The only way this system will work is if we have a complete collapse of the economy and all of the institutions go down especially the teacher's unions.
I was reading nonfiction systematically very early on--a good reader criticized in elementary school since I was always reading on instead of paying attention. Yes, the education system needs to be tweaked but our language doesn't have to be dumbed down or devoid of its history to do so. Nor do we need to teach math in a bubble, since every day we encounter it in everyday language, and that is why it is taught in story problems. Vive la revolucion, but be careful what we step on in the process.
I didn't know what would make me happy, successful or prosperous at 12. I've changed career several times. My broad education enabled that. If I only learned skills for 1 job, I could never respond to different opportunities. If all our education was vocational, we'd be followers, not leaders in science & technology - like India or China.
Mr. Raichle's right to criticise the current system, but better models already exist.
The reason you didn't know what would make you happy, successful, and prosperous at 12 is that you didn't know how to read nonfiction systematically. If you did, you would have a very good idea of what interested you by the time you graduated from High School. Once again, today's "one size fits all" education system prepares no one for anything. Also, India and China's education system is elitist. It selects only the best students in math and science to continue in the system.
Some of my school friends chose vocational courses when they were 14 years old. They've either ended up stuck in a rut in low paid jobs or had to go back to school to learn new skills.
I used to be a calculation engineer - till my job got outsourced to India. Luckily, my broad education has made it easy to switch careers. The job market is changing too rapidly for rigid systems.
You need to demonstrate how your proposals won't leave people stuck with outdated skills.
I think what could be great about a system similar to what Mr. Raichle is proposing, is that you can choose to learn something new whenever you needed to. This way, a person would avoid wasted years of irrelevant schooling, which of course causes boredom, resentment, anger, etc, which, on a mass scale, causes multiple societal problems, obviously. I don't think there is anything wrong with learning as you go through life at times when it is actually neccessary.
"This way, a person would avoid wasted years of irrelevant schooling"...I think this is a very strange and dangerous statement, especially if it comes from an education professional. I'm pretty sure that most of the experts in education, psychology and philosophy would agree that there is no such thing as "wasted years of schooling". I don't think that the "multiple societal problems" are "obviously" caused just by the contents of schooling rather than the method.
Even though the debate of "shape/form vs. substance" may be outdated, you could argue that one determines the other. It is a well known fact that kids throughout a country have different capabilities, concerns and problems. Teaching methods (form) should include a wide spectrum of techniques to consider these differences without excluding kids because they just don't fit the "average type of kid", there should be an equal presence of kinesthetic and visual methods as well as auditory ones.
I'm sure that Mr. Raichle's method is sufficient for a group of kids, but I'm not sure that it solves the problems that he acuses the actual system of having (lack of flexibility). I agree with the idea of discussion groups, the idea of letting kids choose some subjects, the idea of stimulating non-fiction reading...and the core idea of modifying the educational system in a revolutionary fashion is great. But, I also agree with the comment made by jamesstephenbrown:
languages keep some gramatic and morphologic rules to keep track of it's history, dumbing down the language to phonetics just cuts out the whole history of English. Obviously, language is a living creature, it mutates in unpredictable forms according to use and it's just ok that it does so (I'm not trying to defend an authoritarian conservative view about language). I'm just saying that the shift to phonetic teaching has huge costs and we should be aware of them before proposing these ideas.
Finally, I have a very strong opinion about educating people to fit the employment market. When you educate kids and youngsters according to the current balance of job supply/demand, all you do is feed the current system and juncture. As someone up there said, you become a follower of the market, and not a leader (with the subsequent possibility of changing things). Whatever your political views are -and talking strictly about the USA situation- you can agree that with all the resources
(economic and human) it has, the country could be doing much better than it is. In fast shifting times like the ones we live, adaptability is the key asset to give to our kids. Nevertheless, I'm glad that these things are actually being put on trial by someone, and I encourage you to disagree with me. We could even have a good online conversarion (if there is such thing).
I am not an education professional, but I've been through the system and have researched alternatives. The system as it is now is very damaging - it is coercive mind control. Have you heard of unschooling? Have you read about the history of compulsory education and why it was created in the first place? Please google this stuff then get back to me and tell me what you think...
