What would you change about education?

I'd let teachers teach and put less stock in standardized tests. Because the only thing a standardized test shows is how well a student can barf up information on command, not that they have learned anything.

Art, Music, Shop and Home Ec classes would be well funded and mandatory. Even if you suck at any of those, they help teach problem solving and creative thinking. Also shop and home ec classes can teach you how to use tools and be a little bit more self sufficient in life.

History and Civics classes. That cover the good and bad about both.

A life skills class. Knowing how to do your own taxes and other financial things; being able to have basic cooking skills, how to write a resume, how to give a good interview. Shit that you actually need to know.

Lastly a class that teaches how to handle life when it isn't fair. Ways to deal with: bullying, racism, sexism and other negatives without resorting to self harm or drug use.

 

Education major here about to graduate! I'm actually really intrigued to see and respond to answers!

Personally?

• Shorter school days with later start times.
• More flexible and open curriculums. Right now, many are at the whim of school boards. There are books I would love to teach but doubtful that the school board/principal would approve based on really stupid grounds.
• Pay teachers more.
• Smaller class sizes so that teachers are better able to help each student individually.
• Pick up the pace in transitioning to technology and educate older teachers. Tech is the future, but too many teachers steer away from using it effectively in the classroom. There are so many cool ways to use it and it's just hardly ever done well.
• Funding for the arts before funding for sports.
• More welcoming school environments. I'm not talking pops of color everywhere because those are super uncomfortable, but a lot of schools are just gray walls with desks in rows and columns and lectures. There are honestly so many ways to make school an inviting place.

These are the ones that come to mind right away late at night.

Pretty much any teacher would agree with less standardized testing. The idea of standardized testing actually makes sense, but it's not executed well, whatsoever, so a lot end up not doing anything to help students.

So, I agree with some of these but not all and I'll break them down.

Most schools (in America) operate on a period or block schedule. Period schedule is typically somewhere around 8-12 periods in a day (not including lunch), with a lower number of periods being more typical. Block schedules rotate through classes every quarter or so with four classes a day (not including lunch).

A lot of elementary and middle schools (in my area at least) have art, music, shop, comp sci, and home ec stuff as rotational "specials" where you're guaranteed to take them at least once prior to high school. In high school, these typically become electives. "Music" class typically becomes band/choir and not every student can do that, that requires talent. The others are simply electives for students to choose how they want to steer their education often.

History and Civics fall under the category of Social Studies and most (if not all) middle/high schools require a social studies course each year with little variation of what.

Life skills class definitely makes sense, however some of what you said for this is actually commonly covered in a home ec class, at least where I'm from.

And "How to handle life"? Those things are incredibly broad and there's no way to teach them. The topics can be explored in classes like an English course using more modern texts, but hard to be taught. Like, you can have assemblies held by guidance counselors or school psychologists or principals, but there is literally no certification to "teach" these things and therefore, no course can be had.

But to humor...your schedule would look like this:
ELA course, Math course, Social Studies course, Science course, Art course, Music course, Shop course, Home Ec course, (I'll throw in) Comp Sci course, and "How to handle life" course. That's 10 classes at 40? minutes each with a 30? minute lunch. A total of 10 transitions in the day at 5? minutes each to a total of a 480 minute school day, so 8 hours. And this is giving students no choice in what they're taking essentially or factoring in things like homeroom.

Do you mean "make students aware of unacceptable behavior coming from teachers or counselors" or "have a teacher or counselor make students more aware of what is and isn't acceptable behavior"?

If it's the latter, I don't know how things are in England, but in my experience a lot of schools have bullying assemblies and give talks throughout the year with constant reinforcement of what is and isn't okay and reminder to report.

If it's the former, I actually don't know how to respond. Best I could think is having something printed in the school handbook differentiating acceptable and unacceptable behavior from teachers to students.

