I'd say it's still the educational system's fault. There's been some really cool studies in behavioral sciences recently - stuff like "if you have kids do sixty seconds of exercise you see better on task performance from kids with ADD." We've gotten a lot more information about how people learn and how to teach more effectively to a greater set of students. Despite that, our model of education isn't all that remarkably different from the one used a hundred years ago. Teacher stands at the front of the desk and lectures facts, then passes out a test to see if the students have retained the facts. Edit: An example: recently in the cuts made for schools, art programs and after school programs like sports, drama, clubs, etc. have been nixed. These programs are integral for motivating students who aren't necessarily academically inclined to continue doing well in school. E.g.: "If you don't raise this average to a C+, you'll be cut from the team!" There are ways to get students motivated but we seem to increasingly be OK with separating students into different lots based on how well they do at arbitrary, standardized tests and then wonder why some kids don't plug in. Edit 2: One is reminded of Foucault who said that prisons were not built to punish or rehabilitate, but to separate.
Most people are stuck on the educational track they get put on by the age of 7 or 8. Factor-in socioeconomic factors in state education and many are at a disadvantage at birth. This is the kid's fault? How come less able kids who go to expensive schools, or even state schools in nice areas, end up being better educated? I can't lay the blame at the feet of a child for not engaging with the education system, that just sounds cruel. Why is it not the fault of the education system for not engaging with the child? Shouldn't the buck stop with the adults in charge of educating children? Isn't that their job?
I completely think that there are many many ways of making education easier and more effective. But parents and kids also have to enguage with it. Saying its always the schools fault misses out half the equation. its also the only half of the equation you can control. (its also the half the government cant control and so will blame when they don't get their act together)
It's a vicious circle; the parents who don't engage with their children's education are mostly made up of people who were failed by the education system themselves, usually for reasons tied to the socioeconomic standing of their parents. And when I say "education system", I mean the whole thing from policy makers down, not just schools. Of course, you can still have a good education and be a plonker - just look at Nigel Farrage or Nick Griffin, but you don't come out of a good education being stupid.
Would you say the blame for all stupid people always lies in the school system? (fifty percent of the population are below average IQ) Is there no such thing as parental or personal responsibility?
If a person comes out of 16 years of education and has absolutely no idea how to go about judging the veracity of sources, then yes, I blame the education system. These are incredibly basic skills we are talking about, not rocket science. If you have a brain functioning within "normal" bounds, there is no good reason why you cannot learn the rudiments of these skills. I don't expect children to be able to grasp the importance of qualifications. I certainly didn't, and even though I've always been an autodidact I still felt resentment at having no choice but to go to school. I probably would have done better academically if I had stayed at home, to be honest. I think education needs a paradigm shift away from rote learning and toward giving children the skills necessary to educate themselves. At least then they will stand a chance if they get a thirst for knowledge later in life.
i'm sorry, i just don't see this. i went to pretty standard public school in non-descript midwest america. i know lots of people that did not get further education that are not dumb arses. my father has a 4th grade education, he's not an ****. my public school experience was not what i'm reading in this thread. plenty of teachers and plenty of coursework encouraged us to think for ourselves. i'm getting visuals of a dystopian america like pink floyd's the wall reading this, as if we're all just sheep with rote memorization skills and not much else. i think one of the problems with this day and age is that everyone has the same microphone. it's not just a problem, it's an amazing advantage to this age of information we're in. but because this person has a massive megaphone, is there the tendency to think there are more "flat earthers" than there really are? or <insert conspiracy theory>? we're all blind to it sometimes, i suppose. we've got people posting on this very thread that were/are birthers. i think the blame has to go to the person. i just can't believe it's the system.