Actually, starglowe, you hit one of the nails on the head. In this system, you can change careers at any time. As we travel through life, we become more sophisticated about our aptitudes and what is good for us. So, we change our interests, our life-style, our occupations, and that is exciting, good, and rewarding.
Amen to jamesstephenbrown's comment, BTW. I've taught EFL, and it is hard, but there are phonics--you just have to know that all rules are meant to be broken in English! Celebrate it!
I think the dumbing down of language is slightly perverse. The "stupid" spelling of words indicates their origin, Bouquet is pronounced Bookay because it's french, American's already have a miopic view of the world without being taught that their language exists in a void also. It's like saying we're taking in all this food thru this "stupid" chewing system, we should just have an intravenous drip
Being in a grade with people of different intelligence teaches you about living in the real world.
I agree with you that being with people of varying degrees of intelligence is stimulating.
However, the issue in not intelligence, but rather, achievement. Should all 6th Graders achieve at the same level? And, if not, wouldn't the term, 6th Grade, become a misnomer?
Nevertheless, thank you for your omment and God bless you.
This is sort of interesting but is Mr Raichle proposing anything that doesn't already exist in Montessori schools? Also the links don't work, and that's rather frustrating...
I just tried all the links from 2 separate computers in separate locations, and they seem to work. I will check further for you.
Also, his system is based upon the fact that the state and central governments will confer with businesses and universities to set up courses of study that teach the skills required for each job. That is where the links would be most helpful in explaining, especially, the Outline link.
The only way this system will work is if we have a complete collapse of the economy and all of the institutions go down especially the teacher's unions.
Rizky06 1 year ago
I was reading nonfiction systematically very early on--a good reader criticized in elementary school since I was always reading on instead of paying attention. Yes, the education system needs to be tweaked but our language doesn't have to be dumbed down or devoid of its history to do so. Nor do we need to teach math in a bubble, since every day we encounter it in everyday language, and that is why it is taught in story problems. Vive la revolucion, but be careful what we step on in the process.
heather4him 3 years ago
I didn't know what would make me happy, successful or prosperous at 12. I've changed career several times. My broad education enabled that. If I only learned skills for 1 job, I could never respond to different opportunities. If all our education was vocational, we'd be followers, not leaders in science & technology - like India or China.
Mr. Raichle's right to criticise the current system, but better models already exist.
isabella2215 3 years ago
The reason you didn't know what would make you happy, successful, and prosperous at 12 is that you didn't know how to read nonfiction systematically. If you did, you would have a very good idea of what interested you by the time you graduated from High School. Once again, today's "one size fits all" education system prepares no one for anything. Also, India and China's education system is elitist. It selects only the best students in math and science to continue in the system.
ThePolka 3 years ago
Some of my school friends chose vocational courses when they were 14 years old. They've either ended up stuck in a rut in low paid jobs or had to go back to school to learn new skills.
I used to be a calculation engineer - till my job got outsourced to India. Luckily, my broad education has made it easy to switch careers. The job market is changing too rapidly for rigid systems.
You need to demonstrate how your proposals won't leave people stuck with outdated skills.
isabella2215 3 years ago
I think what could be great about a system similar to what Mr. Raichle is proposing, is that you can choose to learn something new whenever you needed to. This way, a person would avoid wasted years of irrelevant schooling, which of course causes boredom, resentment, anger, etc, which, on a mass scale, causes multiple societal problems, obviously. I don't think there is anything wrong with learning as you go through life at times when it is actually neccessary.
starglowe 3 years ago
"This way, a person would avoid wasted years of irrelevant schooling"...I think this is a very strange and dangerous statement, especially if it comes from an education professional. I'm pretty sure that most of the experts in education, psychology and philosophy would agree that there is no such thing as "wasted years of schooling". I don't think that the "multiple societal problems" are "obviously" caused just by the contents of schooling rather than the method.