 

I believe that the change should first involve teachers. I think that teachers should be paid more and be more respected, especially when it comes to elementary and high schools. They should be encouraged to be better. The more competent and skilled the teacher is, the better for the students.
Also they should be allowed and encouraged to be more 'active'. By that I mean that during the class, they should do something based on their own initiative, and not just exactly what the textbook and curriculum tells them to do. Some of the best and most useful classes I remember from elementary and high school were the ones where the teachers had their own way of teaching, and actually wanted to teach us something. Exactly the opposite were the teachers with little motivation, who just wanted to survive their next day at work, and nothing more, so they just followed some general curriculum without actually coming up with their own ideas and methods.

 

In a word? Everything. I think the entire school system is shit. Which is why no kid of mine will being going to school. I never went to a brick and mortar school and it didn’t do me any harm. In fact, I’m convinced it saved me from a lot of harm. The pros of not having gone far outweigh anything else. I never want my kid to have to conform or be bullied. And considering my kids will have lesbian parents that’s all the more reason to protect them from how cruel some kids can be.

 

To be fair, a lot of teachers want more say in what they're doing, but it depends on district to district (in the US at least). I've come across some districts that say "This is the curriculum, you have to teach this as we mapped out" but then I've also come across some that say, "Have at it." BUT, even when needing to follow the curriculum, a good teacher can still make a class more fun and interesting. Teacher-prep programs, at least in the US, teach countless strategies on how to make a classroom more engaging...it's just on the teacher to utilize them.

I won't lie and say the US school system is perfect, because it's not, but I will say this: don't write it off entirely, especially if you never went to a brick and mortar school.

Every school has shitty teachers and fantastic teachers. And especially the way teacher prep programs have evolved, the newer, younger teachers are...better, not to toot my own horn. And they're constantly evolving and constantly getting better. Before student teaching, I had to take an all day training on suicide and bullying intervention. We're taught how to best teach students with exceptionalities, students whose first language isn't English, students from diverse backgrounds and cultures (including LGBT students).

There are some shitty school districts out there, and it often boils down to location. Different regions of the countries and different settings (rural, suburban, urban) are prone to their own issues.

You say everything, but what does that mean? You say you never went to a brick and mortar school and that the pros have outweighed the cons but how do you know? You never went to a brick and mortar school...but you want to change everything about it? Were you homeschooled? Cyberschooled? I'm not trying to write off your experience, it's just hard to give a thoughtful answer without more information.

 

As a former teacher myself, having taught social studies in middle school and high school in California, I can attest that our current educational system is completely broken. More money won't fix it.

First, I would get rid of bilingual education. A complete waste of time and resources. Students need to master English period. I know it's not PC, but most students rapidly learn English anyway.

Second, bring back more trade schools. Many students would benefit by learning a trade than struggling taking useless courses which have no value or interest to them.

Third, teachers have no control regarding discipline. The administration sees every student as a $ sign and is reluctant to expel misbehaving students for fear of losing money. It's no wonder that there is so much bullying in schools because the bullies know they can get away with it. Kick out students who are chronically misbehaving. I think ALL students should take courses in etiquette. The need to learn manners and how to conduct themselves in polite society.

Fourth, BANN all cell phones. Allowing cell phones at school was a BIG mistake. How can you teach when students are texting, watching videos or chatting? Of course parents insist cell phones be permitted so they can call their children in case of an emergency. Well, if there is an emergency, the parents should call the school.

I could go on, but these are the ones that seem the spring to mind first. Teachers are generally very dedicated and work very hard on behalf of their students. Yet more and more are leaving teaching as the teaching environment had become more and more intolerable.

 

Former is very much proven by your comments, man. Some I agree with, but not most.

How is it a complete waste of time and resources when a lot of first world countries have bilingual students? Oh, and being bilingual is attributed to being smarter? Spanish, Arabic, and Chinese are very dominant languages and it literally only makes sense to be teaching students another language in school. Elementary is when it should start because otherwise it's too late to do if effectively.

