If you were to rewrite school curriculum, what would you include?

[keelanz]

I totally agree with you, and suspect you might be older than Keelanz. Like what did you do when there was talk of invading Iraq? Those educated some years ago, might rush to a geography book, or history books and independently research Iraq, unless they are Christian and rely on their church for information. I know I jumped on the Internet and learned about the Baghdad Railroad and how all the European countries wanted control of this region before WWI! I think this need to do our own research is the result of earlier education, preparing us to rely on ourselves for information, instead of on "authority". The media, the church, nor any other "authority" defines reality for me. I do my own independent studies. But education for technology prepares everyone to rely authority. This is essential to the rapid development of technology. No way could we advance technology so rapidly if we did not rely on the work of the work others.

 

 

I believe were the same age; what base do you use for your independent research? were all very much aware that the bias of any article is always unfathomably due to the writers understanding of the subject, though any factual information is necessarily void of fallacy anything that isnt written by authority although isnt hard to understand by its truth value but is questionable in its essence. All these conspiracy theory's on the internet about our war on terror obviously have a truth value but its almost unduly eccentricated to fit its own purpose such that im yet to find a documentary that compares both sides of the story, its either really far one way or another.

 

History breeds Bias into ones view of the world the same as being indoctrinated into one religion biases ones view on god.

Edited May 3, 2011 by keelanz

[Athena]

I believe were the same age; what base do you use for your independent research? were all very much aware that the bias of any article is always unfathomably due to the writers understanding of the subject, though any factual information is necessarily void of fallacy anything that isnt written by authority although isnt hard to understand by its truth value but is questionable in its essence. All these conspiracy theory's on the internet about our war on terror obviously have a truth value but its almost unduly eccentricated to fit its own purpose such that im yet to find a documentary that compares both sides of the story, its either really far one way or another.

 

History breeds Bias into ones view of the world the same as being indoctrinated into one religion biases ones view on god.

 

You have written of the importance of avoiding bias a couple of times. That would be true of anyone doing science research as well. I think we can conclude it is human nature to have a bias. The counter balance is to have values and principles. I think values and principles need to be part of education from the earliest grades, especially if people want democracy, and if they want freedom of religion or to not have religion. Something needs to unite the people and create some agreements about how we behave. That is what religion has done since the beginning of civilization. If this is not done by education than what?

 

I watched a program about alternative schools last night, and would say the chosen schools are getting a lot right. When there is a positive focus on human nature a lot goes right. Repeatedly they mentioned how teaching to score high on a test, restricts a teacher's creativity and the students do not do as well. This is a big issue for us since Bush and the "No Child Left Behind Act' . Scoring high on test is not proof of students actually learning. And I repeat, if the education is restricted to what is needed by the military, it is not a good education for everyone. Some people have different gifts, and they are cheated when education ignores them.

Edited May 3, 2011 by Athena

[Hal.]

If it was the education system of the U.S.A. that I was in control of , I would put local Indian dialects on a compulsory curriculum for everybody .

[rktpro]

If it was the education system of the U.S.A. that I was in control of , I would put local Indian dialects on a compulsory curriculum for everybody .

 

You mean Tamil, Telugu, Sanskrit etc. But why you want these?

[DJBruce]

Personally I feel that for the most part our schools, America, have a fairly good balance between the various subjects. At least in my area the basic high school ciriclulum requires:

 

-2 Years of Foreign Language

-4 Years of English Literature, Language, and Composition

-3 Years of Science and Math

-2 Years of History/Civics

 

I believe that there is a lot to be gained in a well rounded liberal arts education because through exploring various different subjects we allow students to practice various patterns of thinking and argumentation. To be fair I admit that not all of this has a practical application. For example, literary analysis does not have a practical purpose in most peoples lives, but then again neither does calculus, however, both of these subjects help teach students how important ways to think and analysis things that are invaluable in the real world.

