Seeking straight A's, parents push for pills

Herman Rubin wrote:
In article ,
nimue wrote:
Herman Rubin wrote:
In article ,
nimue wrote:
Raving Beauty wrote:
nimue wrote:
toto wrote:
I am a
teacher and I can tell you that kids who get As usually do so
because they love learning.

Bull****.

Getting straight A's necessitates one PLAY THE GAME

What game? Doing all your homework?

Why? The only legitimate purpose for homework is to
help learn the material. If it is not needed for
that, it should not be assigned.

That's why it is assigned. It's called "spiraling" nowadays.
Homework can also be fun, believe it or not.

The spiral method is an utter waste of time. A good
student can probably skip the first five or more steps
on day one, and should go on.

Do you know what spiraling is? It doesn't sound like it.

Writing all your essays?

If one or two satisfactory essays are written, what
is the purpose of the rest?

What do students need to grow as writers and critical thinkers?
Practice. Lots of practice.

Essays on what? Things which the English teacher thinks
are relevant? Things which the English teacher assigns
because the English teacher cannot understand the subject
about which the student is interested, and which may well
be at a higher level?

Watch your pronouns. Do you really think English teachers assign essays
because they don't understand the subject?

Getting an A
average on tests and quizzes?

Do you not take into account improving during the term?
The first time I taught a class, a student got a good
A on the final, much better than earlier. I learned
then that it is the end result which should count.

Here's a secret -- at times I agree with you. If a kid makes a
phenomenal improvement, I will give that kid the higher grade. If a
kid was just cutting the beginning of the term, or goofing off, I
won't.

Completing all your projects?

Unless there is a VERY good reason for projects, they
should be abolished.

God no! They are FUN. This is one of the things the kids enjoy
most. Projects give kids the opportunity to work together and to use
all the multiple intelligences.

No, they are what YOU think are fun.

Why would I find them fun? I don't do them, anymore than I do the tests,
quizzes, or essays. The kids like them. They tell me so (and they don't
say that about the tests, quizzes, or essays).

And they detract
from learning, especially by good students. It is always
a few students who do all the thinking.

Um, that makes no sense. If only a few students do the thinking, how does
that detract from their learning? I am assuming that the students who do
the thinking are the good students.

Showing up to
class every day?

Who cares? What matters is what they learn, and
even more important, what they understand.

Kids learn from class discussion. I can just tell them what a poem
means, or they can discover what it means for themselves during
class. That is what class is for. That's why we have it. The
students learn from one another and the teacher. I have never had a
student who didn't learn new skills from other students.

Literature is entertainment plus propaganda. What a poem
means to one might be nonsense to another. This is not
what an education should be.

I am not ignorant of poetry, and can appreciate it. But I
can also see the author's trying to convince the reader by
rhetorical means, not by logical ones. Students should be
taught to watch for the proselytization, not to welcome it.

Oh, lord. The kids need to learn to interpret poetry. It will enrich their
lives and make them less susceptible to proselytization. Once they
understand how language can be used to create ideas and emotions, they will
be able to identify it when others (say, politicians) employ their
rhetorical techniques. I have to say, I fail to see how Stopping By Woods
On A Snowy Evening proselytizes.

That is what you are graded on. That is not a game --
that is school.

You are part of the problem.

What problem? I want kids to learn and to enjoy learning? What
solution to this "problem" do you suggest?

Enjoy learning what? To play word games, instead of using
logical reasoning?

You assume you know so much. You have no idea what happens in my classroom
or anyone else's. I have no idea what word games you are referring to. I
have no idea why you think the students don't use logical reasoning. I have
no clue what made you so arrogant and so angry.

To write what is almost all fiction in
a "convincing" manner instead of a few clear and precise
statements, which might have to be in mathematical symbols
rather than words?

If you have to write an essay about how the imagery of the sea in Romeo and
Juliet mirrors the lovers' progress, mathematical symbols won't help much.
I loved that essay when I was assigned it in high school and that is why I
assign it to my kids.

I have read many students' essays in applications for
college and graduate school, and the fiction is apparent
to me.

Honestly, it chills me to the bone to know that you are in the teaching
profession. I expect you will say the same to me, but I really think that
your anger and your assumptions (created without a shred of evidence) point
to some real problems on your part.

--
nimue

"As an unwavering Republican, I have quite naturally burned more books
than I have read." Betty Bowers

English is our friend. We don't have to fight it.
Oprah

"nimue" wrote in message
...
Brilliant, insightful, honest post -- and it will probably be ignored or
trashed by Herman Rubin. Well done, though, toypup. Well done.

Thank you.

Herman Rubin wrote:
In article ,
nimue wrote:
Herman Rubin wrote:
In article ,
nimue wrote:
Raving Beauty wrote:
nimue wrote:
toto wrote:
I am a
teacher and I can tell you that kids who get As usually do so
because they love learning.

