Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Wally, I have a suggestion: go to the "Favorites" then click on "History" on the drop menu choose sort by date. Go back to any topic where you had access and click there. It should bring you back to the old topic, from there you can go to the Home page and you should get in. This has worked for me in the past. Good Luck!
Tried this tactic as I had CL earlier today... no luck. Same ol' cannot display message.
England was blessed with all the right things to make the IR go… the following is basically what a 10th grade text that I used in my class has to say (my paraphrasing per my lecture notes, the nickle version):1. Labor supply: Large numbers of available workers; folks displaced by the second Ag-revolution (mechanization forced small farmers our and reduced help needed to farm). 2. Nat. resources; rich in iron ore and coal. Other resources available in trade with colonies.3. Capital: Money and good ready for investment. Rich folks wanted to make money not by working but by investment (other guys do the work)... many of these were rich traders with connections.4. Entrepreneurs: Some had the capital and ideas, others just the ideas and a good pitch but all had the a huge impact as they got things done.5. Transportation: They lived on an island... had a maritime tradition... first fishing, then trade, then military navy. Also harbors and rivers that added to the mix.Markets: The colonies; grew and created more trade and more markets.6. Gov't support: Promoted and protected business as a policy....
.... I am just not certain that the majority today's teacher have the knowledge or ability to teach to the old standards or methods.
Spot on; most of my younger colleagues were the results of the improved programs I mentioned... it is their nature.Have faith though, the education pendulum* swings back and fourth, we'll get there (sort of) eventually.*My first year teaching I went to a presentation by a retiring (after 40 years in the field) Educ. prof from a nearby college that stated he had seen "the Back to Basics movement 10 times." So hang on scout, there is hope just down the road... 😉
But isn't putting kids on some track pegging them and setting their destiny for them?
That was the gripe that got the system changed. Kids like me that were sort of between tracks often did get lost (I was lucky to have a couple of teachers that pushed me into X track classes... was taking some but got tracked into Y history and English... very little challenge) so instead of fixing the problem trashed the whole idea.
Sounds like you are advocating some version of the Gymnasium, Realschule, Hauptschule system of Germany.
Need to think pathways rather than tracks... if the kid, the folks or the teacher thinks the kid can do more, push him, if not let him run in the groove that best suits him.
I guess the heart of my question is that the Amewrican education system evidently worked well until about 30-35 years ago, what changed? I am not talking about families, bad parents have always existed, even in the old days. But I guarantee you that 30 years ago kids did not graduate high school functionally illiterate, why do they do so today?
Basically the crash was about 40 years ago; stopped grouping kids by ability (tracking) and started the warm and fuzzy idea of education. Kids needed to feel good about themselves, no failure, values clarification and the rise of liberal studies majors. No more geography and history teachers that majored in those areas: social studies teachers that majored in dabbling. Main reason it took me almost 20 years to get a job teaching. [...only then by fate, luck, accident, and nepotism...]