 

That being said the thing I would do to the curriculum is to first shift everything forward about 2 years meaning that by time students graduate high school the average student should have complete calculus, and a fairly rigorous science and language requirement. While the advanced students -currently those who take AP's- graduate having finished multivariable, linear algebra, and what is currently college level sciences. While doing this I would also want to raise standards in two ways. First I would actually like to have a good process of holding those kids back who do poorly, without having them drop out. Secondly, I would want to separate students based on ability since this would then force the best students to actually have to work since they can no longer count on the fact that the worse students will just make them look good. A final thing I would like to do is make it so to fulfill graduation requirements students must actually take a rigorous course in that area. For example, currently at my University every student is required to take 10 credits of humanities, social sciences, and natural sciences, however, for some reason it is possible to fulfill your natural science requirement with mini-courses like "Dinosaurs and Other Failures" and "Aliens". If I had my way students would actually have to take things like physics, chemistry, or biology instead of simply taking blow off classes since science might be hard for some.

[Hal.]

I think the term ' Indian ' is applied to native North Americans because explorers in the 15th century thought they had reached the Indian continent that is to the east of Arabia . Tamil , Telugu and Sanskrit are not what I mean . Sioux , Apachee , Cherokee and Navajo dialects are examples of what I mean .

[DJBruce]

Tamil , Telugu and Sanskrit are not what I mean . Sioux , Apachee , Cherokee and Navajo dialects are examples of what I mean .

 

Why mandate those languages? What makes those more important/useful than Spanish, Chinese, German?

[Hal.]

They are the native tongue of the land that I am commenting on ( the U.S.A. ) . Spanish is the mother tongue of Spain , Chinese of China and German of the Aryan tribes of Europe .

[Ringer]

Actually I don't think India was a country when the Americas were founded. Also there is no Chinese language, the reason the different languages in China are considered the same is because they can communicate through writing.

 

But on that forcing people to learn the native languages would be as pointless as making all English speaking people Old English. Maybe less so just for that fact people could realize English is Germanic and not a Romance language (that's more of a pet peeve though).

 

Something to add to the list though, I think student should get a basic understanding of statistics. If you have ever had an argument with someone quoting statistics that doesn't understand what they're saying you know what I mean.

 

[edit] Looking for etymology on Indian because it was bothering me, I can't find anything except that explorers did think they were in India. I don't remember where I read that this was a misconception. [/edit]

Edited May 14, 2011 by Ringer

[Hal.]

Explorers thought they were in India because that was what they were sent to find a way to . They had already been to India going the other way around Africa and I think the times were for proving that the world was spherical by going around it . They were also trying to save a bit of journey time in finding shorter routes for trade .

 

The word ' India ' existed 500 years ago , I think , so they called the locals ' Indians ' when they arrived in the Carribean .

 

Some level of Mandatory native American languages should be taught to everybody . It would be a sign of respect for the history of the land and the people who were there before the Europeans .

[Ringer]

Explorers thought they were in India because that was what they were sent to find a way to . They had already been to India going the other way around Africa and I think the times were for proving that the world was spherical by going around it . They were also trying to save a bit of journey time in finding shorter routes for trade .

 

Everyone knew the Earth was round. They knew it was round in the BCEs, they didn't really forget. The argument was about the size of the Earth not the shape. Other than that, I already said I think I was mistaken, I know the story.

 

The word ' India ' existed 500 years ago , I think , so they called the locals ' Indians ' when they arrived in the Carribean .

 

What I was saying is that I believed I had read something saying this was not the case. I couldn't find anything upon searching, so I said I was mistaken.

 

Some level of Mandatory native American languages should be taught to everybody . It would be a sign of respect for the history of the land and the people who were there before the Europeans .

 

Wouldn't it be more respectful just to learn the history? How would you propose what languages to learn. There were hundreds of different tribes with different languages, which very few people know well enough to teach. Also, as Bruce said, making this mandatory would waste time when they could be learning a different language.

 

 

 

[DJBruce]

Actually I don't think India was a country when the Americas were founded.

 

[edit] Looking for etymology on Indian because it was bothering me, I can't find anything except that explorers did think they were in India. I don't remember where I read that this was a misconception. [/edit]

 

 

India in the modern sense of the country did not exist, but the region referred to as the Indies certainly did. As for the origin of the word Indian I am not sure how it was derived, but Christopher Columbus did write in his log, "En 33 días pasé de las islas de Canaria a las Indias" and "A la primera que yo hallé puse nombre San Salvador [isla Watling] a comemoración de Su Alta Majestad, el cual maravillosamente todo esto ha dado; los Indios la llaman Guanahaní." So we see that it does appear he used the what we would translate as Indian to describe the inhabitants of the New World.

