The Dumbing Down Of America

[HogTrash]

John Stossel exposes America's public school system.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bx4pN-aiofw

Promoting stupidity is the #1 progressive tactic for creating future support for it's political ideology.

The very liberal Teachers Union has been the #1 allie of the Democrat Party in this venture.

The success of their policies are obvious by the state of America's failed education system.

Our children are the victims and have payed the price for our apathy and liberal success.

[Palin Rider]

It's not the liberal politics of the NEA or local teachers' unions that's the problem. It's that these unions are much too willing to defend complete incompetents who don't do their jobs.

[Kathianne]

It's not the liberal politics of the NEA or local teachers' unions that's the problem. It's that these unions are much too willing to defend complete incompetents who don't do their jobs.

Actually, that is their job.

[Palin Rider]

Actually, that is their job.

It always seems that way, doesn't it? :uhoh:

[Kathianne]

It always seems that way, doesn't it? :uhoh:

Doesn't 'seem' it is.

[Agnapostate]

The very liberal Teachers Union has been the #1 allie

So this is your retaliation against English teachers?

[revelarts]

she worked in the dept of education under the Reagan Admin...

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/DDyDtYy2I0M?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/DDyDtYy2I0M?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

[Sweetchuck]

That is one ugly woman.

[HogTrash]

It's not the liberal politics of the NEA or local teachers' unions that's the problem. It's that these unions are much too willing to defend complete incompetents who don't do their jobs.The NEA and teachers union goes way beyond "defending" incompetence...They promote and support it.

The state of the American education system is no mistake...It could only get this bad by design.

[Trigg]

Honestly I think no child left behind was a huge mistake, I also think putting mentally challenged kids in regular classes is a mistake. Here is why.

IMHO because of no child left behind the teachers simply dumbed down the school work so everyone would pass. Schools no longer wanted to help students keep up, since it would hurt them test wise, so they slowed everything down.

My daughter had a mentally challenged child in her class for a few years. The teacher ended up taking up most of the time controlling this boy. In fact at one point my daughter was ahead of the class and she was put in charge of looking after the boy. Now why in the hell is my daughter in charge of another student instead of progressing in her school work??

I purposefully put my kids in any advanced or college credit course they are offered and they have thrived in their school.



In defense of America's schools I will say this. In Finland (don't know if it's the same for other countries) the kids have to TEST INTO HIGH SCHOOL. That means of course that ONLY the kids who want to be there and are smart enough to be there go to the school. The others are guided toward trade schools or farming schools.

Since many schools are filled with kids who don't want to be there it isn't surprising that the Europeans score better.

[Palin Rider]

In defense of America's schools I will say this. In Finland (don't know if it's the same for other countries) the kids have to TEST INTO HIGH SCHOOL. That means of course that ONLY the kids who want to be there and are smart enough to be there go to the school. The others are guided toward trade schools or farming schools.

Since many schools are filled with kids who don't want to be there it isn't surprising that the Europeans score better.

That's another problem with the U.S. system: it doesn't offer much in the way of alternatives for kids who, although not stupid, simply aren't very academic.

[HogTrash]

she worked in the dept of education under the Reagan Admin...

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/DDyDtYy2I0M?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/DDyDtYy2I0M?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>This is an intelligent and amazing woman whose credentials are impecable.

The "dumbing down of America" was inbeded in the Dept Of Ed when it was established by the Carter Administration in 1979.

Ronald Reagan's intentions were to dismantle the DOE but he could never get any support from either Congress or Senate.

Everyone should watch this interview in it's entirety...It explains in detail how the schools first introduced you to PC indoctrination.

[Noir]

In defense of America's schools I will say this. In Finland (don't know if it's the same for other countries) the kids have to TEST INTO HIGH SCHOOL. That means of course that ONLY the kids who want to be there and are smart enough to be there go to the school. The others are guided toward trade schools or farming schools.

Since many schools are filled with kids who don't want to be there it isn't surprising that the Europeans score better.

We have that in Northern Ireland, the rest of the UK got rid of it about 50 years ago, kids took 2 tests called the 11+ with grades from A to F, As and Bs would get you to a grammar school and put you in the top 30%, Cs and bellow would mostly go to highschools and acadamies.

For years wee Norn Iron has been outperforming the rest of the UK just because of these tests, they also removed blocks to soical mobility because it didn't matter how rich or poor your family was, if you had the intelct you could get to the best schools in the country. However, our current Minister for Education, from a certain Republican party has decided that she wants rid of the 11+ because it labels children as failures in early life. (Ofcourse she never went through the education system, her and her predecessor both left school before they had any qualifications to make bombs and murder for the IRA, and now they're setting eductaion policy >,> )

[Trigg]

We have that in Northern Ireland, the rest of the UK got rid of it about 50 years ago, kids took 2 tests called the 11+ with grades from A to F, As and Bs would get you to a grammar school and put you in the top 30%, Cs and bellow would mostly go to high schools and acadamies.

For years wee Norn Iron has been outperforming the rest of the UK just because of these tests, they also removed blocks to soical mobility because it didn't matter how rich or poor your family was, if you had the intelct you could get to the best schools in the country. However, our current Minister for Education, from a certain Republican party has decided that she wants rid of the 11+ because it labels children as failures in early life. (Ofcourse she never went through the education system, her and her predecessor both left school before they had any qualifications to make bombs and murder for the IRA, and now they're setting eductaion policy >,> )

At what age would the 11+ be given and do the kids who score low get a chance to take the test again so they can go to the better schools? In Finland they can take the test twice.

