America's Education System Is Fine

[samusaran253]

If you go on a forum on the internet that has liberals and political discussions, you're bound to read atleast one thread by a liberal saying something along the lines of "America public school system is bad herp derp derp". So after seeing all these people make baseless claims, I'm here to share my own experience with the education system of America, which I have recently finished.

After going through America's 13 year system, let me say this, it was easy. I wish I could be one of those people who say that high school (the last 4 years of the education system; the last 6 years, if you count junior high school), but they weren't, in fact I am a much happier person now than I was in high school. By no means am I implying that the American education system is perfect, since no system is entirely perfect, but it's definitely not as bad as the liberal media makes it out to be.

No, I'm not a prodigy or anything, but I went through the education system and it worked fine. I didn't go to some fascist Orwellian high school with metal detectors, school uniforms, strict dress code, drug sniffing dogs, or police everywhere. I also didn't go to a run-down high school with gangs, violence, bullying, or anything like that. I just went to a normal American high school. Please note that I am basing this entire thread upon my personal experience, which was with a high school in a semi-rural area, and by no means represents urban (city) high schools, which are likely gang infested.

I went through the system like everyone else, did my education like everyone else, K-6, 7-8, and 9-12, and I wasn't generally a straight A student, nor did I have perfect behavior. I definitely could have been a straight A student had I applied myself more, but that was not the fault of the education system, that was a fault of my own. I am an extremely intelligent human being, and have been since I was about 13. I can code and design an entire fully functional website in less than an hour, I am informed about almost all political issues and have opinions on them, I study political ideologies and religions in my free time to further my knowledge, I know how the world works both in high school and after it, and I was always a step ahead of most of my peers, and still am today in many cases.

We teach our children and later our teenagers just fine, and I wouldn't have it any other way. Does that mean I want to lessen funding towards education? No, in fact I want to increase funding towards education. I feel as though education is very important for today's young people, but remember, high school is all about learning how to become a productive and social member of society, K-6 on the other hand is all about learning basics such as the English language, science, mathematics, and other core classes. My school district never had the best funding, and in my final year of high school it was/is crumbling now, because of lack of state funding. It has gotten so bad that they had to close down a lot of elementary schools in the area, and merge them with other elementary schools. They're even planning on merging an elementary school with my local junior high school, which many of the locals, myself included, are strongly against.

Now lets get down to the social aspect, high school has virtually no bullying, bullying is something little kids do in the K-6 system, not teenagers. No, I wasn't some popular football playing jock who had a cheerleader girlfriend, in fact, I was the opposite. I was the video game playing geek with practically no friends. Sure, I had some "friends" who I would hang out with at school and talk to online, but like most people, I only had maybe one or two real friends. But even within my own group, I was one of the people who just didn't fit in entirely, despite me being one of the two leaders of the group, and the administrator of the group's official message board. We had cliques, of course, like every high school does, there were the jocks, the emos, the stoners, the cheerleaders, the preps, the band geeks, the goths, us gamers, and all other kinds of cliques, and of course there was also individuality. But cliques are nothing like what Hollywood makes it out to be, everyone gets along with everyone else, and everyone has friends in every group, and all groups peacefully socialize with each other.

There were no gangs, but again, I've never lived in a major city, especially not a poor area of a city. We did have some drugs though, of course there was alcohol and smoking, but never on campus, and those are of course general things teenagers do to rebel (or because they get addicted). There wasn't any peer pressure though, no one ever pressured you into doing drugs, or even really asked you too. Of course, there's the occasional pot, but pretty much no one got into the hard drugs, maybe a few of the stoners did some of the hardcore stuff like meth, but no one I know (aside from one girl, but she graduated a few years before me). Now then, teen sex, sure, there was a lot of that, but most people played it safe and used condoms and/or birth control. There were a handful of pregnancies each year, but they brought that upon themselves. As for fashion, let me say that, like most guys, I'm not very adept when it comes to fashion. I would just wear whatever I felt like, and never got made fun of or singled out too much. Sure, there were the preps who always wore Hollister or the emos who generally wore darker clothing, but it certainly wasn't a fashion contest or anything like that.

