Religious history might be okay...just no preaching.
What subjects should kids learn at school?
- Thread starter All Seeing Eye
- Start date
I agree with you.
I would even say faith, family and social issues should be taught by the parents and does not belong in school.
I think that the different religions should be taught in the context of history or geography. We had a World Cultures and Geography class in 9th grade that touched on some religions, but of course being in a public school the whole subject was largely avoided. However, in my college history courses we always discussed the religions of a region and how they developed over time and it seemed a very natural discussion to have in terms of understanding the state of the world today. I don't think we should teach the actual religion but teach ABOUT the religion. I don't see why this can't be extended to high school. Some religions, especially the eastern ones like Taoism, I would never have learned about if I wasn't a history major.
I can agree with this.
If by mid high school a student is obviously -- after over ten years -- not retaining knowledge from complicated math, like algebra, or remembering things about Mesopotamia, those students should no longer be required to take those classes.
But classes in basic knowledge, like how to balance your check book, avoid scams (since people still fall for the UK Lottery and Zamunda dead leader scams), and basic car repair and upkeep (fixing a borken headlight, changing your oil, knowing where things are, so forth), and strict classes later on to see if they have actually gotten their English and writing skills down (since studies have shown many don't), should all be done.
And to raise our cultural level, music. Encourage it over sports. I don't know how accurate this statistic is, but read in a book that anually more people attend the arts (symphonies, art galleries, so forht) than football and baseball ticket sales, yet we've seen countless sport stars on late night show, while only twice do I recall, say, film composers on (John Debney [Leno], and John Williams).
But classes in basic knowledge, like how to balance your check book, avoid scams (since people still fall for the UK Lottery and Zamunda dead leader scams), and basic car repair and upkeep (fixing a borken headlight, changing your oil, knowing where things are, so forth), and strict classes later on to see if they have actually gotten their English and writing skills down (since studies have shown many don't), should all be done.
And to raise our cultural level, music. Encourage it over sports. I don't know how accurate this statistic is, but read in a book that anually more people attend the arts (symphonies, art galleries, so forht) than football and baseball ticket sales, yet we've seen countless sport stars on late night show, while only twice do I recall, say, film composers on (John Debney [Leno], and John Williams).
It actually depends on what they want to be when they leave school.
I've had to take numerous math classes that included equations I will NEVER use.
Another worthless class was French. I don't ever plan on using any of the French I had to learn and I've forgotten most of it anyways because it was useless info.
Gym is awesome.
I've had to take numerous math classes that included equations I will NEVER use.
Another worthless class was French. I don't ever plan on using any of the French I had to learn and I've forgotten most of it anyways because it was useless info.
Gym is awesome.
The basics should be the core classes: Math, Science (biology, geography, geology, etc), Reading/Writing, History, Physical Education (I mean actual education, not throw them a ball and say "have fun"), art and music (together, but on a basic level).
The older they get, the more they should be strengthened in what they excel at. It makes no sense to force a mathematician to know how to use increasingly archaic and disused grammar structures or someone with an excellent grasp on writing to know the quadratic equation. It's absolutely a waste of time, training and educational potential.
Physical education is a necessity. As someone pointed out, it includes sex education and how to be physically fit. Too many people see it as a joke which unfortunately it is any more unless you're an athlete then you get to ditch most of your cognitive education to build your physical body up for a chance to be a pro at something.
It's too complicated to just say ditch an educational class because you think it's useless or not beneficial. That's why we're getting such poorly educated people now. If all we're teaching is the basic rotes then it's no wonder people are getting seemingly dumber. They never get to see what they can do if they aren't encouraged to do better at a specific study.
"Well rounded" education does not have to mean they're a jack of all trades in every subject, they just need to know the basics of each one and go forward with the strong suits. If someone shows they are good at a subject, they should be encouraged to delve deeper into it, not forced to distraction in learning other subjects beyond the basics.
The older they get, the more they should be strengthened in what they excel at. It makes no sense to force a mathematician to know how to use increasingly archaic and disused grammar structures or someone with an excellent grasp on writing to know the quadratic equation. It's absolutely a waste of time, training and educational potential.
Physical education is a necessity. As someone pointed out, it includes sex education and how to be physically fit. Too many people see it as a joke which unfortunately it is any more unless you're an athlete then you get to ditch most of your cognitive education to build your physical body up for a chance to be a pro at something.