Bull****.

Getting straight A's necessitates one PLAY THE GAME

What game? Doing all your homework?

Why? The only legitimate purpose for homework is to
help learn the material. If it is not needed for
that, it should not be assigned.

That's why it is assigned. It's called "spiraling" nowadays.
Homework can also be fun, believe it or not.

The spiral method is an utter waste of time. A good
student can probably skip the first five or more steps
on day one, and should go on.

Do you know what spiraling is? It doesn't sound like it.

Writing all your essays?

If one or two satisfactory essays are written, what
is the purpose of the rest?

What do students need to grow as writers and critical thinkers?
Practice. Lots of practice.

Essays on what? Things which the English teacher thinks
are relevant? Things which the English teacher assigns
because the English teacher cannot understand the subject
about which the student is interested, and which may well
be at a higher level?

Watch your pronouns. Do you really think English teachers assign essays
because they don't understand the subject?

Getting an A
average on tests and quizzes?

Do you not take into account improving during the term?
The first time I taught a class, a student got a good
A on the final, much better than earlier. I learned
then that it is the end result which should count.

Here's a secret -- at times I agree with you. If a kid makes a
phenomenal improvement, I will give that kid the higher grade. If a
kid was just cutting the beginning of the term, or goofing off, I
won't.

Completing all your projects?

Unless there is a VERY good reason for projects, they
should be abolished.

God no! They are FUN. This is one of the things the kids enjoy
most. Projects give kids the opportunity to work together and to use
all the multiple intelligences.

No, they are what YOU think are fun.

Why would I find them fun? I don't do them, anymore than I do the tests,
quizzes, or essays. The kids like them. They tell me so (and they don't
say that about the tests, quizzes, or essays).

And they detract
from learning, especially by good students. It is always
a few students who do all the thinking.

Um, that makes no sense. If only a few students do the thinking, how does
that detract from their learning? I am assuming that the students who do
the thinking are the good students.

Showing up to
class every day?

Who cares? What matters is what they learn, and
even more important, what they understand.

Kids learn from class discussion. I can just tell them what a poem
means, or they can discover what it means for themselves during
class. That is what class is for. That's why we have it. The
students learn from one another and the teacher. I have never had a
student who didn't learn new skills from other students.

Literature is entertainment plus propaganda. What a poem
means to one might be nonsense to another. This is not
what an education should be.

I am not ignorant of poetry, and can appreciate it. But I
can also see the author's trying to convince the reader by
rhetorical means, not by logical ones. Students should be
taught to watch for the proselytization, not to welcome it.

Oh, lord. The kids need to learn to interpret poetry. It will enrich their
lives and make them less susceptible to proselytization. Once they
understand how language can be used to create ideas and emotions, they will
be able to identify it when others (say, politicians) employ their
rhetorical techniques. I have to say, I fail to see how Stopping by Woods
on a Snowy Evening proselytizes.

That is what you are graded on. That is not a game --
that is school.

You are part of the problem.

What problem? I want kids to learn and to enjoy learning? What
solution to this "problem" do you suggest?

Enjoy learning what? To play word games, instead of using
logical reasoning?

You assume you know so much. You have no idea what happens in my classroom
or anyone else's. I have no idea what word games you are referring to. I
have no idea why you think the students don't use logical reasoning. I have
no clue what made you so arrogant and so angry.

To write what is almost all fiction in
a "convincing" manner instead of a few clear and precise
statements, which might have to be in mathematical symbols
rather than words?

If you have to write an essay about how the imagery of the sea in Romeo and
Juliet mirrors the lovers' progress, mathematical symbols won't help much.
I loved that essay when I was assigned it in high school and that is why I
assign it to my kids.

I have read many students' essays in applications for
college and graduate school, and the fiction is apparent
to me.

Honestly, it chills me to the bone to know that you are in the teaching
profession. I expect you will say the same to me, but I really think that
your anger and your assumptions (created without a shred of evidence) point
to some real problems on your part.

--
nimue

"As an unwavering Republican, I have quite naturally burned more books
than I have read." Betty Bowers

English is our friend. We don't have to fight it.
Oprah

"nimue" wrote in message
...
Herman Rubin wrote:
In article ,
nimue wrote:
God no! They are FUN. This is one of the things the kids enjoy
most. Projects give kids the opportunity to work together and to use
all the multiple intelligences.

No, they are what YOU think are fun.

Why would I find them fun? I don't do them, anymore than I do the tests,
quizzes, or essays. The kids like them. They tell me so (and they don't
say that about the tests, quizzes, or essays).

I thought projects were the most fun of all during my school years.