English only is a disgusting attribute. I'd kill to be able to speak and understand another language.

I agree with the value of trade schools, literally won't argue here. I will say though, that those "useless" courses that students have to take are purely subjective. A lot seem useless at the time, but they can unexpectedly help you later on.

Your "former" is showing here mainly because teacher prep programs emphasize classroom management and behavior management much more. Ways of deescalating situations and helping students that aren't just "suspend them" or "expel them."

I agree that some students can be disrespectful, but I also keep in mind that teenagers are still kids. A lot of older teachers have expectations for them to act exactly like adults and do this and do that. Their brains are still forming. They make mistakes. They grow and they learn. There are ways to improve unwanted behavior without resulting to extremes that don't actually help the students.

Cell phones aren't going away so why not just...adapt? I see older teachers complain all the time about cell phones and refuse to incorporate technology into their classrooms. There are ways to easily incorporate using phones into a classroom. I'm not saying let them use them whenever, but a balance. Use them for projects or programs like Kahoot. Let them listen to music during downtime. Check their phones during lunch, transition time, etc. But also have it known that if they use them at inappropriate times they will get confiscated. The more students are banned from something, the more they're going to want to try and do it.

Also, "if there is an emergency, the parents should call the school"? This already happens for family emergencies. Schools wouldn't buy a text from a parent, they would need a call. The reasons parents insist now is because of how frequent school shootings, bomb threats, etc. happen. They want to be able to contact their child and make sure they're okay and make sure their child can contact them. If there's a bomb threat or a school shooting (or threat) how do you think a school would happen 500-1000+ parents all trying to call the school at once to try and determine if their child is okay?

 

I was homeschooled. And I doubt I could have gotten a superior education than what I did at home from any school. The sheer amount of time wasted in schools, the mindless busy work, the lack of intellectually challenging work, the lack of grouding in history, literature, art, the lack of individuality, all of it is a mess and I’m convinced no “institution” can provide the amount of specialized attention each child truly deserves. I want my children to have that.

 

Some public schools are flawed, I will agree to that, but...you are making widespread judgements without personal experience. From my personal experiences (in observations of classrooms and education classes):

• Few teachers actually give busy work. Some do, but a lot of those are older teachers. Newer teachers that are more out of college are aware of how idiotic it is to give busy work. From my observations and the classroom I'm in now, I've seen hardly any busy work given.
• Intellectually challenging work can vary by school and student. Many schools have honors and AP programs to level students differently in high school settings. For even more advanced students, some schools (especially ones with local colleges and universities) have the option to take college courses. So, intellectually challenging work is available. I have friends that were in the Gifted program and between ACE courses and AP courses, they were reasonably challenged.
• Grounding in history? A lot of schools have specific courses and the order they should be taken in. Order of what should be taught when is usually decided by the state and executed by the school district. History courses are also a part of social studies, which encompasses many things.
• Grounding in lit? Pretty much same thing as history. Middle school is less-focused, but starting in high school, typically each year of an English course has a focus: British lit, American lit, etc. that is determined by the state or the district/school. Also, other things are covered in English courses than just lit, like writing, grammar, etc. In my experience, English courses tend to be very grounded.
• Art courses are optional in most schools. However, from personal experience...grounded, often. All of my friends that were very artistic in high school took our art courses in a specific order and gradually got much better.
• A lot of high schools (not all) give students a lot of control of their order of courses and what courses (apart from required courses). Since I graduated, my high school drastically expanded their course catalogue. That's a lot of individuality to me.
• And most teachers do their damndest to give as much specialized attention to each student as they can. The smaller the classes the better. My co-op? Three classes with 20~ kids in each and yet she knows all of their names, she can tell me unique things about each one, she knows their IEPs, she knows what works. My sister? 20~ kids total and just wrote something unique for each of their report cards and also knows their IEPs, unique things about them, etc.

