We hate logic

Join a laid-back, close-knit community of mixed interests Get a free account!

  1. TheColorless Discussion #3: The flaws in your education system


    #1078032016-11-01 08:09:57 *Lieutenant said:

    Discussion #3: The flaws in your education system

    Good day to the members of the Colorless.

    I know this might not be the good time for a discussion, especially that it'll go to no avail for the netizens of the Colorless, but it has been a while since the last discussion, and I'd like to get some inputs from the mind of people like you, and I have some time anyway for now.

    Education is the process of facilitating learning, or the acquisition of knowledge, skills, values, beliefs, and habits. Educational methods include storytelling, discussion, teaching, training, and directed research.

    via Wikipedia

    The topic in itself are pretty self-explanatory. Education starts from everywhere (or "home", they say) and it's all around us. The government especially has set up protocols and system for their own country for the benefits of the citizens, no matter race and religion. Though at some point, this system may seem unfair to some people, especially when instructors expect their students to achieve the same results (which often happens in lower school education system) though they are just doing their job.

    What I'd like to hear (or read) from you is your opinion on your country's education system. The flaws that you faced/think they have in the system, The good or bad in it. Don't use this thread to shit talk your education system, or your country in general, but I'd appreciate the input from you because it's always interesting to see what happen in other countries and how their lives are any different than the others.

    Additional: you may read up on United Nations Sustainable Development, 17 goals to transform our world. In which the 4th goal would be Quality Education for references and/or additional reading.

    https://i.gyazo.com/832bf1575c57c3ec6c1d391c4219849d.jpg

  2. #1078072016-11-01 17:28:37Kirn said:

    Hmmm... Well, I immediately can say, that my country inherited a very good education system from USSR times. USSR had one of the best educations, really. And we got those teachers, those classes, free education at its finest, and it was good, too.

    However, along the way, we kinda dropped the ball. I had teachers themselves admit to me, that the curriculum becoming worse. Generally, it can be blamed on lack of funding and the fact that education program is decided by government, and my government is shit.
    I visited a presentation recently, where education representatives clearly admitted that current education program can give knowledge, but can't really prepare student for actual work in a chosen sphere. And, even then teachers mean well, their hands can be tied by official program.

    Most old teachers I know were studying in Moscow or St. Petersburg, and for them universities there are like the golden standard, which is harder and harder to keep up with. And newer generation teachers don't even have examples like that, so the whole thing kinda goes downhill as time passes.

    Now, I can't say it's all bad. And I can't say that education is crumbling. It's just a slow downhill movement, but still, negative overweights the positive for now, so it's slowly getting worse. I will add to this, if I would think of more particular details.

  3. #1078282016-11-02 18:06:05Kirn said:

    @Lieutenant that is very much true. Free education is great thing, so, I can't really complain on that point. Obviously, for some, who don't have good enough grades coming from school, universities offer contract education - paid form. But if you study well enough, you are guaranteed free education.

  4. #1078542016-11-03 04:31:58Kirn said:

    Yeah, it is. Well, we have some private universities, where you can apply only for money. But government university will pay you if you got really good grades. It's not really a lot of money though. Less than 50 bucks per month most of the time, I think. @Lieutenant

  5. #1078742016-11-04 00:30:11mizlily said:

    @Kirn The thing about US education is that you don't have to get good grades, you just need to maintain the minimal of 2.5/4.00 GPA to get 11k each semester.

    Talk about pocket change, I don't even think retirees get that much from social security.

  6. #1078932016-11-04 18:52:01Kirn said:

    @Lieutenant no, no CGPA/GPA here. In universities here we pretty much use ABCDEF grades, and also point system. Like, you can get max of 100 points per subject. And scoring 90-100 points counts as A. If you pass all your classes without fails, you get some moneys. But if you got straight As, on all subjects, you are eligible for increased stipend. Though, I think it's not too much better than the regular one. Anyways, I don't know much about that all, really, because I never was part of the stipend thingy in the first place.

