[geeks] New Tech Schools: Digital Harbor in Baltimore

[Mike Meredith]

On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 13:39:29 -0400, Charles Shannon Hendrix wrote:
> There is some truth to the idea that you get what you paid for.
> However, teachers are usually paid significantly above average wages
> in most places where I've looked it up, so I'm not sure that's really
> the problem.

Bear in mind that I have a UK slant where teachers don't always earn
significantly above the average salary. By chance there happened to be
an item on the news this morning about property affordability ...
teachers can't afford to get on the housing ladder in 70% of UK towns
and cities.

> If they aren't getting paid enough, then neither is anyone else.

Most people would prefer to be paid more :)

> Also, in many areas complaints about the funding of education has
> resulted in big increases in pay, and school budgets.  At the same
> time, the quality of the students has dropped significantly.

It isn't something that can be done overnight. But it does sound as
though the US education system has problems other than money. 

> > It is a little too easy to glorify the education systems of the
> > past.
> 
> Most of the comparisons are noting what is missing now, not
> glorification.

To some extent it's the same thing ... people have a tendency to pick
on the things that are missing (like no latin in schools) and assume
that the current education is worse for the lack. For example, both my
parents went through grammar school (elite 'public' schools for the
academical gifted) and learnt latin, and claim that the lack of latin
and the lack of teaching English with formal grammar leads to a lower
standard of English.

To some extent they're right, and I suspect most here would agree and
would prefer to be taught that way ... I would! Mind you this lower
standard could be confined to a rather narrow area being formal English
grammar. Not being familiar with the formal rules of English grammar
does not necessarily mean one cannot write grammatically. It is not
necessary to know the term 'split-infinitive' to avoid sticking adverbs
in the wrong places (and yes I know that split-infinitives are no
longer totally condemned).

I was taught English in the modern way, where more time was spent on
learning the love of reading and writing than on analysing what was
good and bad English. Not that we were allowed to get away with bad
English ... "No! It works better like ...." rather than "Don't use
split-infinitives". I think I qualify as moderately literate.

I would say that the less formal approach to English teaching probably
has advantages to those who did less well with the formal approach.
Ideally of course both methods of teaching English would be available
so that we could all learn in the way that suits us best.

> However, what good does all that knowledge do a graduate, when he is
> still functionally innumerate and illiterate, and unable to create
> tools?

Not much :)

At work, the academics frequently moan and groan at having to read the
work of young students. However if you grab one on a good day (in a gap
between marking) they can sometimes admit that their own writing at 18
was pretty abysmal, and that today's youth with enough practise produce
some reasonable writing. We don't often look at our own writing at age
18, and it can come as a nasty shock to see just how bad we used to be!

> Quantitative analysis is popular, but useless in most cases.

Usually because people jump to conclusions where you can only make
hypotheses.

-- 
Mike Meredith (http://zonky.org/)
 By the way, you DON'T want to see what a meat layer buffer overrun
 looks like.... (mjr on fw-wiz)