posted on July 17, 2001 11:04:00 AM new"Far more important as a barrier: a homelife surrounded by losers." -roofguy-
>>BINGO!!<<
Just how many very bright kids I have had the pleasure of knowing that came from loser homes with loser parents and the kid never did well at all, I really can't remember them all. What good does it do to have the best schools, the best teachers, the best cirriculum, the best equiptment, etc. if the stupid parents keep on sabotaging the kid at every chance that they get? I have, to my total disgust, seen these loser parents get jealous of the fact that their kids are becoming more educated than they are and the loser parents turn around and do everything that they can think of to kick the kid's feet out from underneath them!
posted on July 17, 2001 11:42:10 AM newCan you define "loser parents"
Simply: parents with no success to show their kids.
It's more than just parents, however. Kids can learn from aunts, uncles, and grandparents too. Generally, kids do better than one might guess at extracting the best examples from a variety of adults.
The accute problem arises when there are zero successful adults in the kid's life. No father who goes to work every day. A mother who doesn't know or care to know much about raising kids, although she might wish for better. Aunts and uncles who have their own problems, and aren't part of the kid's life. Grandparents not around or not doing well either.
This situation characterizes the lives of a surprising number of kids. These kids find no reason to apply themselves in school, and the schools become more and more accommodating of the kid's desire to fail as the kid gets older.
These are the boys who end up in prison with a very high frequency. The girls who end up as welfare mothers.
We're all to some extent limited by our family circumstance. It's just easier to become successful when you have a lot of successful people in your life. Not only do they help out from time to time, but they also serve to set expectations. It's difficult for most people, regardless of race, to rise far above their family context. When that context is completely welfare and prison, it's a huge barrier.
posted on July 17, 2001 12:04:26 PM new
Saabsister -
"Do you think that some people just approach problems more logically than others naturally? Do you think people can be taught to approach problems logically?"
No, I don't think that some people naturally approach problems more logically than others. I do think people can be taught to approach problems logically, but I can't point to a thing that will do it with more specificity than the concept of "structure."
I think "structure" is the foundation, and everything else flows from it. When we begin with, say, the structure of the alphabet, or the structure of the sequence of numbers, then we can progress to an understanding of the relationships between different parts. Those are the building blocks we use. Later, when we're faced with a problem or question, if we can structure our thinking, then we can see more clearly where our errors and omissions lie. If I'm presented with a group of numbers, 3, 7, 9, 2, 7, 8, 5, 1, 6, and I understand structure, I can put them in order, 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 9, and easily see that 4 is missing and there are too many 7's. If not, I struggle with a jumble.
Then, there had come a school of thought that "unstructured learning" was preferable, that "structure" somehow confined us, and while probably no one today would think that it was a valuable educational system that would let a child either float around the room pretending to be a butterfly or pick up a pencil and write "1, 2, 3, 4, 5," according to that child's desire, I think that the pervasive influence of the concepts behind "unstructured learning" can still be seen today, such as in that Calculus teacher's endorsement of "interesting and exciting" over progress that can be ascertained with a standard test.
Are there any particular subjects that are more valuable than others in encouraging structured, logical thinking? I don't know, but my anecdotal experiences with my own siblings raise some thoughts in my mind...
I have a much smarter sister. Not only does she know more than I know, I believe she's a much better thinker than I am, and I believe she's a better thinker than my brother.
One thing she took in school, that neither I nor my brother learned, was Latin. Latin has fallen out of favor today, it's not useful, too arcane, elitist, etc. But one thing the teaching of Latin has is a very strong empahsis on structure. My sister has a vastly better grasp of the rules of English grammar than I do. I have a pretty good ear, but she has a real understanding of the rules, and when we have discussions about grammar, invariably she'll draw on what she learned about grammatical structure from her study of Latin. And I think that that emphasis on structure can be of use in all manner of thinking, not only grammar.