  7. #1078172016-11-02 07:29:56 *--Jack-- said:

    So here in the US, education is stable, but very hollow and greed-oriented. We have all the basic and extended courses that are used for employment...and test taking. Even though I graduated High-school ('secondary school' for some), I still hear about them changing the base program kids get shoved into every couple years. Usually its worse. Common Core is the new program kids use, where things apparently are made more complex than they need to be.

    Also you know about cursive writing right? Yeah I don't use it. No one I know under the age of 30 uses it for anything other than writing their name. They taught it to us once in like 3rd grade, and had us use it for about 2-3 more years, then it literally never came up again. Also the lattice method of multiplication with numbers larger than 20. Its this odd method of drawing a grid and doing operations along a diagonal line in the grid. The point is that the american school system seems to be a cycle of "lets guess what works". The same could be said about a lot of schools in the world I suppose...but here on top of that we also:

    • Under-fund schooling systems because apparently dumb kids are worth having more military spending power.

    • Under-pay teachers. You hear about the respect and pay that teachers and instructors receive in many countries, not here. The average Teacher salary here is about $56,000 annually. Fast Food workers make about $15 - 20,000 per year. That being said, teaching is a good paying job in the US compared to a variety of other countries.

    • We teach to the test, meaning most instructors, regardless of their opinion, have a curriculum that's basically just hammering random facts into the minds of students. It doesn't bother to engage them, or get them interested. It's simply trying a shotgun approach to see if the school can stay afloat with funding based on academic test scores.

    • I'm in college now, and until I'd enrolled, not a single course had taught me about the basics of financial stability and industry networking. Nothing about taxes either, or other things you are expected to know in life, such as insurance, how to write a resume, technical writing skills, and why you should put tape over your webcams.

    • Privatized College Textbook companies. Or should I say company. There's like 1 & 1/2 companies making textbooks I think. It sure seems like it anyway. They are all genuinely evil, even going to the point of reversing some chapters orders so the books aren't compatible with the class they are made for. "Sorry, the 5th edition has 3 sections of problems that are on a different page in the 4th edition. Guess you'll be spending 350$..." When an escort at a sleazy hotel is cheaper than a business book, there is something wrong.

  8. #1078242016-11-02 15:04:19BakaHime said:

    Good thing most teachers here make cursive writing mandatory when it comes to essays and the like. I use cursive for practically everything and now my penmanship is permanently and utterly illegible. It comes in handy when you don't actually know the spelling of the answer in a test and can only vaguely remember it. Since you're using cursive you can just mess it up a bit and make it look like it's the right answer :D

  9. #1078312016-11-02 21:02:35Yugure said:

    Same with the cursive issue Baka wrote, but at least I have a good penmanship, unlike hers.

    But yeah, even if my cursive is good, I still prefer the not cursive one, albeit all letters are in cute and capital forms. I don't know why I switched, but simply because it's appealing to me.

  10. #1078342016-11-02 22:27:26 *Yugure said:

    For a foreigner studying in Alberta, Canada, I can say that the education they provide here is top-notch. As long as students obey the basic and mandatory rules, like respecting others, no racism, no bullying, etc., they are free.

    I'm not sure if the schools located in this province has the same policy as my school. All I know is that, my school takes pride in giving students freedom. Like:

    • Every year, before the school ends, students are free to pick their own classes they want to attend the following year, and organize their timetable to their liking. Of course, all students have to take Math, Social Studies, English, and one of the branches of Science. They can pick a minimum of 2 extra-curricular activities and a maximum of 5. Or if they want to, they can have a part-time job, which is a plus on the resume.

    • You are free to attend the classes you feel, and go absent when you feel like it. But students are responsible for coping up.

    • Flex times (or lunch time) can be used to do homework, attend classes when they are behind, visit the town's fast food to grab lunch, play sports, or body build in the gym. Or just sit back, relax, and lounge.

