Don't stay in school

Jagraf

skattykatty wrote: »

School? Just read, digest, explore, challenge and discuss Shakespeare:

Money? 'Have more than thou showest, speak less than thou knowest, lend less than thou owest'

Mental health? 'There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so'....'To mourn a mischief that is past and gone is the next way to draw new mischief on'...'This above all: to thine own self be true'

Human rights? 'If you !!!!! us, do we not bleed? if you tickle us, do we not laugh? if you poison us, do we not die? and if you wrong us, shall we not revenge?'

Work? 'All the world 's a stage, and all the men and women merely players. They have their exits and their entrances; And one man in his time plays many parts'

Politics? 'The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool'

What's it all about? 'Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player that struts and frets his hour upon the stage and then is heard no more: it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing'

What an excellent post.

Flyonthewall

onomatopoeia99 wrote: »

Want to know about voting? Chances are a child will live with at least one adult that is able to vote who can explain to them that they need to write an X on a piece of paper. It does not need a lesson at school. I read the paper as a teenager and when I was working full time during the school holidays in the sixth form bought my own copy of the Times so I was politically aware at sixteen, but I educated myself.

Not all kids have an adult they can go to to ask questions. Even if there's an adult there who knows the answer it doesn't mean the kid feels they can ask the question.

Most kids probably don't read newspapers though. The news headlines are all over social media so kids probably have an idea of most things going on in the world, but don't know the full details for half of it.

Want to know about balancing a household budget? Well, you should have been taught basic arithmetic at age five, you don't need anything else to do it (still amazes me that people claim on here that they spend a lot of time each week running the household finances. What on earth are they doing exactly that takes all this time? I spend a few minutes a month checking what the bank balance is and that my salary arrived when it was supposed to and I know what I spend over each month so I know if I'm going to go under or over by the end of it without needing to check every five minutes.)

There's more to it than that though. Learning about tax and salaries, learning about what bills you might have and how to work out what you'll have left, credit cards, debit cards and so on. While a lot is basic maths (i.e. salary-bills) and common sense (don't spend more than you have) doesn't mean there isn't more they could be taught or that everyone has that common sense.

That's why we have so many who have credit cards and debt. People spend money they don't have. They don't realise what they're getting and what they're spending.

If parents are bad with money and the schools don't teach it there's a good chance the kid will end up bad with money.

It's easy to say it's really simple because you know the answer and you have the common sense to budget in the first place, but not everyone does and not everyone will think to budget.

I would certainly argue that we should start teaching a second language from when children start school, not in secondary school. Just because the world speaks English does not excuse our laziness about it.

I agree. I think that way we'd actually be fluent in another language or two. As it is, I know odd words and phrases, but I've never had a proper conversation in another language. They spend a few years going through categories and teaching words and phrases and then you leave school. It may be that some are taught more and do have (short) conversations, but by GCSE we could all be fluent in another language if we started sooner.

Flyonthewall

PenguinOfDeath wrote: »

It shouldn't be all down to teachers though. No wonder many are stressed and leaving the profession in droves.

Being part of being a parent or guardian of a child surely means providing them with life skills. Even if the adult doesn't have all the answers (who does?) they certainly should be able to find out for themselves, or get help. It would probably help the adult themselves too.

Teachers are there to teach. Kids need to learn what to expect as an adult. It shouldn't all be down to the teachers, but there's no reason why they shouldn't be teaching some important life skills.

theoretica wrote: »

Also, what is interesting in school is heavily dependent on how good the teacher is - imagine how dull one of the teachers whose lessons you didn't like could have made the taxes you didn't yet need to pay.

Yeah, but it'll be dull no matter what they're teaching so they may as well be teaching something useful and important. Might be dull, but that doesn't mean it won't sink in.

liney

Flyonthewall wrote: »

Teachers are there to teach. Kids need to learn what to expect as an adult. It shouldn't all be down to the teachers, but there's no reason why they shouldn't be teaching some important life skills.

Yeah, but it'll be dull no matter what they're teaching so they may as well be teaching something useful and important. Might be dull, but that doesn't mean it won't sink in.

What age group are you taking about exactly? In my primary school we look at the news, do sex education, cooking, and personal hygiene talks.


Parents are already leaving potty training to schools, and sex education. Surely they can help little Johnny understand what he can afford with his £5 pocket money.


What do you need to know about household bills that your parents, or social worker if in care, can't tell you?

Flyonthewall

liney wrote: »

What age group are you taking about exactly? In my primary school we look at the news, do sex education, cooking, and personal hygiene talks.

Parents are already leaving potty training to schools, and sex education. Surely they can help little Johnny understand what he can afford with his £5 pocket money.

What do you need to know about household bills that your parents, or social worker if in care, can't tell you?

I guess it would make sense to teach the basics to younger kids because there will be things they need to know before they learn other things. For example, they'll need to know basic maths before they learn about finance and taxes when they're a bit older.