AudioUnset 3 years ago
Even though the debate of "shape/form vs. substance" may be outdated, you could argue that one determines the other. It is a well known fact that kids throughout a country have different capabilities, concerns and problems. Teaching methods (form) should include a wide spectrum of techniques to consider these differences without excluding kids because they just don't fit the "average type of kid", there should be an equal presence of kinesthetic and visual methods as well as auditory ones.
AudioUnset 3 years ago
I'm sure that Mr. Raichle's method is sufficient for a group of kids, but I'm not sure that it solves the problems that he acuses the actual system of having (lack of flexibility). I agree with the idea of discussion groups, the idea of letting kids choose some subjects, the idea of stimulating non-fiction reading...and the core idea of modifying the educational system in a revolutionary fashion is great. But, I also agree with the comment made by jamesstephenbrown:
AudioUnset 3 years ago
languages keep some gramatic and morphologic rules to keep track of it's history, dumbing down the language to phonetics just cuts out the whole history of English. Obviously, language is a living creature, it mutates in unpredictable forms according to use and it's just ok that it does so (I'm not trying to defend an authoritarian conservative view about language). I'm just saying that the shift to phonetic teaching has huge costs and we should be aware of them before proposing these ideas.
AudioUnset 3 years ago
Finally, I have a very strong opinion about educating people to fit the employment market. When you educate kids and youngsters according to the current balance of job supply/demand, all you do is feed the current system and juncture. As someone up there said, you become a follower of the market, and not a leader (with the subsequent possibility of changing things). Whatever your political views are -and talking strictly about the USA situation- you can agree that with all the resources
AudioUnset 3 years ago
(economic and human) it has, the country could be doing much better than it is. In fast shifting times like the ones we live, adaptability is the key asset to give to our kids. Nevertheless, I'm glad that these things are actually being put on trial by someone, and I encourage you to disagree with me. We could even have a good online conversarion (if there is such thing).
AudioUnset 3 years ago
I am not an education professional, but I've been through the system and have researched alternatives. The system as it is now is very damaging - it is coercive mind control. Have you heard of unschooling? Have you read about the history of compulsory education and why it was created in the first place? Please google this stuff then get back to me and tell me what you think...
starglowe 3 years ago
Actually, starglowe, you hit one of the nails on the head. In this system, you can change careers at any time. As we travel through life, we become more sophisticated about our aptitudes and what is good for us. So, we change our interests, our life-style, our occupations, and that is exciting, good, and rewarding.
ThePolka 3 years ago
Hey isabella, would you kindly fill me in on these other systems? I'm trying to learn about as many alternatives as possible.
starglowe 3 years ago
Amen to jamesstephenbrown's comment, BTW. I've taught EFL, and it is hard, but there are phonics--you just have to know that all rules are meant to be broken in English! Celebrate it!
heather4him 3 years ago
Only 46% of English words are phonetic. O-n-e is not one of them. That fact is not a cause for celebration. It's a cause for revolution.
ThePolka 3 years ago
I think the dumbing down of language is slightly perverse. The "stupid" spelling of words indicates their origin, Bouquet is pronounced Bookay because it's french, American's already have a miopic view of the world without being taught that their language exists in a void also. It's like saying we're taking in all this food thru this "stupid" chewing system, we should just have an intravenous drip
Being in a grade with people of different intelligence teaches you about living in the real world.
jamesstephenbrown 4 years ago
I agree with you that being with people of varying degrees of intelligence is stimulating.
However, the issue in not intelligence, but rather, achievement. Should all 6th Graders achieve at the same level? And, if not, wouldn't the term, 6th Grade, become a misnomer?
Nevertheless, thank you for your omment and God bless you.
ThePolka 4 years ago
Hi ThePolka,
This is sort of interesting but is Mr Raichle proposing anything that doesn't already exist in Montessori schools? Also the links don't work, and that's rather frustrating...
elisqld 4 years ago
I just tried all the links from 2 separate computers in separate locations, and they seem to work. I will check further for you.
Also, his system is based upon the fact that the state and central governments will confer with businesses and universities to set up courses of study that teach the skills required for each job. That is where the links would be most helpful in explaining, especially, the Outline link.
ThePolka 4 years ago