    • Gadgets are allowed during flex times. Some teachers will allow it on class, but not all.

    • And others that I can't remember.

    Even so, this is just a minority. I cannot voice my opinion on Canada's education system as a whole, because, well, there are 10 provinces, and each have different economy and such. They have a good educational system, that's for sure. I might be wrong.

    But if I were asked - Philippines' educational system, or Canada's? I'd go with Canada, not because I'm a traitor, but because I feel I'm learning a lot. And I really, really, really hate admitting that.

    (I'll be honest though, I don't like moving from one class to another. I just want a permanent class with the permanent people in it, something the PH has. And I miss it ;____;)

    I'll leave the educational system of the Philippines to one of the peepz...

  11. #1078502016-11-03 02:44:25Lieutenant said:

    I should probably type something about my country's education.

    Well, they were probably good at some point. There were at one time where the syllabus keeps changing between Bahasa Malaysia (BM) and English Language, and students were fed up because it's them who wants to study, not the ministry.

    Populations here often worries about the lack of the 'usage' or glorifying the native language because we're a lot of culture so there were a lot of language here and there being used, Chinese, English, Indian, etc. The effect in the job industry is that a lot of fresh graduates (especially the Malays) are unable to get a job because the lack of proficiency in English (42%) and Chinese language (27%), and it's funny because it's the economy right now, Chinese are invading, they are the 2nd largest population in Malaysia, with only 50% of Malay ethnics in their own population right now, means that there are only about 15 million of Malays out of 30 million of the Malaysian population. It's not a requirement for us to know Chinese but a bonus to go further and it always felt like a discrimination because it's only an option to learn Chinese language as a 3rd language in university. For English somehow there shouldn't be an excuse because we learn that since we were in Kindergarten so we pretty much learn English the alongside BM in our lifetime. There are more than 300,000 fresh graduates here that are unable to get jobs. And our Deputy Prime Minister has stressed out his disappointment in Malays that can't speak BM, yeah we have that kinda population here too. Then there are foreign workers that can work here for 2 years and already able to converse in BM. So yeah this section is just the language barrier between us. But why does that happen? Perhaps it was the separation of race in school, we have this SK (Sekolah Kebangsaan) and SJK (Sekolah Jenis Kebangsaan) where students are either all mixed in one school or they go to different school where there're just Chinese and/or Indian. I personally dislike the idea of the separation because it'll lessen the bond between races from when we're little and it's not a good idea to develop 'racism' in kids, though I believe they don't teach them that in school, hopefully ) It's a pity that our language used to be the lingua franca because we were the best port for traders back in the 14-15th Century.

    Secondly, the music and cursive writing that we learn in primary school stays there. As in we never learn it again after that. I suppose unless if you go to music course or academy later on in university or anything, then yeah.

    There are also things where the rate of women gets into university is a lot more higher than men, but most who gets jobs are men rather than women, it's because women here usually are more committed to do housework than men, it's like a common mentality or something, in some cases, bosses don't like married women as their employees because of those responsibility, that they'd tend to put aside work, maybe, I wouldn't know.

    Also, art in Malaysia. Well I'd like to think that it's rather developing but if we were to follow the elders' mentality, art is nothing here. It doesn't make you good money and you're better off working outside the country rather than here. Science and Math are more, well, accepted, because, yeah.

    That'll probably what I'll put here for now, if I remember something else, I'll get back here.

  12. #1078832016-11-04 11:59:33 *DictatorHilton said:

    One of the largest debates about the Swedish school system right now is about "private" schools (schools that aren't owned by the government) and the fact that all education is funded by taxes.

    So our education here in Sweden is free or rather funded by taxes. There are basically no expenses connected to your education up until university where you're expected to pay for your own course literature and lunch (which is free in both primary and secondary school). However when you're studying at university you are eligible for student benefits and loans so course literature is rarely a big deal. Anyways, the point is that we pour a lot of money into our school system so that everyone gets a chance to study.