If the complaints of the teachers of Sulyn1950's acquaintance were justified, and they sometimes had to leave "important 'blocks' behind and upset the natural progression by... (jumping) ...around in the books just to ensure the children would be at least familiar with what was being asked for on the test," then it looks to me that the problem is that the test isn't structured properly, there's been some transposition in the make up of the test and it's quizzing the children about the cart before the horse. So instead of administering the California Cart and Horse test, fix it up so it's the California Horse and Cart test. Or, maybe the test authors have decided that the books' progression is wrong, and they're trying to forcibly correct the order of teaching by strong-arming the test.
posted on July 17, 2001 12:24:29 PM new
At the core of most of these debates is the desire that there be no such thing as intelligence, the wish that we were all created equal, intelligence wise. That it's all in education rather than genes. That we can teach intelligence.
Such people analyzed the analytical approachs of very intelligent people and set out to teach such techniques to everyone. The results have been dismal, the students (and their parents) ended up not grasping concepts. Worse, they didn't learn the old fashioned way either.
The evidence would seem very clear. To some extent we can teach intelligence, by teaching people techniques such as algebra to apply to problems they encounter.
To some extent we cannot teach intelligence, it's genetically determined.
posted on July 17, 2001 12:44:44 PM new
I have to comment on the loser parents.
We had a fellow who worked at our shop a few years back. He had two young boys who seemed normal and bright. They have very little chance of having a normal life. Why?
The people he worked with compared notes and here is the picture:
Dad could not keep a minimum wage job for more than 6 months. He could not follow directions at work. He crushed his hand because he disobayed instructions to leave machine turned off while cleaning it.
He would be sent out with a hot delivery at 7 in the morning and be found a couple blocks away at McDonalds having breakfast at 9:00
He would be sent on a simple errand and then come back two hours later with all sorts of dumpster diving stuff in the back of the company truck. Could not understand why the boss was upset.
He belonged to a church where he folowed the orders his Elders in the congregation gave hime to the letter. If they said to quit his job because the people there were leading him away from Christ - boom he was gone. He would not go to the corner store and buy Sodas for the shop because they sold beer there and it was unholy.
At home it was a pig sty with food all down the sides of the stove. A sink full of mismatched junk like a Goodwill store for dishes and siverware. Basic diet was fried everything with instant coffee. His pale faced wife in a cotton dress was sullen and angry if he brought anyone home and would hide in the bedroom until the strangers left. No make up or jewelry of course. He could not keep a car running so his co-workers often took him to work and home. He never changed oil or wasted money maintaining a car so they died and were towed away if they did not die at home.
There were no books or newspapers because they were all evil and worldly. No TV because it was Satanic. No movies. No decoration or fresh paint or anything pleasant in the home. No music if it was not religeous. Greasy couch and chairs. Dirty windows with heavy curtains closed all the time.
They were not clean to the point he had to go to the doctor because he never changed his socks and got fungus so bad his feet bleed and his toenails came off. No toothbrushes or floss.
The kids always had a bowl haircut and no jeans or t-shirts because they were looked down on that at the church. They were tormented at school because they looked like refugees and were encouraged not to do anything with the ungodly kids. McDonalds or Taco Bell the only kind of eating out they do.
Wrote money orders for everything because he did not keep a checking account. Had to tith to the church. Always trying to borrow $20 off someone until next week. Never visited relatives because they are too far away and as poor so they would have to stay with them.
What chance do those kids have to even KNOW what normal is? They never heard a normal conversation from the Dad because he could not hold one. He could talk a little about sports. That's about it. Who knows what the Mother said. She didn't talk to strangers.
These kids will have no idea how to relate to others to have a friendship where they actually do things together. How to act on a date. No idea how to act in a public place like a restaurant or how to open a checking account or make a reservation for a plane or hotel. Go to a museam or pick out clothing.
If they go off to the military when old enough it would probably be good for them. It would have structure. Where would you start to fix such an enviroment?
posted on July 17, 2001 12:50:59 PM new
One of the best work/education ethics for a family I have ever read about is in a book called The Ditchdigger's Daughters by Yvonne Thornton.
The book is about her family (they are black BTW). Her father was determined that all his children (5 daughters--one was adopted)would be doctors (all are except for one).
Dr. Thornton tells how her father alwyas told their kids to pick a "rabbit" each year in their class. The "rabbit" being another kid in class getting good grades. Then they were to work until they did as well as the rabbit--and then look higher for the next one to catch. When the oldest daughter tried coasting her mother got her up at 6am & set her to scrubbing the kitchen over & over & over--and informed her that if she didn't do well in school that's what she'd end up doing so she might as well learn to do it well. Told the girl that her "job" was to work hard in school.