I'd say the school system is pretty damn good, if not the best in the world. Sure, after high school, like most people, I missed it, and still do sometimes. I wish I could go back and be 13 again, a teenager, and start my adult/teenage life over. But all-in-all I'm glad of the person I am now, I'm not rich or overly successful yet, but I work hard and I'm getting there, since that's what America is all about, hard-work and making your own future. The school system has already vastly improved, my baby brother learned in 3rd grade what they taught me and everyone else in 5th grade. He was learning multiplication and division in like second grade. So yes, I'm glad our school system is making strides to become better, because our young people are the future of this country. Do I think we need to completely overhaul the school system? No. Do I think we need to take extreme stances like metal detectors, teachers beating students, school uniforms, strict dress codes, search and seizures every 2 hours, drug sniffing dogs, or anything like that? No. But I do think we need to fund education more, and with that, I bid a due.

[samusaran253]

That isn't a half bad idea.

[samusaran253]

USA is actually above England, but behind South Korea.

[img]http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images /Guardian/Pix/pictures/2010/12/7/1291740 184391/PISA-rankings-within-OECD-001.jpg [/img]

[adrshepard]

It's "adieu," not "a due."

It also seems you're judging your school at least in part by the lack of social problens like bullying, inattendance, and drugs. Every criticism of the US school system I've encountered though focuses on educational scores and attainment, not the learning environment.

Judging by the various measurements and test scores, the US is a ways from the top. But I've always expected this had more to do with the relative per capita income and cultural norms. I'm willing to bet that students with comparable household income to those with similar finances in Norway or Sweden. Students in poorer countries like China and India face huge pressure to do well in school, so they tend to do better on average.

I think people usually interpret these statistics to mean that the US produces educationally average people, but that has more to do with having a lot of average people bringing the rankings down as opposed to a dearth of exceptional people.

[Camarohusky]

At 4/20/11 02:13 PM, adrshepard wrote: It also seems you're judging your school at least in part by the lack of social problens like bullying, inattendance, and drugs. Every criticism of the US school system I've encountered though focuses on educational scores and attainment, not the learning environment.

Also, his account seems very blind. Issues are brushed off with the simple "oh, I never experienced that" as if his lack of contact with that issue meant that the issue didn't really exist. I can tell you first hand, that while the OP may not have encountered much of the problems he mentioned, I have. They do exist, and they do drain the ability of the school to teach in an optimal manner.

Judging by the various measurements and test scores, the US is a ways from the top. But I've always expected this had more to do with the relative per capita income and cultural norms. I'm willing to bet that students with comparable household income to those with similar finances in Norway or Sweden. Students in poorer countries like China and India face huge pressure to do well in school, so they tend to do better on average.

There is a much mroe sneaky explanation for this. The US is no stupider than any otehr country. Many European and Asian school systems separate people otu at a young age based on what potential they see. When we test our high school students we test everyone. When these countries test their high school students they test only those in the middle-upper to upper tier students, who have already been segregated by intelligence level. This would be like us only testing the Advanced to AP/IB students, and ignoring everyone else.

I think people usually interpret these statistics to mean that the US produces educationally average people, but that has more to do with having a lot of average people bringing the rankings down as opposed to a dearth of exceptional people.

The fact that the US is home the most of the cutting edge science and business and so on shows that while our scores may show lower, our achievements show that the US produces the best all around adults for the workforce.

[Chris-V2]

The problem in American education is the same as in English education. It is inconsistent (There are "good" and "bad" schools) and it is becoming easier and easier. While I know you can't expect every school to be similiar in terms of how smoothly it runs I'd dare you to poke around Vun Nuys Highschool from what I've heard from freinds and say the same things.

There is also a lack of scope - the idea of doing European history in many situations is being WW II and inevitably focuses on US involvement in WWII. Now, this is true of ANY country (and I find it utterly daft) but the lack of knowledge about the outside world is a common point of contention. If you don't come out of Primary and Secondary education without a fairly broad scope of the world then I feel the systems have failed. I mean, they've even left you with bad analytical skills if you feel the "I didn't see it so it can't be true" arguement works. It's almost as bad as the "I disagree with liberals therefore everything they say is wrong" arguement.

But I have a bone to pick with our Industrial Revolution style schooling systems anyway.

[Camarohusky]

At 4/20/11 05:00 PM, Chris-V2 wrote: The problem in American education is the same as in English education. It is inconsistent (There are "good" and "bad" schools)

I would contend that this inconsistency is rather a result of the idea that education is bad than of anything the education system itself has done. However that is for another post.

and it is becoming easier and easier.