    So the thing is that since all education is funded by taxes, private schools with private owners are able to fund their establishment on tax money. For most that wouldn't be an issue if it wasn't for the fact that the owners are able to turn the tax money into profit for themselves. So they're basically taking out "excess" money, from the money that the government has given them to fund their schools, and putting it into their own pockets. How do they do it? Well, by cutting down the expenses. Some do it by cutting down the number of teachers they employ, finding loopholes by taking away courses that are expensive materialvise (while still getting funding for those courses), employing teachers without formal competence (i.e. cheaper teachers) and so on. They're essentially compromising the quality of our education in order to make profit.

    Some people argue that these schools shouldn't be allowed to exist or that they at least should be forced to reinvest (some of) their profit into the school system. Some argue that no harm has been done since students in private schools tend to get higher grades than students in public schools** or that the profit isn't even that large.

    This isn't really about the education system itself but since people see this as something that affects the quality of our education I'd say that it's relevant. But yeah, to summerise, people are upset because tax money disappears.

    ** These schools might have students with higher grades but they tend to perform the worst when it comes to standardized test. This has led to another debate about the authenticity of their grades and whether the schools just hand out good grades to make their schools look good.

  13. #1079362016-11-08 07:05:10Lieutenant said:

    I've heard a great deal about Finland education system, too bad I don't think I know any CL member(s) that is from Finland ) because that would be interesting to read.

  14. #1082232016-11-28 10:16:24BakaHime said:

    Honestly, same. I keep hearing about how it's really good and shit (lols). I haven't really experienced it firsthand though >_> (or at least, haven't heard about it from someone who actually studied there :/)

  15. #1091112017-02-14 16:32:05shafnat said:

    The private schools in Indonesia is just what user mizlily said above, " it's a public school for rich kids". But when it comes to university, our perspective changes.

    The high school where i was is a private school owned by a pretty known tutoring agency in Bandung city. It was a school with no field trip, no art performing or whatever it is called like the other neighbor schools, and such things they said "getting in the way to pass the university entrance exam". Instead, we were forced to attend a must attended tutoring that is held from after school to 6 PM everyday (so basically we go home at 6 PM). We also had a try out of entrance exam a month once. Also, when it's close to the exam, we were invited to spend the night in school along with the teachers to study overnight. Why, of course to pass the public university/institute exam.

    It was a school where almost every student target themselves to pass the best public university/institute in Indonesia. I don't know about the Social classes, but since i took Science back then, all of them are targeting Bandung Institute of Technology(ITB) for engineering and science students or Universitas Indonesia(UI) for the medic thingy and the other else were just a spare options.

    Something that they made in here is really bothering me. Really really bothering me. I know i did target myself to go to ITB too back then, also UI as the second option (i should have known that UI wouldnt want them to be a "second option" so it was an instant fail for me) but the fact that our school is really forcing their student to study so hard just to get to these institute is making me question myself "what for?". ITB is ranked at 401-410 on World University Rankings 2016. I didn't mean that it was a crappy institute, it is the best in our country indeed. And i'm happy it's in my hometown too. But what? is "passing" the test to the best institute is the final target? was it only for the pride? to put "Student of chemical engineering of ITB" or "Pharmacy School of ITB" on instagram and line bio? Yes we know that when it comes to a job seeking, they are easier to get the job. But is that what are we into? is it what we really wanted back then? Theres a lot of ITB students that transfers and re do their university life in another uni because they are stressed in such a cold world of competition inside ITB itself.

    So i would conclude the thing that bothers me a lot is the PERSPECTIVE of ourselves as a student, parents, people even myself.