I never said that you need further education, the groundwork for auto didacticism can be laid by 4th grade. I didn't get any academic qualifications past age 16, so I guess in American terms I didn't graduate high school. My experience with the British state education system in the 80's and 90's wasn't too far off The Wall. I think the most valuable thing I learnt was different classes of sources in History, but I didn't remember any of the dates and facts we needed to remember for the exams, and only 5 kids passed history in that year. So you have this history teacher, who on paper is terrible, but in my view he engaged us in the right way and taught me the most valuable lesson in my 16 years of primary and secondary education. I don't know... it definitely starts out fringe, but because of that massive microphone it spreads. There is graffiti outside my girlfriend's school (she teaches there, don't call the cops! ) about flat earth. That's scary. At what age does a person become culpable for their lack of education (not just formal education, but knowledge in general)? I guess it's much easier if you think it's genetic (or do people choose to be stupid? That's a strange thought...). We can just screen babies for the dumbass gene
Eddie Bravo doesn't seem to be an outlier, or even someone with an incredibly low IQ, but a specific example of a systemic problem in the United States at this point. The amount of people willing to endorse weird conspiracy theories is just astounding. Vaccine deniers, Sandy Hook deniers, Obama birthers, chem trailers, Pizza-gaters, global warming deniers, evolution deniers, all over the place you see this same lack of knowledge and distrust of authority of any sort. Far from being limited to any one locality, you see it all over the place. Skepticism, basic logic, research skills, and science are subjects that our populace is ignorant of. If it's a systematic problem, then my guess is it needs a systematic solution.
I'm not saying the school system hasn't contributed to this, BUT I also know saying its all the schools fault absolves you of personal responsibility for this, which is always a seductive way of thinking. As an adult, there's always college, open university etc I've spent 8 years as an adult completing further education courses, whilst working, they were mostly very rewarding, cheap, and nothing like being at school! Go for it man, You can do it!
I thought the american school system taught critical thinking via debate class? Or is that just generalizing from watching too much community?
If you think about it EB was rewarded for having slightly kooky beliefs about BJJ training (gi nogi etc), with regular money, kudos, beating his biggest naysayer in comp, and students. so I can see why he transferred that over to conspiracy theories. You dont see chris brennan doing that though do you, even though he virtually invented american NoGi. (PS I am a massive Chris Brennan fan)
There's high school debate clubs, but it's not a class with an associated set of national standards the way math, english, biology, chemistry, physics, world history, American history, American government, etc. are. Increasingly teachers are called upon to teach to a specific test, and their pay is based on how well their students do on that test, so uhh... Yeah, not a great situation to encourage students to say "But what about," "Maybe if," or "How do you know?" "SHUT YOUR FACE I NEED TO GET PAID" is, although inappropriate, the general subtext to any response teachers make.
Ha! Thanks ...but I have participated in further and higher education since, I got pretty much everything, in terms of learning, out of a degree, but became too chronically ill to finish my 3rd year (not enough student loans years left to start again, not enough credits to transfer into 3rd year elsewhere). I don't mind though, it was a great experience and the piece of paper would make zero difference to my income.
We have PSE (personal and social education) over here, but its a very wishy washy class, But it does mean that there's space for things like critical thinking to be introduced. I'm lucky in that my religious education class was run by an ex army chaplain who introduced the idea of looking at the bible as subjective evidence, and made us compare and contrast the different Easter stories. I like to think he knew exactly what he was doing.......
I think there's definitely space for it to be introduced, but, as in your case, it's up to the individual teacher and too often they're not equipped to instruct. How often, even on this forum alone, have you seen people refer to evolution as 'just a theory' or not understand what a scientific consensus is, or what it means? Fact is, we are not equipping our students with an excrement detector.
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/sky-criminals-chuck-norris-speaks-out-on-climate-engineering/ so chuck norris is a chemtrial'er.....
nail on head, These things used to to foundational in science class, maybe if we replaced religious classes with more science there would be time for this.
I'd argue that comparative religion study and learning about other cultures is too valuable to miss out on. Stopping politicians changing the game for teachers every time a new government is voted in would be a good start, I think.
Id rather people were pro science then pro religion, but I get your point. Bigots are everybodies problem.