It's too complicated to just say ditch an educational class because you think it's useless or not beneficial. That's why we're getting such poorly educated people now. If all we're teaching is the basic rotes then it's no wonder people are getting seemingly dumber. They never get to see what they can do if they aren't encouraged to do better at a specific study.
"Well rounded" education does not have to mean they're a jack of all trades in every subject, they just need to know the basics of each one and go forward with the strong suits. If someone shows they are good at a subject, they should be encouraged to delve deeper into it, not forced to distraction in learning other subjects beyond the basics.
Economics and Logic. It would be much more useful to have kids take basic critical thinking at least once rather than the advanced math they won't remember and won't use ever. Often kids never leave high school knowing how to balance a checkbook.
Depending on where you live froeign languages can be very helpful. I can't imagine a non-US country where English can't come in handy, and in half of America you can use Spanish daily.
I am America you get 13 years of schooling including kindergarten. I don't see why you can't be exposed to music, art, and religion since they are so much a part of everyone's daily life.
Depending on where you live froeign languages can be very helpful. I can't imagine a non-US country where English can't come in handy, and in half of America you can use Spanish daily.
I am America you get 13 years of schooling including kindergarten. I don't see why you can't be exposed to music, art, and religion since they are so much a part of everyone's daily life.
I agree as well, but I have to admit that in my early years in public school prayer was not only still legal, but required.
I disagree.
I was 250 pounds in high school. And horribly uncoordinated. All of the kids used to hide behind me in dodgeball. That kind of humiliation I could have lived without.
Don't EVEN get me started on the rope climb.
Thank you very much.
Strongly disagree - firstly many kids don't 'go out and play football and exercise anyway' - but more importantly, there's more to PE than just a chance to run around shrieking.
Learning a foreign language is one of the most employable skills you can have. It was always a weakness of mine, and one I have always been annoyed with - they are immeasurably useful in many, many forms of employment.
Religion is a huge part of our world, whether you are actually religious or not. Not teaching about religions in schools is a perfect way to lead to kids being indoctrinated with hateful dogma from other sources. RE is a way to teach a balanced view of all the major religions, and help promote tolerance and understanding.
And it is rarely preaching, at least in this country - my RE at secondary school was taught by a strong atheist.
I absolutely hated music at school, a weekly ritual humiliation on the level of SicOne's gym class - I had the musical talent of a Pop Idol audition by Crazy Cat Lady, and the class endlessly involved playing the piano to the whole class. In year 9, after which I mercifully could drop it, I still couldn't identify middle C on a piano.
Having said that, I would not support dropping it from the curriculum. I would support it being better taught. The issue, at least in the schools I went to, was that it was crappily taught at primary school (here's a drum, hit it a lot) and then I got to secondary school and it was suddenly 'here's a keyboard, play me this'. Somewhere along the line, someone needed to actually teach music. Were that done, I would have no problem learning it in school, even if I still sucked at it.
Besides, excluding music when you include art is a bit... inconsistent isn't it? I could be wrong, but I think we've actually got a list of subjects Tachyon Shield enjoyed at school. Geography, for example, I enjoyed as well - but it's actual use? I don't think I've used a thing I learnt in Geography past 'the world map' in year 5. We never learnt 'where places are', we learnt physical and human geographical theory - very interesting, I don't deny, but practically useful to life?
Science is an absolute necessity, and I believe should be taught in three separate sciences to all those students who can manage it - However, not to those who can't - far too many were turned off science at my school because it was '3 separate sciences or you're a dunce'. It is more important that you learn the principles of the scientific method, of testing by experimentation, and of logical reasoning based on results, than it is you learn the electron configuration of Neon.
The big absentee from your list, Tachyon, is IT/Computing. In today's world, kids need to be started on computing at a young age - and not the sort of half-assed 'here's a mouse. here's a keyboard. That's today's lesson kids!' way it's taught now (all the way up to GCSE). It's the 21st century, kids don't need that sort of basic approach to computers anymore than they would need to be taught how to text their friends. They need to be taught how to use computers to do practical things, and gain a knowledge of (basically speaking) how they operate, which is the best way to get people to be 'platform independent', and easily adaptable to many kinds of systems in the workplace instead of just being aware of how to do specific things on their specific computer.
