

As for discipline, there is still a great deal of discipline - just not of a physical kind.

IMO, the system for discipline we have now is a far better one - but it's harder to implement. Traditional 'discipline' was nothing more than bullying and more often than not, hypocritical.

You got caught punching another kid? Well, I beat you up with a cane/slipper to teach you that's wrong.

Nowadays, we have a much more remedial approach, making people think about their actions. What caused them? What made you mis-behave? How did the other person feel about that?

Trust me, it works. And when it works - it REALLY works. Of course, there are those who won't be affected by it, just like those who got caned day after day after day.

But the main difference (and possible advantage?), is that no-one gets hurt. As a result, the 'trouble-makers' begin to have great respect for their teachers and peers. Not out of fear and physical trauma like with caning, but out of genuine respect and understanding for their fellow human-beings.

Could that be an advantage? Could a less physical approach work?

Or a load of codswallop?

I think there's a great deal of research to be done, before one makes a decision - and not from news reports.

I dissagree with that technique. All our generations test blow modern kids tests away. Cane and switch is what I say. I think its just become so PC the thugs that come into school who sell crack for their parents and run with gangs don't care about positive reinforment on their feelings. We used to measure bad kids in how many schools they've been kicked out of. I've seen teacher beat that crap our of a student that wouldn't back down. I've seen numerous teachers sleeping with thier 12-16 year old students. Personally I know of 4 unreported occasions. One was a friend, he was a PE teacher, he started dating the 16 year old girl and the damn parents approved. I just couldn't believe it.

 

@ RB, you raise vaild points. But again, careful with the figures.

Remember the USA is a pretty divided country when it comes to stuff like legislation. Some states outlawed corporal punishment really early (late 19th century), whilst others took longer and banned it in the 70s. I believe (please correct me if I'm wrong) that New Mexico is the most recent to ban it, and that was only last year.

There are still many states which allow it, but interestingly it is these states which often have the worse levels of education. About 20% of Florida's adult population don't have basic literacy skills.

Taking the matter closer to (My!) home, I don't believe that there is any country in Europe which allows corporal punishment at schools. Some even ban it at home too. Interestingly enough, there is a corrolation between the countries which ban it at home and school being some of the most educated countries in the world (Norway, Luxembourgh, Germany, etc).

Now, remember that still 99% of the population of countries like USA and UK are still literate. That's not too bad after 3 or so decades?

One cannot rely upon facts and figures which are supplied based on one country - as you say, there are many other factors which are at play.

Take a look at other countries and their education is still great - if not, the finest.

Again, be really careful with what you read. And don't take facts and figures at face value.



@Maxpower
What evidence do you have to suggest that today's tests are easier? Have you seen any recently? How well can you do at them? Would you mind if I give you one to try? Exam boards themselves have sometimes admitted that exams are getting harder - heck, there's even been instances where impossible questions have been set!

I've been saying all along, listen to what a variety of people have to say. DON'T form a judgement before you look and query ALL the facts. DON'T take facts at face value.

But most importantly be happy.

 

I think London people are supposed to be pretty thick too.

 

Of course people in the armed forces still meet the requirements of the armed forces. :/

In all humility, I consider myself fairly clever, and I fully intend to spend my working life serving HRH and my country. Nothing wrong with that. Joining the services is not a last resort.

As for London people being think... WTH???

I presume you mean 'Londoners'? In which case, I don't believe they are any less clever than anyone else.

You guys are really forcing this discussion on and off... Several times...

 

You made a good point Sparky49 about biased figures. I wasn't saying those examples represent everything perfectly they were just the first couple of things I found on a quick google of "declining literacy in schools".

I still believe literacy is getting worse and welcome any figures you have to show the opposite.

Britain is not immune from failing literacy either;
"...news that nearly 15% of adults lack basic understanding of the English language...
A report by Ofsted published this week has revealed that, during the past four years, there has been no overall improvement in the levels of literacy held by primary school pupils. Not only have literacy levels failed to improve but thousands of schools have also fallen below the literacy standards expected of them. ...
These concerns follow on from information which shows that 45% of pupils who just manage to reach the expected literacy level shortly before leaving primary school do not achieve a grade C or above in G.C.S.E English."
http://www.tutors4gcse.co.uk/blog/g...-school-english-are-literacy-targets-too-low/

"Ofsted: Literacy Standards Falling Behind 7:17pm UK, Thursday March 15, 2012
Literacy standards in English schools are falling behind those in other countries with one in five children failing to achieve the expected levels, Ofsted's chief inspector has warned."
http://news.sky.com/home/uk-news/article/16189095

Re my comment about the armed forces I feel that is a valid point. There is no reason for someone of a normal intellect to fail a normal learning task provided they are properly tested and there is enough discipline in place to ensure that enough work is done for the learning to be successful. I used the armed forces as an example of schooling where discipline is higher than in typical high schools.

My apologies to the OP for continuing with the slightly off topic discussion.

 

Of course people in the armed forces still meet the requirements of the armed forces. :/

In all humility, I consider myself fairly clever, and I fully intend to spend my working life serving HRH and my country. Nothing wrong with that. Joining the services is not a last resort.

As for London people being think... WTH???

I presume you mean 'Londoners'? In which case, I don't believe they are any less clever than anyone else.

You guys are really forcing this discussion on and off... Several times...

Also not everywhere but here if you get a college education then enlist you can come in as on officer.