"Teaching methods that produce poor results . . ." If only it were that simple. For decades we have spent vast amounts of money on trying scores of different educational methods, everything from rote learning and strict discipline to open classrooms and "learning from the children." We have enlisted the most erudite, eminent educators and psychologists, not to mention out and out lunatics, to design more effective ways to teach our kids. And the result? Consistently declining test scores and high schools with a majority of students who can barely read.
The inconvenient truth here is that good educational results come from good students, not from the amount of money invested in the system. People discussing the issue are often unhappy at the fact that kids in countries like Finland and Korea score much higher on PISA tests than our kids do, even though they spend much less on education. What such people never seem to mention, though, is that those countries are full of Finns and Koreans. That's what makes the difference.
Agree with all you say. The difference here is that parents are given the money and they usually care as much as the kids. This way it gives parents and kids who care a way out of a failing school. And each state gets to choose their own methods. Some states may highlight homeschooling or charter schools while some states highlight teacher union schools. - the standardized tests show which is empirically working given the same amount per student.
By the way, you're quite right that the Dept of Education is a useless waste of taxpayers' money.
"Teaching methods that produce poor results . . ." If only it were that simple. For decades we have spent vast amounts of money on trying scores of different educational methods, everything from rote learning and strict discipline to open classrooms and "learning from the children." We have enlisted the most erudite, eminent educators and psychologists, not to mention out and out lunatics, to design more effective ways to teach our kids. And the result? Consistently declining test scores and high schools with a majority of students who can barely read.
The inconvenient truth here is that good educational results come from good students, not from the amount of money invested in the system. People discussing the issue are often unhappy at the fact that kids in countries like Finland and Korea score much higher on PISA tests than our kids do, even though they spend much less on education. What such people never seem to mention, though, is that those countries are full of Finns and Koreans. That's what makes the difference.
Agree with all you say. The difference here is that parents are given the money and they usually care as much as the kids. This way it gives parents and kids who care a way out of a failing school. And each state gets to choose their own methods. Some states may highlight homeschooling or charter schools while some states highlight teacher union schools. - the standardized tests show which is empirically working given the same amount per student.