[For Phid]Why go that way... just go back to a comprehensive HS with programs keyed to the students.The big bogeyman years ago was tracking. X kids were college bound; Y's would graduate and go to a tech school, JC, military or to a job that might require some special training; Z's were terminal, either not likely to finish or if did make grauation were going to unskilled laboring type jobs. Most kids that got into a given track stayed there and that was the rub. As we know many folks bloom late or need something to hook them; tracked kids often didn't get the exposure they needed so it went away infavor of all kids getting the same education (cookie cutter style) equality instead of equity.My point is that some kids get off on the math end of physics and others on the smoke and explosions... some kids want to read the classics and others go for Harry Potter; if kids are working on a level that is challenging to them (but not impossible and not a gimme) they will accomplish more and stay engaged. [scout]In the 70's we wanted all kids to go to college; Jackie Mason (famous comic... Ed Sullivan and the finger ;)) had it right: "If everybody goes to college who will wrap the fish?"Give the kid in the back that doodles an art class, the kid over ther that's taking his pen apart a shop class... give e'em some direction rather than warehousing them anfor 12 years.This for ski: The testing is a deadend road. Over time all schools will fail. In the quest to reach 800 (the magic #) each school is give a goal, if the reach it it is raised (plus it is now predicated on target groups, not just the whole school averaage ... and many kids fall into multiple groups; average anglo kids count once, if the kid is economically disadvantaged, latino, and a second language learner they can count 4 times... each of the groups and whole school)... this might be real if you were testing the same kids each year but you aren't. At my school we turn over 1/4 of the students (typical, right? 8th grade goes to HS and we get new 5th graders)... one of the students a couple of years back spotted the problem... you do really well one year (really bright 8th graders that had be getting better each year) the next year you do really poorly, falling back. Why? Bright 8th graders left, the kids coming up were average and really dumb 5th graders coming in. How is this the fault of the teachers? If the gain wasn't because of the teachers... usually hyped as successful interventions, following the standards, and a culture of success at the given school... then neither is the drop their fault.All should read, Feds in the Classroom.edited to catch up with the newer posts ;D
One of my concerns is the idea that test scores are being promoted as an evaluation tool; yes most jobs are judged by results, I grant that; however, for numerous reasons the students don't see the tests as being important as the educ. system does. Like saying a Dr. that lost several patients (that all came to him with terminal illnesses) wasn't doing his job because these folks died. Did we consider how far gone they were when they came to him? Did we look at the other factors that helped shorten their lives… smoking, drinking, etc., etc., or that they didn't follow any of his advice, picking only the parts that they liked or thought were cool? I'm not saying all teachers are Mr. Chips types nor that all kids come to school (or should) on meds for ADHD, have rotten homes, are drug babies, have AFS, or all of the above but a significant numbers are messes... these, though, do make it much harder to help those that are there, squared away and ready to go. (Think of the family of the sick guy above, giving him foods that will make him sicker.Obama and the Dept. of Ed are gonna have to get out of the way (Bush and Kennedy with NCLB really got some great roadblocks going) or we are on our way to 3rd class status. Ski, you wrote a paper on NCLB awhile back... what's your read on this? Blackmailing the states (again) isn't the answer.IMHO, we need tech schools, art schools, humanities schools, math / sci schools... one size doesn't fit all and we can't seem to hit the happy medium of the old comprehensive high school of the 40's, 50's, and 60's.Currently we push academics to the loss of the more technically inclined kids.So too, until we fix a society that wants nothing but reality TV, and such... well....
(and in all actuality, was it really about discovering, or was it more about conquering a new land? ;D)
In a nutshell, both. The biggest thing is the connection that tied the new and old world together... both sides gained from the so-called Columbian Exchange neither would have done as well insolation. It wasn't all positive... the connection started Spain on a path that would ultimately drop them to a lowere standing among nations but that's another story.
rather than go back through the whole Who Really Discovered America thread we can save lots of rehashing and quotes within quotes to say that C2 was the one that mattered because something came of it… it drove history. Those folks previous (and the record indicates there were some and might have been more), like Brown, drooped the ball. ;D
The 3G's; gold, God, and glory fueled the Age of Exploration. Gold to finance the various empires, souls to save (Catholic Reformantion… Spain and France always sent priests to save the natives as the various Protestants were tapping off dissatisfied Catholics right and left in Europe), looking good in the face of the other contestants.As for the English Donnie fleshed out my westward movement post very well.
Thanks, the wife and I went on a cruise a few years back… really nice except for the sea days. My buddy that was in the Navy likes that part best. We'll see in a year or so when things calm down; right now too busy just doing little stuff around the place.
For the time being just enjoying not having to fight a flawed educational system that, like a wounded hyena, is snapping at its own hanging guts. Sounds harsh but until we get back to teaching kids how to think rather than what's likely to be on a test, it's gonna be ugly.If Obama delivers the speech they ran on the web, and anybody really takes it to heart, we may have a chance but it might just be Dr. Feelgood's Fluff too. As I said in another thread the message is the same one we all try to send; does he get personality points for being the Prez? Who knows?
