<p>Manu U.S. schools offer trade type classes instead of traditional college prep courses. That’s been that way for as long back as I can remember or research. Yes we have an alarming drop out rate, but that is a totally different issue and has nothing to do with comparing 2 country’s educational system.</p>
<p>The problem I was referring to is an educational system that doesn’t allow a student; or at the very least discourages a student from going on to college. I personally know of a student; and others; who were typical “C” students. Couple of “B’s” and maybe 1 “A”. In the system you promote, there is a very good chance that they never would have been able to continue on with college prep classes and go to college. Here, their parents believed she, this particular student, needed more structure and challenges. The mom wanted the girl to get into the IB program. The school emphasized the challenge and commitment required, however not discouraging. They figured she could always drop out of IB and go back to traditional at the end of 9th grade if it didn’t work out. It did work out. She wasn’t a straight “A” student, but she did end up with about a 3.2gpa. She didn’t score high enough to get college credit, but she is now in her Junior year of college at State U and doing well. My point is that she probably would never have had that opportunity in Finland or Holland.</p>
<p>Money definitely isn’t the answer to education. At least not dollars PER STUDENT. Finland and Holland are prime examples of that. The answer lies within the family structure and social acceptances. In our society, preparing to have children, planning for their education, planning to support them financially, socially, and emotionally, are not usually done. Too many people having children that don’t even have their lives figured out yet. I’m not saying that a woman’s place is in the home. I don’t believe that. But I do know that when a family almost always consisted of a mother and a father; and one of the parents (usually the mother) was in charge of the family; to include the children’s education; we had a lot less drop outs and kids were better prepared educationally. </p>
<p>If I cared; which I don’t because I don’t believe we can compare the USA to finland or holland; I would like to see stats between the 2 countries such as single parents; teenage pregnancy; age of a traditional woman having their first child; parental involvement in their child’s education; etc… In our country, I think there is too much of the “me” generation left where parents care more about themselves than they do their children. If they aren’t prepared to have and raise children, they should be having children. We’re not even talking about social debates like abortion. With the exception of rape, a woman does have control over her body. She doesn’t have to get pregnant. Anyway, these are some of the social issues I believe has lead to the demise of our educational system. It isn’t the style of education, the amount of money towards education, a European method compared to and USA AP/IB/standard method. etc…</p>
<p>Along the same lines as Xiggi’s original post: North Dakota scores highest on all American math achievement tests.</p>
<p>Reason given? Homogeneous population.</p>
<p>This means the class has shared values and shared holidays so students are not missing class time when their colleagues are in attendance. And the class has none of the divisiveness that, sadly, splintered ethnicity can produce. (See Freedom Writers, book and movie for an excellent exploration of this phenomenon.)</p>
<p>North Dakota. Interesting. Do the North Dakotans get the highest scores in the country, or do more North Dakotans score above a certain level (i.e., not as many kids who are not able to do basic math as in other testing populations)? I would assume the latter to be the case.</p>
<p>I will say that places like the Dakotas, Montana, Wyoming, etc…, besides having a Homogeneous population, probably also has smaller class size; more culturally accepted norms; and probably more accepted family values among it’s citizens.</p>
<p>Political correctness and diversity is NOT what it’s all cracked up to be. This is just another example, of many, where it’s divisive and causes problems. Our country originally was so strong and exceptional because the norm among immigrants was assimilation. You brought with you certain customs and traditions, but for the most part you became an AMERICAN. Being an American was the culmination of all those customs and traditions. Founded on a principle originated with freedom and the possibility to dream. Now, more and more people concentrate on people’s differences as a good thing instead of emphasizing the importance of our commonalities. And I don’t really blame the immigrants. (Except illegals). The majority of immigrants would assimilate better if they knew they had to. Unfortunately, we have certain groups and individuals in our country that fight so immigrants don’t have to assimilate. The consider it racism and discrimination to force people to speak English and other culturally accepted norms.</p>
Are you sure you have to pay a church tax. When we lived in Germany they asked us when whether we wanted to pay our tax to the Protestant or Catholic church. We said neither, and they goggled a bit, but in fact it was no problem. We didn’t have to pay. I know my taxes were high in Germany, but frankly I had more disposable income during the time I lived there than at any other time in my life. It helps when you don’t have to pay deductibles and co-pays every time you go to the doctor.</p>
<p>I didn’t envision it going there either. Just asking a question . . .</p>
<p>There are good and bad things about being part of a very homogenous population. I grew up in South Dakota. In a town that was in an Indian reservation. Test scores in our school weren’t so hot.</p>
<p>Personally; I would rather not pay any type of direct income tax. I believe truly in a “USE TAX” or form of sales tax. This way the consumer can truly dictate the market and their own spending. You can buy a Mercedes or a Ford Focus. You can buy a Sony or a Philips. You can pay for your kids to go to whatever school you want them to. If you don’t have kids, you don’t have to pay.</p>
<p>Of course, you will have those that argue that there will be those who can’t afford to pay for their kids to go to school. Or, they can’t pay for them to go to a “Better” school. As long as they have income; albeit government social service money (welfare), they will be able to. Unfortunately, there are many parents, who I mentioned earlier, that have no business being a parent. They care more about themselves than their children. They will send their kids to the cheapest school they can find so THEY have more money. That is why a “Use Tax” will never work in our country. Not until people become more responsible. And currently, too many parents are irresponsible. Same with health care and other expenditures. If you left it up to most people, they WOULDN’T save for the future. They WOULDN’T have health care for their children. They WOULDN’T send the kids to a decent school.</p>
<p>But no, I didn’t like paying the high taxes. When I lived in Europe, I too had a lot more disposable money. But I don’t believe it was because of their socialism society. It was because we didn’t spend our money on things not available technologically yet. I.e. You only had 1 TV because there were very few stations. Now there is cable and satellite. We have 3+ tv’s in the house. We didn’t do DVD and CD, Playstation; 2+ cars, etc…</p>