I can see your point, but I don't agree with it. I'm mostly a science guy, but I really enjoyed my hours of arts, music and literature in high school. Without it, I would never been exposed to the knowledge that gave me appreciation for many works of arts and craft, something I wouldn't probably had if it wasn't for school. Sure, you can go to the library and learn it on your own, but it can't compare with a passionate teacher explaining it to you. So limiting your education, even in the name of focusing on what you excel, is not a good idea to me. You may get better professionals, but worst human being.
And I'm appalled by people that want to ditch foreign languages. You may never leave your neck of the wood, but if you want to live in the big real world, it's absolutely essential to know at least one foreign language. Tell me again when the Internet will start speaking Chinese or Spanish.
Reading Comprehension
Math
Geography
Science
History/Government
Foreign Language
Fine Art
PE
Economic/Business course
I'd argue what needs to be focused on is the amount of each particular subject that needs to be taught. I see people arguing that they haven't used "x" ever or have rarely used "x" in their lives.
Well why should one take three sciences which they might never use either. I took biology and physical science and that more than suited my needs. On the other hand I took more history and literature courses which tied into what I wanted to do.
Foreign languages are very important, and as some have noted, the earlier you start educating people in them the better they do. If you and someone else have fairly identical resumes and one of you speaks a foreign language that person will most likely have the edge in getting hired.
Math
Geography
Science
History/Government
Foreign Language
Fine Art
PE
Economic/Business course
I'd argue what needs to be focused on is the amount of each particular subject that needs to be taught. I see people arguing that they haven't used "x" ever or have rarely used "x" in their lives.
Well why should one take three sciences which they might never use either. I took biology and physical science and that more than suited my needs. On the other hand I took more history and literature courses which tied into what I wanted to do.
Foreign languages are very important, and as some have noted, the earlier you start educating people in them the better they do. If you and someone else have fairly identical resumes and one of you speaks a foreign language that person will most likely have the edge in getting hired.
I think kids should be given some core subjects, and some choices, even at junior school. Kids do have preferences at that age, and I'd be surprised if most change those preferences as they move into adult life. The core subjects are those which are important to daily life, which are Maths and English (Reading/Writing).
Geography and history and science are not crucial, but are a valuable part of our culture and knowing our place in the grand scheme of things. I'd still class them as core subjects for juniors, and semi-core for seniors, meaning they must do some and can choose if they want to do more.
PE, crafts, languages, art and music and philosophy/religion are what I would call choice subjects. There should be maybe 1 hour at the end of each school day where kids can choose from these classes, and there should be no real commitment or continuity to such classes.
I loved music. It was my favourite subject at school. I'd loved to have had more freedom to do music, and spend less time in PE or religious studies which I hated.
IT/computing I don't think I'd have special lessons for, I'd just work it into regular lessons if it could benefit a lesson.
I remember at my junior school there were three teachers for my year group, and although most of the time we were with our own teacher, for some lessons like music and crafts the classes were mixed up based on music skill or what kind of crafts we were doing. There's no reason why that couldn't be applied to choice subjects, something like this:
Monday choices: Art, RE/Philosophy, PE
Tuesday choices: Crafts, Languages, Art
Wednesday choices: PE, Art, Music
Thursday choices: RE/Philosophy, Crafts, Music
Friday choices: Languages, PE, Crafts.
Geography and history and science are not crucial, but are a valuable part of our culture and knowing our place in the grand scheme of things. I'd still class them as core subjects for juniors, and semi-core for seniors, meaning they must do some and can choose if they want to do more.
PE, crafts, languages, art and music and philosophy/religion are what I would call choice subjects. There should be maybe 1 hour at the end of each school day where kids can choose from these classes, and there should be no real commitment or continuity to such classes.
I loved music. It was my favourite subject at school. I'd loved to have had more freedom to do music, and spend less time in PE or religious studies which I hated.
IT/computing I don't think I'd have special lessons for, I'd just work it into regular lessons if it could benefit a lesson.
I remember at my junior school there were three teachers for my year group, and although most of the time we were with our own teacher, for some lessons like music and crafts the classes were mixed up based on music skill or what kind of crafts we were doing. There's no reason why that couldn't be applied to choice subjects, something like this:
Monday choices: Art, RE/Philosophy, PE
Tuesday choices: Crafts, Languages, Art
Wednesday choices: PE, Art, Music
Thursday choices: RE/Philosophy, Crafts, Music
Friday choices: Languages, PE, Crafts.