I would really love some sources on this repeated claim. People have dropped that idea multiple times here, and I have a hard time truly believing it.

There is also a lack of scope - the idea of doing European history in many situations is being WW II and inevitably focuses on US involvement in WWII. Now, this is true of ANY country (and I find it utterly daft) but the lack of knowledge about the outside world is a common point of contention.

While this can lead to an insular point of view, schools are there to prepare children to become functional adults. In the US, where the country is as large and productive a Continent, the average person has littl eneed to know of anything outside of the US. This just fine to me. It hurts the view of America, but we have 50 quite diverse states to learn about that essentially or economically similar to countries in Europe. Our lack of world knowledge tends to be a symptom of our size, power, and relative geographical isolation. Any world learning is superfluous to darn near anyone who does not go to college, and even then still only relevant on a situational basis.

But I have a bone to pick with our Industrial Revolution style schooling systems anyway.

Actually our school system was really developed long after the industrial revolution, more nearing the beginning of the modern era. They fit a manufacturing based society, and that is essentially what we all are.

[Dawnslayer]

At 4/20/11 10:53 AM, samusaran253 wrote: If you go on a forum on the internet that has liberals and political discussions, you're bound to read atleast one thread by a liberal saying something along the lines of "America public school system is bad herp derp derp".

Congratulations. You managed to destroy any credibility your argument might have had with your very first sentence.

Welcome to Newgrounds.

Wikipedia: Fallacy

[onearmdude]

At 4/20/11 10:53 AM, samusaran253 wrote: Now lets get down to the social aspect, high school has virtually no bullying, bullying is something little kids do in the K-6 system, not teenagers.

Aha. Ahahaha. AHAHAAHA.
Oh my. I needed that.

I mean, I have a lot of problems with that rant anyway. But I was especially struck by the inanity of that statement. I guess I should be relieved! All those past hardships are in my head! And the parent-student/teacher conference cases I've been studying for the past 2 years? Pure nonsense I'm sure.

Your education in 1 or even several school systems gives you neither the perspective nor the data to make that kind of claim. So please, wait until you get the education or experience you require to throw down these broad statements.

[Chris-V2]

At 4/20/11 06:51 PM, Camarohusky wrote:

I would contend that this inconsistency is rather a result of the idea that education is bad than of anything the education system itself has done. However that is for another post.

I'd contend that it's down to inconsistent funding,

I would really love some sources on this repeated claim. People have dropped that idea multiple times here, and I have a hard time truly believing it.

Well here's an excerpt from a book (Google has gotten very sophisticated!) in which they citate the US Secretary Of Education slamming the current system as "eroding" and the state succumbing to "Unilateral educational disarmament". Pretty unequivocal words to me.

[orangebomb]

The American public education system is varied at best in terms of education quality and student/faculty on the K-12 level. On one hand of the spectrum, the modern, up-to-date schools are an example on how the American school system works, what with modern materials for projects, more career-based classes, {i.e. Auto mechanics, computer design, business, etc.} and so on. But on the other side, there are schools where you see the proverbial casualties of cutbacks, and having a reputation for high dropout rates, outdated materials and teaching methods, and so forth.

In short, most of America's schools are falling apart at the seams due to a variety of factors, but even then, there are a lot of people that graduated from public school, and they turned out alright. Can the schools be better than it is right now? Absolutely.
Is it as bad as a lot of critics turn it out to be? Not nessacarily.

[Noonga]

I reckon they just need better learning materials and the students need to be encouraged to enjoy learning and not just be attached to the children culture we have now, and teachers also need to be decent and encouraging too but they are there to teach so they shouldn't be expected to do TOO much, they should still be friendly though, teachers who don't talk to the students are the worst ones and make school boring.

There are probably tons of other factors effecting it too.

All I know though is that I go to a rich well funded and equipped school (years and years and years ahead the average American elementary and public high school, mind you there are tuition fees but we aren't here to argue where the money comes from) and the teachers are fucking bro's (they are like university professors some of them) and we have the highest amount of students getting jobs in the whole state and considering the statistics of the economy now thats something to be proud of.

[Noonga]

SHIT. I forgot to say something too but one thing about my high school is that we have among the best career focused classes in the whole state, even in grade/year 9 there are actually DOZENS of electives the students can pick that help you see what the future holds and gets you INTERESTED in your future and what you want to learn, we have pretty fucking awesome music labs and recording studios.

