<p>Is it to produce informed citizens? Re: ones who are able to cut through the jargon of the voters pamphlet and decipher if voting for the measure means you want it to happen- or * dont* want it to happen.
Its not always clear in our county.
Is it to produce workers for Walmart or is it to keep the universities full?
Can we even agree on what the purpose is?
[SCHOOL:</a> The Story of American Public Education](<a href=“http://www.pbs.org/kcet/publicschool/get_involved/guide_p2.html]SCHOOL:”>http://www.pbs.org/kcet/publicschool/get_involved/guide_p2.html)
Who are we targeting?
We know we arent targeting the elite, they dont send their kids to public schools.
So what does a classroom look like?
In our district students speak 120 languages. 40% are on FRL. Class sizes are 30-32 in high school, they want to increase middle school classrooms to 32, and elementary classrooms to 30 from 28.
Must be because the kids are learning so well, that a larger classroom wont inhibit progress.
And after all Bill Gates says " class size doesnt matter" & he should know, eh?
:rolleyes:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Wow. I guess that depends on your definition of “elite.” I wonder how many officers in the United States Armed Forces are products of public education?</p>
<p>Elite are the people that run the country.</p>
<p>The definition is generally a small group of people who control a disproportionate amount of wealth/power.</p>
<p>I don’t consider people that take orders from others to be “elite” no matter how proficient at their job, so in this arena its doubtful that many in the military would qualify.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>While the purpose of education in general should be pretty clear, the purpose of deciding to offer the education through a monopolistic system of government schools is far more nebulous. In a way, the obvious purpose seems to be to protect a group of service providers from the broad public. A group of people who would most definitely better off without the burden of working for the government, if they only realized how bad their so-called leaders are.</p>
<p>The essential purpose of public education is to produce people fit for society. It benefits society that people have education because those people become more productive and less destructive. I frame it like this because in the old days public education was more directly aimed at providing certain basics needed to function in a mostly farming economy where manual labor prevailed. It also sought to provide sufficient opportunity to the brightest and most motivated - thus the classic American success imagery.</p>
<p>I think the public schools do a remarkable job given the explosion in demands on them. There is much more to learn in many more fields. Schools are expected to act as parental substitutes after and often before the school day. They are required to maintain voluminous reports - never dreamed of before - in a paperwork & security obsessed world in which everything must be documented. They deal with changes in the expectation in the work force and much more.</p>
<p>From the beginning, the purpose of American public education has been to replicate society. That is, to create factory workers out of the children of factory workers, and professionals out of the children of professionals. All while claiming that America is the land of equal opportunity.</p>
<p>There are many of us who think that this should change, and who are working hard to change it, but it’s an uphill battle with a lot of obstacles in the way.</p>
<p>Well you know what they say about obstacles…the obstacles are the path.
:)</p>
<p>You’re absolutely right!</p>
<p>In theory, from the abstract society and government point of view, better educated people are more economically productive, resulting in a wealthier society (and more tax revenue for the government). Providing educational opportunity to more people, particularly those born into poor families who would not otherwise be able to pay for schooling for their kids, can result in significant long term economic benefit.</p>
<p>Of course, the implementation of such is nowhere near perfect (the students born into poor families usually only have access to low quality schools), and there are principal/agent problems, as there can be in any type of organization.</p>
<p>[Prison</a> Planet.com » Newly Discovered Eighth Grade Exam From 1912 Shows How Dumbed Down America Has Become](<a href=“Alex Jones' Endgame”>Alex Jones' Endgame) </p>
<p>[Dumb</a> As A Rock: You Will Be Absolutely Amazed At The Things That U.S. High School Students Do Not Know](<a href=“End Of The American Dream - Life As You Have Known It Will Never Be The Same Again...”>End Of The American Dream - Life As You Have Known It Will Never Be The Same Again...)</p>
<p>to NOT let this happen</p>
<p>The difficulty of that 1912 test has been much overblown, IMO. We learned most of that stuff in late middle/early high school, and I remember most of it. The word problems, especially, look a lot like word problems we had on standardized tests, and I’m only 27. The only thing I can truly say we didn’t do was diagram sentences, and that’s because there are other ways to learn proper grammar.</p>
<p>Also note that there’s no indication of how the 8th graders in question actually did on this test - what the average score was - or whether the exam was actually ever given.</p>
<p>Re Post #3 Emeraldkity4, who said:</p>
<p>“Elite are the people that run the country. The definition is generally a small group of people who control a disproportionate amount of wealth/power. I don’t consider people tat take orders from others to be “elite” no matter how proficient at their job, so in this arena its doubtful that many in the military would qualify.”</p>
<p>Wow.</p>
<p>Definition of “elite” from Merriam-Webster: 1. The best of a class. 2. The social superior part of society. 3. A group of persons who by virtue of position or education exercise much power or influence.</p>
<p>“The Power Elite” (1957) discusses three branches of elite as “those political, economic and military circles, which share decisions having at least national consequences. Insofar as national events are decided, the power elite are those who decide them.” According to the author, the governing elite in the US primarily draws its members from three areas: 1. The highest political leaders. 2. Major corporate owners and directors, and 3. High ranking military officers.</p>
<p>So while it is true that not many in the military would qualify, neither would many in politics or many in the business world.</p>
<p>Re: that 1912 8th grade test</p>
<p>Remember also that attaining an 8th grade education in 1912 was nowhere near universal. Only 13.5% of the population then completed 4 years of high school in 1910.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.census.gov/statab/hist/HS-22.pdf[/url]”>http://www.census.gov/statab/hist/HS-22.pdf</a></p>
<p>Considering the fact that 100 years ago most children ended their formal education after only a few years of schooling (in order to work the farm or family business), whereas now not only is a full high school education the standard, but increasingly now a community college or university education is being seen as the minimum requirement for a successful career, I think that it is fair to say that the US education system is leaps and bounds better than it was a century ago. That’s not to say that the education system nowadays isn’t necessarily deficient and broken, but comparing it to the paltry standards of education at the turn of the 19th century is ridiculous.</p>
<p>Also, in regards to the 1912 test, I think its perceived difficulty is also due to a shift in educational emphasis. For example those grade 8 students may have been able to understand that ship navigation geography question (important in the context 1912, but less important in the modern age where information travel is near instantaneous), or some of the grammar questions (Useful then, but now with spell check nowadays and being able to delete mistakes with a simple click of a button- seriously how many of you guys could spell all those words without a single mistake?) but how many of those 1912 students would be able to explain what we consider basic knowledge nowadays, such as the different layers of the earth, basic atomic structure (I even saw a Magic School Bus episode in elementary school in the 90’s about this) Darwinian evolution, or the structure (or even existence of DNA). It is obvious that the students of the turn of the century would not know these things, simply because the above information and theories were not discovered or were still not widely taught. Some of the posters here expect modern students to know everything the generations in the past learned AND all the new material. The emphasis on what is leaned changes through the generations and this means that some knowledge is lost, in addition to all the new stuff that is learned.</p>
<p>Is the quality of education declining, or are we just overlooking the change in the curriculum subject matter?</p>
<p>There are multiple problems with how the eighth grade test was presented.</p>
<p>The website that hosts it directly states, “it should not be used to compare student knowledge then and now.” NamelessStatistic explained why this is. This also wasn’t a normal test. It was considered a very important exam that people studied well in advance for.</p>
<p>One thing that does seem to be constant throughout the ages though seems to be the elder generation griping about the quality of the younger generation (admit it baby-boomers and genXers) ;)</p>