schools

Thank you for your response, I hope to have in intelligent debate with you. Okay so this a big topic with lots of factors. I would like to ask why you think, with a rate of 40% of pupils not achieving even 5 GCSE's at grade A-C, that this does not reflect a degree of ignorance in our education system or could be described as failing? To me, if a factory made 40% of its products faulty, it would be described as failing or outdated. I mean, had you not known this fact, do you now question your stance as a result of this evidence? Okay so if direct evidence isn't enough, we can look at other evidence and theory. I don't know where to begin there just is not enough room. Okay so firstly, the body clock of an adolescent, until about the age of 21, is set to wake up around 11.00 to 13.00 and go to bed about 23.00-00.00. When this is disrupted, it effects the body in a slightly negative way but in many ways, like smoking. More importantly though, it reduces their capacity to learn and memorise, particularly at these times when they are supposed to be asleep. From my own experience, even now in university, I am tired in early lectures/classes and more engaged in late ones. Secondly: school has a very narrow view of intelligence, this is academic intelligence. All you get from school are GCSE's, they are the holy grail of your education. What mark you get determines you worth. All (maybe not quite all) of these tests are done in the shape of examinations and writing. Even music and art are at least half writing and reporting. I could go on and on about how schools have this view and about why its is a very, very bad thing but I think these examples may suffice. One music teacher had half the Beetles in his class and recognized no musical talent, John Lennon was not recognized to be talented by his school either, even in music! Another example is famous dancer and founder of a dance academy (I forget her name but will find it if you need proof) She was deemed restless and too have a lack of interest and care for education. Due to a fluke incident and a 'unorthodox' psychologist, she was put in a dance school as the psychologist believed she loved to dance. Most other psychologists would have put her on medication for ADHD and told her to settle down and be obedient. The best example, for me, is Einstein. This is because his genius could not have been in a more 'academic' area, and yet school still recognized nothing and deemed him a failure! had it not been for a string of flukes and a good friend, school would have completely eradicated Einstein and he would of gone his life thinking he was nothing special and the world would be worse off. How many other potential geniuses has the school system not recognized? how many will we never know about? A brilliant quote that sums up this argument about judging on one type of intelligence goes as follows: If you judge a fish by his ability to climb a tree, he will think he is a failure his whole life. Okay so another problem is the specific methods in which they teach. They do not engage students, some teachers may do this of course, but its the exception. By engage I mean make them interested in the subjects, teach them what they really are and why they are important and fascinating. Forcing a child to wake up hours before he should, making him come into school in a uniform he hates, making him sit at a desk and listen, for hours on end, about a subject he has no interest in or cannot see the relevance of, is not clever. Anyone who knows the first thing about humans should see this, never mind if you study psychology. Labour can be forced, learning cannot. So you may ask how else can we engage kids? David Attenborough documentaries and other science documenters I have watched have been just wonderful, had they been in school, they would have been so effective at engaging people. Evidence and logic tell us that to have a visual, descriptive video. that can be watched in ones own time and at ones own pace, if far more effective for learning. Classrooms should be small (in pupil number) and should be there for discussion about subjects and help on physical work, such as writing. These would work so much more effectively! and have been shown too in parts of America and elsewhere. Another point is that there are many things that are left out of the education system that I believe should be taught. One being 'HEALTH' (what keeps you healthy, how to be healthy, what health is and how its effected.) Two being 'FOOD' (what different foods do to you, and how to make meals from scratch) Three being 'PSYCHOLOGY' (the basics about human relationships and mentall processes) Evidence is conclusive that a knowledge and awareness of mind is essential for happiness and positive life and social relationships. Four being 'HISTORY' (not like it is now, focusing on one situation and going through it with a fine toothcomb, but rather overviewing the story of how we came to be how we are and how societies develop in order to give people an understanding of their place in the world and why things are the way they are) That's enough to be getting on with for now, I await your rebuttal