The book contains another interesting note: Dr. Thornton relates something her father told her about the black community. He told her to look at a basket of crabs...when some of the crabs try to climb out, others reach up & pull them back in--and that a lot of people in the black community act the same way. I think about that when I read about black kids who are taunted by their peers for being "oreos" when all they are trying to do is to do well in school...
posted on July 17, 2001 01:01:08 PM new"Borillar Can you define "loser parents." -Hjw-
"Simply: parents with no success to show their kids." -roofguy-
Helen, I think that roofguy is being too gentle. Like gravid tells us below, it is a mindset for failure. While religion did not play the role in all cases, the sentiments were exactly the same. No one read books or magazines, nor were kids ever encouraged to learn to do so. The mess, the insanity, the hopelessness of ignorance so ingrained into the parents that they'll fight you tooth and nail -- even in court, just to keep eveything in the status quo. They fight for their child's right to not do homework. Craziness. Gravid was being too kind as well - what can you say in a paragraph or two of the complete horror that many of these kids face everyday? Why do you think that I fight so hard for them to become educated, to get the jobs that they can hold, to learn how to get out of that morass that keeps them down? Instead of reading or teaching the kids to entertain themselves, they let them do anyhitng that they please -- and that usually means imitating their parents get drunk and stoned on drugs.
Although this page attributes it to Dinah Washington, lots of people took a shot at it, including Billie Holiday.
(edited to correct typo and to note that my post was not in reference to yours that immediately preceeded it, Borillar, you just posted too dern fast.)
[ edited by donny on Jul 17, 2001 01:16 PM ]
posted on July 17, 2001 01:14:09 PM new
What a diff'rence a day mades
Twenty-four little hours
Brought the sun and the flowers
Where there used to be rain
My yesterday was blue, dear
Today I'm part of you, dear
My lonely nights are through, dear
(Since you said you were mine)
What a diff'rence a day makes
There's a rainbow before me
Skies above can't be stormy
Since that moment of bliss, that thrilling kiss
(It's heaven when you find romance on your menu)
What a diff'rence a day made
And the difference is you
(What a diff'rence a day makes)
(There's a rainbow before me)
(Skies above can't be stormy)
Since that moment of bliss, that thrilling kiss
(It's heaven when you find romance on your menu)
What a diff'rence a day made
And the difference is you
posted on July 17, 2001 01:34:11 PM new
If one of the answers is to re-write the standardized tests, do we need to set up national curriculums and allow schools to only teach those set standards?
posted on July 17, 2001 02:35:02 PM new
OUCH ! That article had to be a slam to that school district ! I wish she would have interviewed some parents too.
posted on July 17, 2001 03:18:51 PM new
Yeah- that story is not unique- I have seen published reports about students graduating in the top of their HS class and not scoring high enough on the SAT to get into any college.
But this is the first time I have heard of them going to a school board meeting and telling them like it is.
It is unusual for students to return and give feedback to the school boards. I like it! Local school boards need to know what is going on in their schools and not just from the school's point of view.
posted on July 17, 2001 03:56:11 PM new
But... like it or not, money does make a difference to a school's abitlity to run a good syatem. Not necessarily how much money but also how it is spent.
We have an excellant system and we hire the best educators from the surrounding districts just by outbidding them. We just hired a new principal by offering $10k more than another district.
I can offer no ready answers for what to do with disruptive students. If you throw them out, then what ? Usually crime and prison. It is cheaper to educate than keep them in jail.
I guess on the one hand, it's nice to be wealthy enough to vote with your feet and live in a wealthy district. Our recent high school grads just got offered over $4 million in mostly academic scholarships, and most could afford tuition without help.
Then that gots gets, and them that don't gots don't gets.
posted on July 17, 2001 04:05:36 PM new
reamond: It is cheaper to educate than keep them in jail.
Simplistically, it is cheaper to store them in school than to store them in jail.
But these kids do not get educated by attending school. They don't do their school work, any of it. Worse, they disrupt the education of others. Worse than that, in some schools, they come to dominate the existing educational culture.