 

http://abc.gov.ar/docentes/efemerides/12deoctubre2009/descargas/europa/carta_colon.pdf

http://es.wikisource.org/wiki/Carta_de_Cristobal_Col%C3%B3n_a_los_Reyes_Cat%C3%B3licos_anunciando_el_descubrimiento_de_Am%C3%A9rica

 

 

Some level of Mandatory native American languages should be taught to everybody . It would be a sign of respect for the history of the land and the people who were there before the Europeans .

 

 

North America has significant portions of its history where Spanish, English, French, and numerous Native American dialects have been spoken should we not respect the people who were here before us by learning all of those languages? Also if you are going to learn a Native American dialect, which one would you learn? Surely, you could not expect everyone to learn them all, and this means that numerous different distinct cultures would not receive the respect you think studying these languages would give them. Finally, I believe you can show respect for other cultures without mandating that people learn their language. For example, studying their history and culture -which most schools already do- would in my opinion show respect to those that came before us.

[rktpro]

Indian definitely is an old country. It existed with different names earlier. This can be found in the books of Vedic Period.

[Hal.]

Choosing a language to learn would be quite a task . The level of importance given to the languages that are there the longest should be higher . But , what I would propose is that people learn whichever Native language it be for 1 hour per week , for example .

 

Is that too much ? Will that stress the brains too much ? Would the Indians be happier ?

 

It would be great to meet Americans in Europe who say , " Hi , We're from the U.S.A. and we speak Native Indian ".

 

I don't understand Spanish so I am sure I am at a loss .

[Ringer]

Choosing a language to learn would be quite a task . The level of importance given to the languages that are there the longest should be higher . But , what I would propose is that people learn whichever Native language it be for 1 hour per week , for example .

 

Is that too much ? Will that stress the brains too much ? Would the Indians be happier ?

 

It would be great to meet Americans in Europe who say , " Hi , We're from the U.S.A. and we speak Native Indian ".

 

I don't understand Spanish so I am sure I am at a loss .

 

My uncle speaks Cherokee very well, but that doesn't help him in any way to be a more productive citizen or give him an edge in employers eyes. It's interesting, but other than that its not useful. Other languages can be much more useful, even Latin though it's a dead language. If that kind of language is your heritage and you wish to learn it good for you, but to force it upon people isn't what I would think school is for.

 

Would it make Native Americans happy? Would it make African Americans happy to make children learn, say, a Bantu language? No, first it doesn't make up for what was done to them in any way shape or form. Second, if you were to choose a language you are singling out a single tribe as more important to native history. That would probably cause most to be more angry than happy. The difference between learning Spanish and a native language is that Spanish is still spoken throughout the world regularly. It's a useful language to learn even if you don't study languages.

[Hal.]

If the employers were Cherokee people maybe then this uncle would have an edge . If Donald Trump spoke Cherokee would the apprentice learn Cherokee ? Why is it always about personal gain ? If this uncle was in the pub ( bar in the U.S. ) couldn't he just have a beer with the Cherokee lads and talk about the weather ?

[DJBruce]

If the employers were Cherokee people maybe then this uncle would have an edge . If Donald Trump spoke Cherokee would the apprentice learn Cherokee ? Why is it always about personal gain ? If this uncle was in the pub ( bar in the U.S. ) couldn't he just have a beer with the Cherokee lads and talk about the weather ?

 

Well yes if a lot of people spoke Cherokee then it would be useful, but currently there are not many Cherokee people around -yet alone people who fluently speak Cherokee. The Cherokee Nation has roughly 300,000 members, which means that they make of roughly .09% of the US population, and they are generally located in Oklahoma so the usefulness of the language, and the chance of meeting someone in the bar who speeks Cherokee is incredibly slim for most people.

 

Everything does not have to be about personal gain, but teaching someone Cherokee really has no overall gain in my opinion.

[Hal.]

So , a solution to the original hypothetical of Cap'n , applicable in this instance might allow for Cherokee to be on the curriculum of Oklahoma schools . Progress happens in small steps .

[Ringer]

But the point of teaching something in school is to help children to develop useful skills that they will be able to use later in their life. While I agree that it is interesting to learn languages that aren't really that necessary, it isn't the purpose of school to teach this. If your culture teaches a language not in common usage that is great, but that is not what I would expect my child to learn in school. If you wish to learn a language like that on your own there are things out there to help you, but I don't think we should train educators to teach something that is of virtually no use other than it's interesting.