    We just see the name and the cover, and have no knowledge of what is inside. Eventhough i want to thank my school because at the end i can pass a public university, i also blame my school for making this competition atmosphere. I blame this school for making the students think "I am smarter than him/her, i should pass the test, i don't care if he/she pass or not, but i will always be above him/her" and just that. We envy them who get there without knowing are they having a bad time or not, and at the end we got mad to them who given up and re-do their university life in the other place. Why was it? Because we were made just to think we can pass the entrance exam! not how we live as the student in it!

    Now let's take a look at the other universities out there. I've asked a lot of my friends who got into a private uni (which is not provided by the government), i could see they talk more flexible, more up-to-date than us who is in public school. Of course i asked them who are serious on studying them, not those "as long as i got the degree" guys. Indeed, public teacher universities has a lot more experienced professors, but private universities also has a lot of up-to-date professors that keep catching up with modern technologies and things. The atmosphere of most private uni also looks more like "two way education" where the lecturer and the students are discussing for the best results instead of what happened in a lot of public uni that is really strict on using the old method of the experienced lecturer that we should follow. There's no proof that we as a public uni students are better than them in private uni. So back to the perspective, why?

    Why are students competing to get into the best public uni instead of the best in their way?

    Why are parents boast their children who get into best public uni instead of building up their goal wherever they are in?

    Why people look a public uni student "they are great" instead of looking at their life inside about are they having a good grades there, enjoying their uni live, progressing to be a useful person or not?

    This writing wouldn't change anything, any perspective of people. It's just something i want to vent everytime i hear people compare a public uni to private uni as if private uni are just the "throw out" of them who doesn't get into the public uni eventhough i'm a student of a public uni.

  16. #1091272017-02-15 04:04:21piggu said:

    is ok.

    cc is dirt cheap.

    sometimes free food. free food means maybe fucky

    2 years of awesome depress and then some.

    tldr is gud

  17. #1092212017-02-21 17:36:27naidraug said:

    So I've spent some time actually doing education here in the US. At one time or another I've taught students from college level down to kindergartners, the bulk of my time so far has been spent teaching university students about science. You asked for flaws so I'll give you those.