That is why, if we expect any significant improvement in our failing schools, we must get past the "we don't know what to do with them, so leave them in school" mentality. That choice must come to be understood as the worst one.
posted on July 17, 2001 04:11:06 PM new
I think that "lack of parental involvement" was mentioned earlier in this discussion.
My kids are grown now, but even back then, I remember that few parents were available for Fun Night, cake walks, etc. The attendance at concerts and plays was low.
Now I attend my grandson's plays and concerts. Attendance is even lower. Kids are dropped off, and no adult comes in with them. It is so sad.
There is one middle school here in my city that had a doorprize drawing. All you had to do to be eligible to win a TV was show up for the parent-teacher conference about your child.
Parents were being bribed to talk with the teacher about their children.
posted on July 17, 2001 06:19:06 PM new
I deleted my earlier post about what it was like to work full-time, commute to the city, and have kids in school because I thought it wasn't really relevant to the thread.
How do you think both parents working plays into parental involvement?
Neighbors don't know one another any more, much less parents with kids in the same school. In my experience, parents are not even very welcome in the school.
T
posted on July 17, 2001 07:38:41 PM newjt-I'm sure you will probably find all kinds of views on this, but I have often heard that it is quality time not quanity time that is important when dealing with your children.
Some children may be with a parent all the time, but if that parent does not interact with the child it is of little use to the child or that child's developement IMHO.
I was priviledged to be able to be a "stay-at-home" mom. It was not really "popular" during the 70-80's. Sometime I would find myself being asked if I felt guilty about not working! It was not the "norm".
I had a friend who worked. She often found herself feeling "guilty" because she was not with her child for the majority of his day. She made a point to spend at least 1 hour each night giving her child her undivided attention. Not always easy to do when you work and there are other chores which usually must be carried out in the evening.
He husband also spent 1 hour with the child. Sometimes it was a shared thing, but usually they made an effort to have it be one-on-one which would give the child 2 hours each night exclusively as the "center of attention". They read books, they colored, they played games and they "talked".
This boy was well "ahead" of most of his classmates. He was very well behaved and was extremely close to his parents. He still is. As a teenager, when asked by his mom if he ever felt resentment about how little time he had with her as a child, he answered her that he really didn't realize he hadn't had a lot of time with her! Seems really little kids don't perceive time the same way older children or adults do....As far as this boy was concerned or "remembered" his mother and father were always there! I always thought that was interesting.
posted on July 17, 2001 07:54:39 PM new
One of the worst--and saddest--things going on in education today is the idea of dumbing things down to meet the students instead of raising the students to meet set standards.
Here in California a lot of kids flunked the tests which measure where they should be. The answer? Why, the tests are just too hard and unreasonable. In the past year a lot has been heard about SATs & how so many kids are doing so poorly--and what is ironic is that the standards for the SATs have actually been lowered over the past 10-15 years...and people still yammer that they are "too hard."
Yeah, that's the way to do it--lower everything until the students will be able to fly through whether they know their stuff or not.
posted on July 17, 2001 08:32:37 PM newbunnicula-I think it has been going on for well over a decade now! My aunt recently ran into someone she hadn't seen in awhile and it made her think of his daughter. The summer after she graduated from school, she had gone into the store my aunt was working in looking for 1 gal of vinegar. All that she had found in the stores she had already been in were quarts or pints. She asked my aunt how many pints she would need to make the gal, because she was getting tired of all the driving and just wanted to get it and go home!
My aunt asked about the girl and was told she had gotten her masters and was teaching school up near Dallas! My aunt said she guessed the girl figured out her measurements finally or at least she hoped she had!
posted on July 17, 2001 09:01:12 PM new
I empathize with the pint-challenged girl, I always have a problem with pints myself. Cups, quarts, gallons I can visualize, but pints, you don't see very often, it's harder to put them in perspective, which brings me to another of my ideas - the damage caused by digital watches.
My daughter never seemed to have a conception of time like I did at her age. A clock face gives you something to put in perspective, you can see that the difference between where the little hand is at 12 and where it will be at 6 is a pretty big chunk of space. I think we've lost something.