I can understand, I hated Gym with a passion and was so glad when in grade 10 I no longer had to take it. I was the skinny kid with no confidence in my physical abilities at all so I downright sucked at all the sports (not much has changed and I'm 33 today).
However I still think it's important, kids and particularly young boys need to blow off steam. While it was painful for some of us the majority of kids had a good time and I think it benefited them to have more physical activity in their day.
I disagree.. just because you may have had no need for some skills doesn't mean others wouldn't.
You're a native english speaker so you didn't need to learn the world language but what harm did it do to you to learn French? Your current career path doesn't have a need for it apparently but what if it did? Do you know how good that looks on your job resumee if you have several (or at least one) foreign language skill?
I personally have benefited hugely by knowing english and a bit of french.. my company has sent me to Luxemburg for a few months just because i knew english and a bit of French (apart from my general job skills).
Physical education? How many kids nowadays really go out and play sports? I don't see that many.. they'd rather play sports on their consoles than do it themselves. PE might be the only time they have to really move.. i certainly liked competing against my classmates and kick their ass
Religious Education.. hm, tough one. For us it was more like an ethics course instead of bible study like some may believe it to be. Personally i'd like it to change to a combined ethics/general study of major religions.. Islam, Christianism, Buddhism etc.. young people should know about each others religions and habits to foster understanding and tolerance. Fundamentalists hate nothing more than education and a free, tolerant mind.
Music and arts.. well, i hated the practical parts of it.. i'm not very artistic (i do paint miniatures but that's more like painting by numbers than freehand drawing and such) and getting bad grades because i lack a certain talent seemed unfair. However i'm all for the theoretical parts.. learning about great composers and why their compositions are so good is really something that you can take with you when you leave school. Art however was a big waste of time.. all we did was paint pictures.. not a single lesson about artists, their pictures and various art styles/periods.
I hear such arguments as yours quite often.. why do students have to learn things they may never need later in life. My answer: Do you want to become a narrow minded person who only knows something which directly impacts your job?
How about broadening your horizon a bit and discover knew things.. who knows, you might even like it and make it part of your life and round off your personality.
If all you want to do later in life is to work from 8am to 5pm and then go play video games and/or watch TV then you might as well finish school in 6-7 years and be done with it. I pity such persons.
What i would wish to be a regular subject:
Maintaining a house/appartment.. kids of a certain age should know how to use a hammer, a drill or a saw.. should know how to do simple electrical wiring (and be taught safety), basic plumbing etc. I know that this is usually taught by the parents but sometimes it doesn't and school might be a good way to do that.
Other than that i'd like to have mandatory studies on cultures and ethics.. kids should learn that there's more to this world than their video games and the movie theatre down the street. They should learn how different cultures operate and how those people live.
The problem with instigating choice too early is that education inevitably builds on what has gone before - by choosing to drop, say, History, at a fairly young age because you happen to find it boring at the time, you pretty much exclude yourself from taking it up again unless you are particualrly bright - I think it would be folly to expect kids to make informed decisions about educational choices which could affect their long term possibilities at such an early age. For example, most university courses have prerequisite A levels, which have prerequisite GCSEs - to expect kids to make choices in this manner early on is to expect them to think through that sort of thing long before they can really get a handle on what they want to do with their life, and they may find themselves closing doors for themselves before they've really considered where they lead.
You missed IT these day's its up there with English' maths and science
Also music should only be taught in school's that have the space and equipment to deal with it.
It was a waste of time in my old school i think we got the glockenspiel and xylophone out twice because we only had the one music classroom so we had to spread out into the corridor so you could only do it when you would not interrupted with other lessons.
The kind of stuff you learn in junior school isn't as structured as high school. You could probably start high school music/art/RE/PE/crafts/languages lessons without any knowledge of them from junior school. I wasn't taught any french in junior school, but I didn't feel at a disadvantage in high school french classes because of that.
For history/geography/science, which I said were semi-core... Maybe the dividing line between junior and senior should be at the end of the first year of high school, when the child is familiar with how the high school teaches these subjects, and can then choose either the light or heavy courses in them.
If a child hates history in first year of high school, are they really going to take any interest in the lessons even if they are compulsory lessons? Would forcing a subject on a person cause them to change their feeling about it in later years? While it's possible that some people will have a sudden change of feeling over a subject, I believe most would benefit from having some choice in what they learn.
I have three school aged children and I agree with cultcross's post almost completely.
