h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

[]

[llill]

[Amy] - confused.

BTW, I hope you haven't paid for those visiting cards, Lil. I have seen a correct one yet.

Sounds awful, sea. I'll be online at least part of tomorrow if you need to chat, honey.

sea, that's really too bad. Are they really kicking him out over missing ONE class? If they're helping him with school, I can see them being a little miffed, but kicking him out seems a bit harsh.

And don't beat yourself up! It isn't YOUR fault!

Today was lazy day for me. The small female person spent the night at a friend's, so I slept in and took myself to breakfast. It was lovely not to have to cook the instant I got up. Now I'm just trying to motivate myself to clean!

[Amy]

{[caer csd] The US list gets longer each time we think about places we went to go, sea. I'm sorry to hear about D, but often there is more to these things than meets the eye.

Having said that No2 son's g/f's parents want a date from her as to when she is moving out. I am a bit concerned because the two of them are going to look for somewhere together and I'm not sure either of them are emotionally mature enough for that kind of a commitment. But at 19, they are both adults and I'm keeping my worries to myself. We shall just be ther if needed.}

¶[LIL]
cards were replaced free of charge
power failure at 2 am on a cloudless night lasted 30 minutes, caused loss of 6 hours of rendering time

Still reading The Selfish Gene, I now can't help putting human events into evolutionary parameters. It strikes me that kicking an adult child out of the house is a function of biology, because (as Dawkins would put it) the cost to the parents' genes is more than the benefit of reproduction, and the parents' genes would be better served in putting effort into younger offspring.

Sounds awful when I say it, but Dawkins is extremely convincing.

[BB]

{[caer csd] I do think as parents you get to a point when you almost need your children to move out. I love my sons and they are wonderful company and No1 son went off to Uni, so he has left once, but H and I are beginning to feel the need for our own space. So I can see other parents' of view in wanting their children to move out, but almost pushing them into commitments that they may not be ready for is asking for trouble in the long term.

I agree that it is as much a biological thing to want them to leave home as it is bringing them into the home in the first place. On the other hand I can also see the advantages of the extended household that other cultures have, many out of necessity, admittedly.

My old Dad came for lunch today, H and I took the opportunity to drive his automatic. Its the first time I have driven one. I placed my left leg almost under the seat and only once tried to reach for the clutch pedal. The trickiest bit was in traffic, my own car doesn't do traffic queues very well and its a constant balancing the clutch/accelerator effort, so it seemed very strange to be just easing my foot off the brake and having the car roll forward with out using the accelerator. But otherwise it was fine }

Well, Witty and MR, you're right in that identifying the problem is much easier than finding a solution. But there are solutions to work towards. Maybe I'll answer your specific questions and comments first.

From Witty's post (396):

- I disagree with your comment: "Home schooled kids will only learn up to the ability of their parents to teach them". Home schooled kids get their education not only from their parents - they have a wide range of real life experiences with a lot of different people of all ages and learn many things by doing them. You can learn pretty much anything you want at the time you need it and can learn it much better when it has some importance to you personally. Parents are just one resource for home schooled kids. If they need more than the parent can provide, then they just seek out the information whereever they can find it - i.e. a family friend, a local merchant, the library, the plumber.

And this works for poor kids too. Poor parents are just as able to read to their kids as rich parents. (That's how our daughter learned to read - she was never taught). Poor parents have too cook too (That's how our daughter learned fractions - she was never taught). Poor parents have the same access to libraries as rich parents (That's where our daughter learn tons of geography, history, etc - through the stories she reads). Kids are naturally curious and ask lots of questions, they really want to figure out how the world works. Home schooling answers their questions in whatever manner is needed. Sometimes the parent knows. Other times, the parent doesn't and the answer has to searched out somewhere else. That's the way it works for us, and it would work the same way for poor folk too.

The main advantage of home schooling is that the child learns what the child wants to learn when he/she wants to learn it, not some arbitrary set of facts, in some particular order that someone else decided every child should know. And that advantage is gained whether the child is rich or poor.

- You said "The current system tends to homogenize towards the middle, which I am by no means endorsing, but is it really such a ". See my first rant. The system does what most people want it to do and does it very well. See - even you think it isn't such a ous thing. We NEED the division between winners and losers and we don't want any of us winners' kids to become losers. Thus the losers' kids have to stay losers. No there. Unless, of course, you happen to be a loser.

- How to fix the system? Well, the short answer is you can't. You need a new system. I'll reply to MR first, then get back to this after.