Having good career-focused classes and practical classes is good and I agree with that because then it sets you up for college/university and you learn practical and interesting stuff and a lot of people these days don't get jobs because they don't have enough basic knowledge and job employers these days look for very skilled people (like if you want to be an account for example.)

[Chris-V2]

At 4/21/11 11:35 PM, Noonga wrote:

I reckon they just need better learning materials and the students need to be encouraged to enjoy learning and not just be attached to the children culture we have now, and teachers also need to be decent and encouraging too but they are there to teach so they shouldn't be expected to do TOO much, they should still be friendly though, teachers who don't talk to the students are the worst ones and make school boring.

See the issue here is because your school was privately funded you only ever saw a modern implentation of education. Your teachers were probably encouraged to use more abstract, social and achievement-orientated learning mechanisms like independant study, group work, debate. You were treated as an adult and asuch acted like an adult. You could ask "Why" we try to find the point on the curve and ask for examples where it's used. This sort of post-modern learning enviroment is really benificial. If you can allow your different areas of knowledge and interest interact then all of a sudden you become motivated.

However older teachers and teachers who may not have been good enough to teach in the private sector and teachers with overcrowded classrooms can not implement these sort of ideas. You can't have a structured debate with fourty young teenagers in the same room who think that yelling and running around is the norm.

Has anyone hear ever had a class where half the people got sick or went to a football match? One of those classes where you cover the days material in a few hours, get a more in depth understanding and the teachers act like less of an authority figure? It's because with large class sizes you're fighting just to be heard.

Kids in poor schools get told to learn pages 15-18 and not to come in tomorow without knowing it. So chances are they don't come in the next day. Learning only becomes fun if it's not treated like labour. Once you threaten the child with punishment the work itself becomes punishment and there's no real strive in doing it. They being to associate learning with negative forms of authority.

As far as I'm concered with Teacher workload, in an ideal world I'd say do as much as needs to be done to help the kids follow their passions. But with how understaffed schools are (with teachers, anyway) I can see how it gets overwhelming.

[Camarohusky]

At 4/22/11 12:52 PM, Chris-V2 wrote: See the issue here is because your school was privately funded.

i.e. The parents of the students at yourt school cared enough to send them to private school so they likely had a higher amount of parental motivation, and thus acted better.

All of this "private schools teach modern-like" is utter bullshit.

[Chris-V2]

At 4/22/11 01:55 PM, Camarohusky wrote:

i.e. The parents of the students at yourt school cared enough to send them to private school so they likely had a higher amount of parental motivation, and thus acted better.

Poor people are lazy lololol. That's not a solid arguement, it's purely speculative. The only element where the parent paying into private education can really have substance is in the fact that private schooling better prepares people for University since it assumes the family will also be able to afford University tuition.

All of this "private schools teach modern-like" is utter bullshit.

Well I've done a little private tuition and I have to say the method is different and the learning is far more contextual - I'd dare to correct myself and say private education in its best forms leans towards more Post-Modern teaching methods.

How can better class ratios, facilities and a less restricted educational workflow be considered bullshit? I don't follow your train of thought.

[JudgeDredd]

At 4/20/11 03:52 PM, Camarohusky wrote: The US is no stupider than any other country.

*chuckle*

Our lack of world knowledge tends to be a symptom of our size, power, and relative geographical isolation.

Do you know the meaning of geographical isolation?

Any world learning is superfluous to darn near anyone who does not go to college, and even then still only relevant on a situational basis.

Since America has a tendency to war with other countries to spread democracy and American influence, i'd suggest there would be more than a "superfluous" need to know something about these countries, or at the very least, a general knowledge of what it is everyone is actually voting for.

[Camarohusky]

At 5/1/11 03:57 PM, JudgeDredd wrote: Do you know the meaning of geographical isolation?

Yeah, I'd say having a mere two land borders with foreign countries, and few other countries within 100 miles of the coasts, is pretty darn isloated.

Since America has a tendency to war with other countries to spread democracy and American influence, i'd suggest there would be more than a "superfluous" need to know something about these countries, or at the very least, a general knowledge of what it is everyone is actually voting for.

Do you think that more than half of the people know what they are really voting on when they vote in ANY voting country? That's just naive. Even then, a person in Nebraska needs to know almost nothing about foreign countries as they could travel for hours without even reaching one. This isn't Belgium, Korea, or Israel.