Herman, even gifted students have to learn to write by writing. There's no
other way to do it. Once you know how to write, it carries over from
discipline to discipline, but some things just plain take practice to
master.

The best choice I ever made, in retrospect, was attending a college where
"writing intensive" meant what it said. Basically, for several years, I had
a major research paper due in every single non-math and hard science course
I took, and often minor writing efforts between times. The extreme was my
music literature sequence, where there was a written response/analysis of a
work required every week for several semesters in a row.

The result was that when I entered graduate school, I was used to writing,
used to research, knew exactly which journals were reputable, could walk
right to the section of the library where books I needed were shelved
without even touching the catalog, and wasn't at all scared by needing to
document my writing, whether the professor wanted MLA, Chicago, or APA. I
had no trouble turning out publishable writing in graduate school, and no
trouble with writing my thesis.

The students who had gone to schools where writing was limited to the
required English courses (many of which had been skipped due to AP
placements) had a much, much harder time with the idea that not only were
they expected to research, but that they had to turn out well written
documentation of their research, which met publication guidelines.

--
Donna DeVore Metler
Orff Music Specialist/Kindermusik
Mother to Angel Brian Anthony 1/1/2002, 22 weeks, severe PE/HELLP
And Allison Joy, 11/25/04 (35 weeks, PIH, Pre-term labor)

"Herman Rubin" wrote in message
...
In article ,
toto wrote:
On 8 Sep 2006 22:05:04 -0700, wrote:




All good mathematics is rigorous, in the sense that what
is known is what can be proved. Logic belongs in elementary
school, and has been successfully taught there by those
who understand it.
Taught to the regular, average, run of the mill child, or to those gifted
children who had mastered arithmetic before age 5 without much formal
instruction? The latter do exist, and definitely can learn quite advanced
materials very early, but it is a major mistake to extrapolate that because
a few children can handle algebra at age 6 and 7 (or even 12 or 13) that
all, or even most, children can do so. Algebra has been pushed down in age
over the last few decades, so that a class which used to be solidly high
school curriculum is now typically middle school level; and the result has
been that students, instead of taking Algebra as Freshmen or Sophomores in
high school and then moving on are beginning algebra in 6th or 7th grade,
and are STILL taking Algebra as Freshmen or Sophomores. No time has been
gained, and all that has happened is that concepts which previously would
have been taught in 6th, 7th and 8th grade have been missed in favor of
starting Algebra early.

"Bob LeChevalier" wrote in message
...
"Linda Gore" wrote:
"Bob LeChevalier" wrote in message
. ..

Admittedly, not everyone can manage this, but we should be creating
more opportunities for people to follow their true dreams, imo.

While I have some sympathy, the public schools are set up to train
kids the way the public wants them to be trained.

so why pretend you are teachers,

I don't pretend I am a teacher, and never have. I am a parent, and I
don't need to pretend that.

So why pretend teachers are teachers?

"toypup" wrote:

"Herman Rubin" wrote in message
...
In article ,
toypup wrote:

"Herman Rubin" wrote in message
...

I was in high school before WWII, and took part of that
program; the rest I studied myself. Only the honors
programs match any of it, and not always then. The
theorem-proof geometry course was mandatory, as was
grammar-based foreign language. There was no attempt
to reduce any of the college preparatory program to
what the "average" student could do.

The one year of algebra required (more was usually taken)
then was more than the equal of two now.

The physics and chemistry courses were stronger, but
that did not then, and does not now, have that much
relevance. Literature had more of an "ancient" flavor,
and reading Shakespeare was expected of all.

My dad, who was born in 1905 and grew up in a ghost mining town in
Colorado went to school in a one room school. They had spelling, and
math and English, but the teachers were not college graduates (not
that it is necessarily bad) - they could teach right out of high
school. After he finished as much as they had of HS in his town
(there was no HS when he finished 8th grade, so his mom had him
tutored at home for two years, and then they had enough kids for a HS,
and he basically took those two years over again), his mom sent him to
Lutheran school.

When he got to college, he took German (which his folks spoke at home)
and never got more than a C in it because the teacher determined that
he wasn't having to do any work in it. He flunked English, but he got
an A in all his Biology courses (I've got two of his grade cards).

My mom (born in 1909) took 4 years of Latin in HS, and when she went
to college she was an English Lit major. I don't know that she had
any science to speak of, or any higher math.

I started school during WWII. I graduated HS in 1955. At that time
they were teaching 'core' in junior high (7-9th grades). Core was an
English and social studies mix and we had it two periods a day. We
got one period of math and one period of science. I was in a section
of math which was supposed to do algebra. Then we were to test into
Algebra II. I was one of only 3 people in my class who passed because
the teacher was incompetent and I passed because in my prior school in
8th grade, we'd had a really good teacher and an advanced course..