I do wish the US media would explain the school system in Europe. You really can't compare our high schoolers to Finland or NI. They aren't on equal footing.

[Kathianne]

Basically the Euro system, including most of the West like Mexico, gives tests at various ages to determine suitability for various paths of curriculum.

The US doesn't do the same. While standardized tests are given, they aren't used to weed out those 'college bound' and those that aren't. All children in the US are assumed to be educable, even if brain injured and on ventilator. Thus, curriculum in the main is aimed at the norm, with gifted and special needs factored in. In the European system the best and brightest are tracked from 3rd grade on.

Seems to me that a melding of the systems might serve all kids better.

[Noir]

At what age would the 11+ be given and do the kids who score low get a chance to take the test again so they can go to the better schools? In Finland they can take the test twice.

I do wish the US media would explain the school system in Europe. You really can't compare our high schoolers to Finland or NI. They aren't on equal footing.

Depending on when you started school the person taking the test will be 10-11 years old.

If you fail it and go to a high school you can try to apply to a grammar school in the following years, the schools will talk with eachother to discuss if they think you're capable of it. The Latest you'd look to transfer would be 16-17 when you do your GCSEs,

Our system is just a series of specialisations. 11+ sorts the academics from the nonacademics, then 3 years of 13-15 subjects, then 2 years (GCSEs) of 9-10 subjects, then 2 years (A-levels) of 3-4 subjects then 3 years (degree) of 1-2 subjects. Whereas I think in the US you guys have a much more general system with less emphasis on specialisation, by way of example I know folks who are having to do maths for collage credits in the US, whereas over here as I aquired my GCSE in maths when I was 15 I could of left it there and never need worry about it again.

[Trigg]

Depending on when you started school the person taking the test will be 10-11 years old.

If you fail it and go to a high school you can try to apply to a grammar school in the following years, the schools will talk with eachother to discuss if they think you're capable of it. The Latest you'd look to transfer would be 16-17 when you do your GCSEs,

Our system is just a series of specialisations. 11+ sorts the academics from the nonacademics, then 3 years of 13-15 subjects, then 2 years (GCSEs) of 9-10 subjects, then 2 years (A-levels) of 3-4 subjects then 3 years (degree) of 1-2 subjects. Whereas I think in the US you guys have a much more general system with less emphasis on specialisation, by way of example I know folks who are having to do maths for collage credits in the US, whereas over here as I aquired my GCSE in maths when I was 15 I could of left it there and never need worry about it again.

all right, I'm still confused. It seems young to test 10-11 yr olds because here they would only be in 6th grade.

In the US in college you can test out of math and English classes and admittance in specialized degrees depends on your SAT's.

I don't know if you can explain your system or I mine, since I don't think we're speaking the same language. The schools are obviously very different. Of course that was my point all along. Our schools can not be compaired to yours.

[Noir]

all right, I'm still confused. It seems young to test 10-11 yr olds because here they would only be in 6th grade.

In the US in college you can test out of math and English classes and admittance in specialized degrees depends on your SAT's.

I don't know if you can explain your system or I mine, since I don't think we're speaking the same language. The schools are obviously very different. Of course that was my point all along. Our schools can not be compaired to yours.

Yeah, it all seems so simple until ya try to put it into words lol,

And yeah that's the main reason the people who want it scrapped want it scrapped, cue they say the kids are too young, but we start high school / grammar school at 11/12, to make it any older would be silly, and to abolish it would be worse, but abolish it they have >,>

[Trigg]

Yeah, it all seems so simple until ya try to put it into words lol,

And yeah that's the main reason the people who want it scrapped want it scrapped, cue they say the kids are too young, but we start high school / grammar school at 11/12, to make it any older would be silly, and to abolish it would be worse, but abolish it they have >,>

I'd probably be in the abolish it crowd, since I think 11-12 yr olds are to young to be pigeon holed.

On the other hand, if I'd been raised in your system maybe I'd feel differently, who knows.

I know my sister stresses about her 4yr olds testing into the right school and I think that's obsessive, again I don't live there, so I have an outside observation.

For now I put my kids in AP courses (college bound) and college credit courses that they offer at our high school.

[Kathianne]

Depending on when you started school the person taking the test will be 10-11 years old.

If you fail it and go to a high school you can try to apply to a grammar school in the following years, the schools will talk with eachother to discuss if they think you're capable of it. The Latest you'd look to transfer would be 16-17 when you do your GCSEs,

Our system is just a series of specialisations. 11+ sorts the academics from the nonacademics, then 3 years of 13-15 subjects, then 2 years (GCSEs) of 9-10 subjects, then 2 years (A-levels) of 3-4 subjects then 3 years (degree) of 1-2 subjects. Whereas I think in the US you guys have a much more general system with less emphasis on specialisation, by way of example I know folks who are having to do maths for collage credits in the US, whereas over here as I aquired my GCSE in maths when I was 15 I could of left it there and never need worry about it again.

Actually if the kid is capable in the US, all college level required math, foreign language, science, English, history can be finished in high school in honors or ap, with required test completions. Of course depending on major, you may well be required by the department to take 200 level or above course.