mikeyv23
What do you thing of the Education system?
Posted on: 05/07/2009 19:28
So I was just wondering what people think of the education system and how it works. Do you think students should have grades or marks? It seems like students don't learn as much as they could because they focus on getting good grades, instead of actually understanding a subject. For example, cramming information the night before a test might help someone get good grades, but will they really understand thoroughly or remember the information later? It seems so pointless to take a course, do loads of work and then not learn much at all. Just a thought, what do you think? 
- Login or register to post comments
- Add new comment
Search
Recently Active...
Comments
Tyson
Nice topic bro. I am actually
Posted on: 05/07/2009 19:59
Nice topic bro. I am actually working on a masters of science in education right now.
My whole issues with testing is that I believe it does not determine whether or not a student has gained the knowledge, it only shows if a student can memorize facts, formulas and figures. I think many people assume that testing is a good measurement of progress, it's not. Testing does not allow for the application of knowledge. I think that major projects and assignments that allow students to think about and apply what they have learned is a far greater assessment tool that testing. Projects and assignemnts allows students to think critically and be creative, thereby creating a more meaningful learning experience. With that being said, I do think some tests are a good thing (like end of unit tests) but should they not be the end all and be all of assessments.
I also have an issue with standardized tests. The problem with those tests is that in the testing years (grades 3,6 and 10 in Ontario and 3 through 8 in NY) is that teachers are so concerned with these tests that they literally just "teach to the test," and they are extremely frustrated with this. All students learn is what will be on the tests and little else. In my opinion, these tests take away from a meaningful learning experience, and tie teachers hands to these tests rather than allowing them to teach what is in the curriculum and create authentic learning environments.
I think grades and marks are important, but I believe how those grades are given and earned is another story all together.
stoneeyeball
When I went to school, back
Posted on: 05/07/2009 20:44
When I went to school, back in the stone age (the mid 50's to the early 60's), we were drilled in reading, spelling, arithmetic, etc. The taught phonics, and I was reading at a high school level after the end of grade 1. When my sons went to school, the emphasis was on whole language. Now that they're in their twenties, their spelling is atrocious. Testing has its place, and some students would have derived benefit from them. I was diagnosed later in life with NVLD and an IQ of 165. Knowing that sooner would have been more beneficial when I was a youngster. Most of the testing in high school was useless. The high school I attended was so small they attracted many 'border line' teachers, so the burden was on the student. After that experience, I went to unversity where I thrived. It seems we go from one extreme to another.
Freundly-Giant
I've had teacher's give
Posted on: 05/07/2009 21:01
I've had teacher's give lessons on essay formating, proper test writing, things to look for when writing a multiple choice test, etc. etc. I've even had to write tests in foreign languages just to show my understanding on bs-ing my way through tests, stuff that will never help me in my future.
graeme
learning is also profoundly
Posted on: 05/07/2009 21:34
learning is also profoundly affected by social class and cultural group. When I was a kid, it was Jewish kids who led in the high school leaving exam - not because they were smarter than us goys but because they came from culture which had enormous respect for learning And among goys, the rich ones usually led us poor ones. I notice that here in NB, it's the middle class to upper income schools that do far the best.
More importantly, when I taught elementary school, we didn't worry about these standardized tests because there weren't any. So we weren't teaching to get statistics. We were teaching kids so they could learn. I think it made a huge difference in the learning process.
I also think the emphasis on teaching to meet statistical demands of standardized tests creates high stress levels for teachers - as well as wasting their teaching time and stuff that does not really reflect learning at all.
graeme
seeler
One good about tests is that
Posted on: 05/08/2009 10:37
One good about tests is that they tend to be objective. In many subjects you either get the answer right or you don't. Even essay type questions that allow for the student to use some creativity and personal opinion about what he has learned can be objective (especially if they are marked by someone who doesn't know the child and doesn't have a preconceived idea of what the mark should be).
But progress reports by the teacher without any form of testing are quite subjective. They then to favour the 'star' pupils, the kids who are always volunteering answers in class, who always have their hands up, who project well, and while these are admirable traits that may help these youngsters in life - they tend to over-shadow the shy quiet polite child who waits to be called upon, or who is too timid to volunteer. My son did fine in both systems. My daughter, small, quiet, shy, never got an A in elementary school (progress reports) but did quite well in later years when she passed in written work for both term marks and exams. She has a University degree and has done well in the work world, and she has learned to speak out when it matters - although she is still polite and softspoken.