From MR's post (403)

- You said "...kids with uneducated parents can hardly be expected to learn reading, etc, from them". I talked about this above (all the parent has to do is read to the kid), but the parent DOES have to be motivated to get their child ahead. If they don't care, then by all means, use the public sytem - it will ensure that they perpetuate their parent's socio-economic status.

- You commented about private schools being elitist, but having more success at teaching. Well, they HAVE to be more successful, or else no one would send their kids there. They are elitist because they charge for their service, since they couldn't survive without charging. There are hints here at ways to improve the current system. The private schools perform better because they have an incentive to do so. Where is the incentive for public schools? More later.

- Yes there are some excellent teachers. And the last part of your post was great - indeed, there need to be other criteria for judging. That's one of the main points in the solution.

Okay, I had better stop here and leave possible solutions for another post.

And if you want me to just shut up on this topic, tell me - I won't be offended.

Hypatia - thanks for the link, but I couldn't find that particular article on that site. Saw some others that I'm going to go back and read later, though.

Hypatia - went back and found it.
http://www.ets.org/research/pic/twinchall.pdf

Garius, that's what I meant about getting rid of tenure. It would provide incentive for teachers to actually teach. Part of the problem, as well, is that they put children into classes by age, rather than by ability. My daughter can't read, yet she does third-grade level math, and her knowledge of the insect world is far superior to my own. The other day I called a spider an "icky bug" and she corrected me, telling me a spider was really an arachnid, and detailing all sorts of spider wonders (which I knew, but I didn't think she did!). What I want to know is why they can't accomodate those sorts of disparities in learning levels. Let her take a higher grade math class, and a lower level reading class. Let her do science....

Hey, wait. Those are called Montessori and Waldorf schools. Oh, wait again. They're usually private, and expensive, and thus, perpetuate elitism.

So there's the Catch-22.

My duaghter does not have regular art or music classes, and yet the principal drives a brand spankin' new Lexus. And thus, part of the problem becomes clear. Administration is overpaid, while good teachers get paid NOTHING and are expected to do it for the "love" of it. Makes ya wonder, doesn't it?

Good teachers help a lot, but the main problem is with the system itself. At some point your daughter must have been interested in insects and math and gathered information by asking you, or observing by herself and in the process, learned a lot about them. So far, she hasn't seen a need to learn to read, so she hasn't. Sooner or later, it will become important for her and she will learn to read in a flash.

This is typical of everyone's learning style. You see a need to learn something, or something catches your interest, so you ask about it, read about it, watch tv programs about it and after a while, you know a lot about it. Such interests can last a day or for years, but you slowly build up your expertise by focusing on it.

Schools, of course, don't work this way at all. They jump from subject to subject, based on an arbitrary time schedule, feeding tiny bits of information at a time. And it's information chosen by someone else. Someone else decides what you should know and when. "Interested in insects? That's great, we get to that in Grade 7. Now, turn to the page on Iceland."

It's the "lead a horse to water" thing. You can teach at a person, but you can't make her learn.

I'm sure you've already thought of this, but have you gotten out a whole load of books on insects from the library? Might give your daughter a reason to want to read. Does she see you and your husband reading for pleasure or do you wait until she is in bed? (She may have gotten the wrong impression if you just read for your coursework and viewed it as a chore). Do you rave at the dinner table over the latest book you read, or relate funny or interesting bits from books? Is going to the library or a bookstore a favourite passtime? Lots of books around the house? I don't need to ask if you read to her, because I know you do.

My mother is trying to find a tactful way to kick my baby brother - who is now 20 and has yet to get a real job - out of the house, while my father is trying to convince her that Chris needs to stay with them until he's ready to leave the nest. Its been quite interesting to watch, standing as I now do on the outside.

the trick will be to move the double bed

{[caer csd]*with a motherly for all those teetering on the edge of leaving home*}

¶[LIL]
speaking of homes:
[Unsuitable link removed by Moderator]

Garius, my daughter actually learned most of what she knows from her public school kindergarten teacher, who would follow the kids' interests by making their scheduled learning coincide with what they wanted to know about. My daughter liked insects and cats, so her science time would be spent examining insects in terrariums, etc, and cats, which she would learn about by watching our cat at home, and then "writing" about it at school. Also, the math lessons were based on counting insect legs, or cat ears, or what have you.

Of course, this woman has been teaching for 22 years, she knows her stuff, and is very into science herself. She also spends an incredible amount of her free time devising her individualized lessons, which, I think, few teachers are willing to do.