by WildRose » Sat 24 Feb 2007, 19:07:25
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mercurygirl', '
')
It's true that the "driven few" can excel, but what about the majority who are being failed and even damaged? That's what worries me.
Anyway, after reading Gatto's articles, it's clear that the real purpose of our schools is not education, and in this sense they are actually quite successful.
Thanks for that interesting link, Mercury Girl. I read a lot of that article and will make time to read more on that site.
Re: your comments above. As the parent of three, aged 20, 15 and 12, and a volunteer who has taken part in many social and educational events with students throughout the years, I've observed a few things about the structure of the public school system (as it is here in Alberta).
The kids who are really bright and "driven" are identified early on, even grade 1. These kids learned to read at home and in fact, parents are encouraged to teach their children to read before they get to school. Parents are told by the system that they are their kids "first teachers" and, if they don't want their kids to fall behind, they'll make sure the kids are as far ahead as possible before they enter school. Kids who are slower learners, or whose parents, for whatever reason, didn't give them this advantage before they started school (maybe they were teaching them other things, like how to bake muffins or paint a fence, or play a really fun game), are also identified quickly and assigned extra help in the school, which, as Mr. Gotto points out, does not go unnoticed by their peers and does affect them socially.
Parents are also expected to help with homework, teach concepts that their children didn't grasp at school, and it's perfectly okay if they completely design a child's science fair project and that child can actually be a first place winner.
The curriculum, as I see it, is set up for the children who are the best readers and quickest learners. The school curriculum does not allow a lot of time for developing adequate reading and writing skills, but subjects like science and social studies are structured so that kids are being taught things that are high above their grade level. For example, why does a grade 2 student need to know the medical terms for parts of the anatomy, or be tested on the names of endless different kinds of rocks, when they cannot yet write two sentences that make sense?
All too often, this is what happens, how this system fails kids: those who are not in the top 50%, who are still struggling with reading and writing by the end of junior high school, are continuously passed on to the next grade, because failing students isn't done anymore. Not until high school. These kids could explain all kinds of things to you orally and demonstrate that they really are intelligent, but because they are functionally illiterate, they enter high school and begin flunking courses because they can't read well enough. They can't read well enough to answer the questions posed on exams, or write a decent essay! So, they drop out of school and move on to menial jobs. And as Grotto says, the system has effectively washed the dirt down the drain.
I could go on and on. It's been quite a challenge trying to raise my own children's self-esteem and educational level in this system.