As to language, religion, civics, music, art - all those so-called disposable subjects, the ones that feel the budget cuts first, I say, we're cutting off our noses to spite our faces when we eliminate them. We talk all the time about how this is a "global village," yet we don't want to give kids the skills to do business with their counterparts around the world. Do you really think that this generation is going to be limited to the countries they can actually visit in person? It's called a world wide web for a reason, people, and how arrogant is it to assume that English will be the lingua franca forevermore? In that same way, I agree that world cultures (religion, art, history, music) should be taught. One of the reasons, in my opinion, that the US is caught in the middle east quagmire is because we have/had no understanding of the root causes of the conflicts there - but we waded in anyway. How in the world can we mediate in Gaza when we don't understand what the conflict is about? It's land, yes, but it's also hundreds of years of culture and religion. How can we negotiate a lasting peace in Iraq if we have no idea why the different sects are polarized in the first place? Our arrogance and shortsightedness largely contributed to the mess we're in right now, and I cannot fathom how we can even begin to repair the damage if we don't educate our kids about the ever-smaller world they live in.
And I can add from first hand experience as a parent: physical education is more important now than ever. My kid, who is active when given the chance, would rather play his handheld game than palm a basketball. And he doesn't understand that Nintendo doesn't teach him good sportsmanship, doesn't help him keep fit, and doesn't help him avoid obesity and Type 2 diabetes, which is reaching epidemic levels in his age group, and doesn't teach him the way his body is supposed to work and feel. Oh, and one of the more common replacement from regular phys ed classes: Ritalin. You cannot expect kids to focus for 6 or 8 hours a day without regular, vigorous exercise. So they can't. And we label them (sometimes inapproprately) as having ADD or ADHD, and drug them.
There's no fixed formula of who should learn what - you just don't know when a child will twig onto one subject or another. My oldest was a voracious reader in his early grades; now I practically have to put a gun to his head to get him to crack a book. But he has discovered science, and mid-level math, and loves them. You really don't know what they're going to be good at or interested in until you teach it to them, and neither do they. Teach the basics in elementary and middle school (K-8), and offer upper level courses as kids begin to choose what kinds of post high school education or training or job they're interested in.
As to language, religion, civics, music, art - all those so-called disposable subjects, the ones that feel the budget cuts first, I say, we're cutting off our noses to spite our faces when we eliminate them. We talk all the time about how this is a "global village," yet we don't want to give kids the skills to do business with their counterparts around the world. Do you really think that this generation is going to be limited to the countries they can actually visit in person? It's called a world wide web for a reason, people, and how arrogant is it to assume that English will be the lingua franca forevermore? In that same way, I agree that world cultures (religion, art, history, music) should be taught. One of the reasons, in my opinion, that the US is caught in the middle east quagmire is because we have/had no understanding of the root causes of the conflicts there - but we waded in anyway. How in the world can we mediate in Gaza when we don't understand what the conflict is about? It's land, yes, but it's also hundreds of years of culture and religion. How can we negotiate a lasting peace in Iraq if we have no idea why the different sects are polarized in the first place? Our arrogance and shortsightedness largely contributed to the mess we're in right now, and I cannot fathom how we can even begin to repair the damage if we don't educate our kids about the ever-smaller world they live in.
And I can add from first hand experience as a parent: physical education is more important now than ever. My kid, who is active when given the chance, would rather play his handheld game than palm a basketball. And he doesn't understand that Nintendo doesn't teach him good sportsmanship, doesn't help him keep fit, and doesn't help him avoid obesity and Type 2 diabetes, which is reaching epidemic levels in his age group, and doesn't teach him the way his body is supposed to work and feel. Oh, and one of the more common replacement from regular phys ed classes: Ritalin. You cannot expect kids to focus for 6 or 8 hours a day without regular, vigorous exercise. So they can't. And we label them (sometimes inapproprately) as having ADD or ADHD, and drug them.
There's no fixed formula of who should learn what - you just don't know when a child will twig onto one subject or another. My oldest was a voracious reader in his early grades; now I practically have to put a gun to his head to get him to crack a book. But he has discovered science, and mid-level math, and loves them. You really don't know what they're going to be good at or interested in until you teach it to them, and neither do they. Teach the basics in elementary and middle school (K-8), and offer upper level courses as kids begin to choose what kinds of post high school education or training or job they're interested in.