In grades 10-12 we read at least one Shakespeare play each year. I
remember the Merchant of Venice, Julius Caesar, and Macbeth. My mom
insisted that I take Latin but I could only take 3 years of it because
HS was only 3 years. I also took Plane Geometry, Algebra II and
Trig., Biology, Chemistry, (no Physics), World History, U.S. History,
and Shorthand. I don't think we had AP courses.

When my kids were in HS (1975-1989), I don't think they had any AP
classes available either. They had calculus available (which I did
not). They could take physics (I could have too, but didn't), but the
higher levels of language (3rd and 4th year) weren't available. I'm
not sure that they read much Shakespeare. The only thing I remember
for sure is that my son read "Lord of the Flies" (which I had not
read).

My grandchildren (the ones that have been in HS) went to a Catholic
school so I don't know how that compares.


You took part of the program, but not all of it before WWII. Did you take
any of the honors program today for comparison (since that was what you were
comparing)? Which parts of the pre-WWII program did you take? Were
algebra, physics and chemistry part of it?

Last I was there, it's been almost 20 years, Shakespeare was still expected
for college prep literature courses. Do you have evidence that it's no
longer the case? What's wrong with it not having an ancient flavor? Modern
literature has its place and should be taught along with Shakespeare.

On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 01:29:15 GMT, "nimue"
wrote:

Do you know what a project is?

Too well. My children had them.

All right then. What are they?

My ds hated *team* projects. Individual ones were fine, but he hated
working with teams because often the lazy kids wanted him to do all
the work for everyone.


--
Dorothy

There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..

The Outer Limits

Rosalie B. wrote:
"toypup" wrote:
"Herman Rubin" wrote in message
...
In article ,
toypup wrote:

"Herman Rubin" wrote in message
...

I was in high school before WWII, and took part of that
program; the rest I studied myself. Only the honors
programs match any of it, and not always then. The
theorem-proof geometry course was mandatory, as was
grammar-based foreign language. There was no attempt
to reduce any of the college preparatory program to
what the "average" student could do.

The one year of algebra required (more was usually taken)
then was more than the equal of two now.

The physics and chemistry courses were stronger, but
that did not then, and does not now, have that much
relevance. Literature had more of an "ancient" flavor,
and reading Shakespeare was expected of all.
My dad, who was born in 1905 and grew up in a ghost mining town in
Colorado went to school in a one room school. They had spelling, and
math and English, but the teachers were not college graduates (not
that it is necessarily bad) - they could teach right out of high
school. After he finished as much as they had of HS in his town
(there was no HS when he finished 8th grade, so his mom had him
tutored at home for two years, and then they had enough kids for a HS,
and he basically took those two years over again), his mom sent him to
Lutheran school.

When he got to college, he took German (which his folks spoke at home)
and never got more than a C in it because the teacher determined that
he wasn't having to do any work in it. He flunked English, but he got
an A in all his Biology courses (I've got two of his grade cards).

My mom (born in 1909) took 4 years of Latin in HS, and when she went
to college she was an English Lit major. I don't know that she had
any science to speak of, or any higher math.

I started school during WWII. I graduated HS in 1955. At that time
they were teaching 'core' in junior high (7-9th grades). Core was an
English and social studies mix and we had it two periods a day. We
got one period of math and one period of science. I was in a section
of math which was supposed to do algebra. Then we were to test into
Algebra II. I was one of only 3 people in my class who passed because
the teacher was incompetent and I passed because in my prior school in
8th grade, we'd had a really good teacher and an advanced course..

In grades 10-12 we read at least one Shakespeare play each year. I
remember the Merchant of Venice, Julius Caesar, and Macbeth. My mom
insisted that I take Latin but I could only take 3 years of it because
HS was only 3 years. I also took Plane Geometry, Algebra II and
Trig., Biology, Chemistry, (no Physics), World History, U.S. History,
and Shorthand. I don't think we had AP courses.

When my kids were in HS (1975-1989), I don't think they had any AP
classes available either. They had calculus available (which I did
not). They could take physics (I could have too, but didn't), but the
higher levels of language (3rd and 4th year) weren't available. I'm
not sure that they read much Shakespeare. The only thing I remember
for sure is that my son read "Lord of the Flies" (which I had not
read).

My grandchildren (the ones that have been in HS) went to a Catholic
school so I don't know how that compares.

I think priorities and course offerings may vary as much between schools
as between generations. My girls attend school in one of the poorer
suburban districts of our city, but the high school offers at least
three AP classes (AP Lit, AP Principles of Democracy, and AP Calculus),
of which my OD, a senior, is enrolled in two. She struggled too much
with Algebra II to bother going the pre-calc route and is currently
taking a college math review class. She is also taking 4th year Spanish
this year.

I could go on, but you get the picture.

marcia