Again, I'm not saying public education is perfect but it does give students an unbiased education. You were homeschooled, you can easily talk about what it's like to be homeschooled, people who weren't can't. But you're making claims without any actual experience. You think you got a great education and I'm not saying you didn't but...that doesn't give you ground to trash public ed, especially when there are plenty of people in public ed who are trying to do some good.

 

I have no idea what you mean by unbiased education. What about my education makes me biased to you?

 

I didn't mean specifically yours, I mean, I don't know your education. I was meaning more that there are some instances of homeschooling by parents that give very biased views to their kids. For example, Bible thumper families that homeschool their kids preach the Bible and whatnot over other things and don't give a comprehensive view of education whereas public ed literally has to give an unbiased view, as much as possible. Apologies if I came across as claiming yours specifically was biased.

 

That’s alright. I know a lot of people think this when they meet me and learn I was homeschooled. And I knew a ton of families where, you’re correct, the kids were brainwashed and damaged from it. I’m sorry if I sounded defensive but I’ve had people assume I was raised this way as well and it’s just not true. I had a secular education that didn’t involve any preaching or requiring me to read the Bible. So my experience of homeschooling was extremely positive and had no ill effects on me.

 

I totally respect that homeschooling can be a positive experience because everyone's different and has their own needs, sometimes those are best met by doing homeschooling. I'm glad you had a very positive experience! I didn't mean to make broad generalizations about homeschooling, it is just that many, of course not all, instances that I've come across were those of the brainwashed kids

 

Yeah it’s super unfortunate because that’s where the bad rep comes from. They assume all homeschoolers are like The Duggar’s or something. And I knew people who were kinda like that, including my close childhood friend. But yeah, that wasn’t my experience. I mean, if that same friend knew I was a lesbian she’d not be allowed to talk to me anymore probably. But my parents? They’ll be surprised but not upset.

 

I have to strongly dispute this. I've been to schools all over the country since I moved around a lot. Public, private, charter, religious etc. and one thing that was always the case every single time at every grade level is at least half the teachers would assign busy work daily. They wouldn't even put any effort into it, they'd literally just be like "um...I'm going to go make copies of these papers so do questions 1-30 while I'm gone" and then they wouldn't even collect it for a grade most of the time, making it totally pointless. Then they'd also assign tons of homework for no real reason. Between all my classes it was like 50 math problems, two worksheets/lab reports, and an essay/project of some kind almost every night in high school type of tons on top of studying for in-class pop quizzes (I hated these so freaking much, it's unfair to not tell people when to study for something), real quizzes, tests, and standardized tests like practice SAT's.

 

Everyone has their own experiences, you've just seem to have gotten the short end of the stick. I did acknowledge that some do, especially older teachers. From my own teacher prep program, it's drilled into us how much we should not give busy work and that if we're going to give work, it's got to have some sort of meaning. So, newer teachers are a lot less likely to give it than older teachers (not saying they won't, because some will, but less likely).

Also, we're pretty much always told that we shouldn't give pop quizzes and that they don't help in any way (graded ones at least, ungraded can be used to do a quick formative assessment of what is known and what needs worked on). Many ed majors, in my experience, will call out a professor that gives pop quizzes for this exact reason.

Things are improving in education, especially since the students that grew up with lots of standardized testing and shit like busy work are the ones now becoming teachers.

 

I guess I had a pretty good experience in public school. Frankly I think the most important part of primary and secondary education is the socialization aspects--direct face to face exposure to different viewpoints and kinds of people and just basic social skills, from sharing crayons in kindergarten on up to the prom. Tbh I've never met anyone who didn't do it (and being from Utah I've probably met more than my fair share of people who were homeschooled) who didn't have a rather strikingly limited range of experience and an inordinate tendency to generalize from it.

 

This is exactly what I’m talking about. Thanks for the examples of what I was trying to convey.