I don't think it's right to leave things like potty training to schools. Parents should be teaching that before the kids start school. Sex ed is normally a mix of both home and school.

Some parents are really bad with money. They may only have £5 themselves, but doesn't stop them buying the latest mobile.

While they could explain bills and give general costs, if their kid comes up and asks them a question about their personal finances they may just say none of your business. The kid is unlikely to ask again and the parents may never know why the kid actually asked. An innocent question about something that could be answered simply could go completely wrong.

coolcait

Flyonthewall wrote: »

... Like did I really have to learn what types of clouds there are? We spent at least an entire lesson on that, may have been more than one. It wasn't in any test, never mentioned again and I've never needed to know since leaving school. There are far more important (and interesting) things I could have been taught in that geography lesson.
...

And that example probably demonstrates how differently people can see the same thing.


I would have found that lesson fascinating. I taught myself about clouds (from a Ladybird book!), and still find myself looking at clouds, trying to identify them, and - most importantly - remember what kind of weather they are likely to bring. I do find that it was a useful thing to learn.


As for being taught how to vote, what does the singer mean by that?


If it's the mechanics, then all polling stations have signs up telling you what to do. School teaches the skill of reading, so there should be no need for confusion - even when dealing with the electoral system for the Scottish Parliament!


If it's 'who should I vote for?', schools are already teaching the skills which can be used to identify the issues which the person feels are important; analyse and assess each party's promises and performance, and so on.


It goes without saying that, as with all the other skills which people can learn at school, there's no guarantee that they will ever be used in this context!

theoretica

We spent an A level maths class going through several different voting systems and constructing scenarios to see how they can give different results, what the effect was of more options splitting the vote, tactical voting and the potential effects of tactical voting with incorrect assumptions about other voters. I am not convinced it made us any better members of our current democracy.

Flyonthewall

coolcait wrote: »

And that example probably demonstrates how differently people can see the same thing.

I would have found that lesson fascinating. I taught myself about clouds (from a Ladybird book!), and still find myself looking at clouds, trying to identify them, and - most importantly - remember what kind of weather they are likely to bring. I do find that it was a useful thing to learn.

Learning about clouds could be interesting. Staring a a block of text and a picture in a book while the teacher rambles on for an hour or more is boring. If the window hadn't been behind me I'd have been staring at the real clouds!

As for being taught how to vote, what does the singer mean by that?

If it's the mechanics, then all polling stations have signs up telling you what to do. School teaches the skill of reading, so there should be no need for confusion - even when dealing with the electoral system for the Scottish Parliament!

If it's 'who should I vote for?', schools are already teaching the skills which can be used to identify the issues which the person feels are important; analyse and assess each party's promises and performance, and so on.

They mean we're not taught about voting at all. How, why, when, who. I got taught the history of women getting the vote and I've heard many times how important that was, yet at no point was I taught how voting works today.

There may be signs up at the polling station, but how do kids know they need to go to a polling station to find them signs? How do they know where to find the stations or if they need to take anything?

Most kids probably can't list the parties, don't know what they have to offer, don't understand why they should care or what they've done previously. Some history might be taught, but going back many decades not covering more recent years. If you asked them to list the last 3 Prime Ministers and what they did for the country I bet most wouldn't have a clue. Actually, I bet there's a fair few adults who wouldn't know the answer to that either!

Potternerd

burlington6 wrote: »

Slightly off topic but I have a problem with teachers who teach subjects they have no experience in.

My granddaughter is taking business studies. The business studies teacher is a local woman who is well known.

She's 24, has a degree in English Language and then obviously took her teacher training. Her parents paid for her to get through uni but she has never had a job. Not even part time.

What a woman of 24, with no experience of the working world is doing teaching business hstudies in a high school is beyond me.

She does have a job: she's a teacher. Are you saying all English teachers should have written a novel, all Geography teachers should have travelled the world and all chemistry teachers should have worked in chemical plants?

onomatopoeia99

Flyonthewall wrote: »

There may be signs up at the polling station, but how do kids know they need to go to a polling station to find them signs? How do they know where to find the stations or if they need to take anything?

You get a polling card which tells you when and where. You do not need to take anything to the polling station apart from yourself. Also, they are adults, not kids. I know policitians seem intent on extending childhood, but by age 16, never mind 18, people should be taking responsibility for informing themselves about things they don't know and want to.

Of course, if you live in a vacuum and completely miss all the news coverage of upcoming elections, which in the case of a general election is wall to wall for at least a month and it is all over social media as well, then you might miss that it's happening. To do so you would have to not turn the TV on, not look at a newspaper and not be on facebook or other social media. I guess there must be some people like that, but there cannot be many.

I remember general elections getting talked about by teachers when I was at school. We had a mock election one lunchtime in 1983 shortly before the real one (I would have been 13, so in secondary school), which was won with a huge majority by the Official Monster Raving Loony Party candidate, as he gave the funniest speech.


As for common sense, the thing that was most frequently said about me growing up was "all the brains and no common sense.":D