J. Clarke wrote:
In article ,
says...
On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 12:15:39 -0600, Swingman wrote:
I'm pretty well convinced that two factors that were in greater
supply in those days are largely responsible for the current
decline ... discipline, and the quality of the teachers.
I agree on discipline, but I don't recall there being a plethora of
good teachers back in the '50s. Maybe one out of 5 of my HS teachers
qualified as good, 3 as mediocre, and 1 as horrible. I remember
only one really excellent teacher.
I hesitate to mention this because it's not P.C., but the rules now
force the teachers to teach the unteachable. Also known as the
lowest common denominator. In my day, if you couldn't keep up after
as much extra help as the teacher could give, you were eventually
ignored and given a failing grade. They can't do that anymore, it
hurts the kiddies self esteem.
It's worse than that, it's now mandated by law. The combination of
"mainstreaming" and "no child left behind" means that the teachers
have to put strenuous efforts into educating the uneducable and let
the best and brightest fend for themselves. Everybody has to pass a
standardized test. The trouble with this is that the best and
brightest aren't expected to do more than pass the same standardized
test as the worst and dullest.
I'm sorry but this is just flat out wrong - at least where I live. I have
one daughter and one daughter-in-law who are teachers in NY. Both of them
will set you straight on this urban legend. Yes - they do work harder on
the slower kids, but there is no legislation, nor are there any school
policies that require to teach to the lowest common denominator. None. In
fact - NY is aggressively grading schools on the caliber of the student they
produce. The lowest common denominator in NY is the same - or nearly the
same standard that we experienced in the 60's and 70's. Those were and are
quite high standards. There are many schools - mostly urban that fail this
standard, and they are under a lot of pressure to correct this. All of
which says "Bull****" to the commonly thrown about notion (from those who
usually don't even really have any understanding...) that there is some
lowest common denominator thing going on.
The foolishness of the above statement is that it creates the notion that
the standarized test are at the lowest common denominator - translated to be
simple - or stupid. It then goes on to state that the brightest are left to
their own devices to achieve this level. Now think about that for just a
moment...
I will admit that my perspective today is somewhat limited by what I hear
from my daughter and my daughter-in-law, but that is at least very
reflective of the world of education today. Neither would tell you of
"strenuous" efforts, or of letting the brightest fend for themselves.
All of this from a guy who is not pro-teachers. We homeschooled our kids.
--
-Mike-