    1. Kids aren't taught nearly enough outside, or how to do stuff. In the US our students in 2017 mostly lack exposure to the physical world. By the time they are in college most of them think what they learn is utterly disconnected from the world around them, and that my job as a professor is to give them a bunch of shit to memorize and a multiple choice test to put those items on and forget about so they can memorize the next thing. We start this early. When my job was to teach Biology it was tough. Most 20 somethings had never cooked a meal, or flipped over a rotting log, dug in the dirt. It's tough to explain what osmosis is going to mean for a cell to someone who has never brewed tea, or competition/interaction to someone who sees the world in two kinds of tree, four kinds of bird, five kinds of bug and one kind of grass.
    2. Religion isn't helping. It could, but it isn't. When I taught little kids in Ohio I had to pussyfoot around evolution. Not because of the kids, they got it intuitively. When you've dragged them out of the classroom and you're sitting in the woods with them talking about animal and plants fighting it out for life again and again, the kids they get evolution. Even co-evolution and invasive species (my part of Ohio just lost all it's ash trees). These things are intuitive to fifth and sixth graders in the right setting. The trouble is the parents. In my part of the country you have to choose your words carefully before late high school, and in truth, it's the perception that a parent could cost you your job for telling their kid the truth using the terms we would use as scientists. This makes it harder to get rid of misconceptions, because even when a kid understands some loaded topic, like say evolution, or some historical example of appeals to racism or abuse of patriotism, we as teachers have to discourage the kid from making the connection to the world around them. Which is kind of the point... so yeah. Which brings us to
    3. Parents. This is a problem up until around the middle of highschool. The first part is the most intuitive part, parents directly interfering with their kid getting taught something useful, or coming in to try and get you to give the kid a grade they don't deserve (this happens up until... usually it is young kids but not always, some will do this until they graduate from college). MOST teachers want to do good, but a lot of us are restricted to certain forms of teaching (late high school to college) somewhat by logistics, but mostly by fear of parents (K-12). Teachers don't usually get backup from their administrators, most of those act as surrogates or advocates for parents. If you ever wondered why when you're 10 years old sitting in nice neat rows with clean shoes and bored out of your skull while someone drones on and on about what the inside of a frog looks like, it is because if we took you out to the creek and showed you some real examples 10 parents would be calling in about muddy shoes and pants, 5 outside the teacher's door about skinned knees, and 1 outside the principles office irate that when Johnny caught a snake his teacher told him about it's habitat and what it ate and not that it was the spawn of satan and deciever of Eve. These are the direct influences. The indirect ones are even more problematic. Parents don't teach their kids stuff. For better or worse the bulk of the US is two income households. This means all sorts of good things for female empowerment. But kids aren't really raised so much as shuffled from caregiver to caregiver. I don't know how to fix it, pay people like they are single breadwinner households or something. But as a teacher it makes it super hard, when most kids aren't interacting much with their parents. They aren't learning honesty, or empathy, or the value of hard work, or even that adults are people, or how to handle stuff at home. So... I don't know it's kind of intangible, but they just don't really get life skills, so when you're asking them to figure something out and they struggle, a lot of kids just fold up. You can take five to ten minutes to get the kid on track, but there's a cost to that. It's five to ten minutes the rest of the class is waiting on you. It is pretty frequent, and uniform across age class, and I see a lot of teachers struggle with it.
    4. Effort/reward. So it's still pretty intact through the lower grades (except in charter schools) but teaching in the US is still a pretty stable profession. EXCEPT for colleges. So I guess it started in the 70's but really took off in the 90's But the old tenure system has pretty much been scrapped. There are still tenure folks alive and in jobs, but when they retire they aren't getting replaced. If this was being replaced by real jobs with health insurance, and stability that would be fine. But... well we made too many phds. So yeah adjuncting is a thing. It's worth looking up what that is, but suffice to say that when I was a college prof I teaching at three different schools and was making less than full time at McDonalds. Every semester it was pretty much a crapshoot if any university or college would have work for me or not, or what I would be teaching until about a week before (on several occasions after) classes started. This will eventually break higher ed in the states. It's cheaper than the old system so the schools survive a lack of state funding like the old days. But I saw a LOT of good teachers get ground into dust. There is still the tenure system for researcher, but that is based on how much grant money they bring in for their research almost never or minimally on how well they teach.

    5. Money. It screws things up, badly. At college the dynamic was depressing. Students could be sorted into roughly four categories. Some didn't get what school was for, and thought it was for socializing. They learn nothing. There are others who put in a middle amount of effort, and get a middle return. Then there are those who are really there to learn. This group has a subdivision. Those whose mommy and daddy are paying for school (fair number of those in the first group also), they get a huge amount out of it, and usually get flawless grades. And those that are working their way through. They know there's a lot there to gain, and they want it. But they are just overtaxed. On paper you can't tell the difference between them at the group who middle through with basic effort, but in class and in discussion, it shines through are really giving it their all. This effort isn't reflected in their grades, they are just overtaxed by life. There are exceptions, but not many. At the k-12 level money doesn't make a difference within a school, but instead between them. For whatever reason we thought it was a good idea that a school's budget (beyond keeping the heater running) should be based largely on LOCAL taxes. So rich schools have more money than they know what to do with, and poor schools, well they have heat. We'll never get rid of this because, you just try telling some rich suburban mom that her tax money that used to go to her little Timmy's school is now going to have a portion go to some poor kid because it would be better for us as a society if they had an even shot at life.

    Those are pretty much the flaws I've come across in the US education. The standards aren't bad, but the pressure is, and now that they are taking are adaptive tests, the time spent on standardized testing is dropping dramatically. Essentially we are locking our teachers into a certain style of teaching we know isn't the best, and we have risk/reward out of wack.