Basejumper.com - archive

Your 3rd option was as good as the photo.

[teacher's rant]

I asked the kids in my dimmest class to
name a country in North America and all
but a few were totally fucking baffled!!

2 dumbest responses: Hawaii, Alaska


Here are just some of the idiot response
I get to other things I think should be but
are not common knowledge for kids born
in America and taking college classes.

How many people are in congress? 27

How many people on the supreme court? 15

How old is America? 2009, 6000, 800

Area of a 6m x 9m rectangle? 18, 30

Outback, no longer a restaurant, now a country.

The Gulf of Mexico has been upgraded to an ocean.

 
College classes? give us some more background here. How old were these students? Is this one of those... specal clases? Are we talking short buss here?

speaking of pissing the world off, this is a good example of why they should not just hate us but fear us. not only do we have the biggest guns but we are so isolated or should I say insolated from the rest of the world that we have no... conection? How many people would realy have a problem if we nuked north korea or somallia or Afganisstan? and frankly I see this as a good thing. Most people see this and leave us alone.

Lee

I have 146 students in 7 sections taking
either ECO-2013 or ECO-2023 which are
Macro and Micro Economics respectively.

While the students' ages range from 16ish
for the dual enrollment kids up to 50ish,
the majority are between 18 and 21.

YES, community college = 14th grade

I think he teaches in community college, which is pretty much the 13th grade.

but i guarantee you they know anything about video games or fucking t.v. very sad. I dont hate being American, just embarrassed.

If there was a *Like* button, I'd be all over it about now.

 fuck yeah

This isn't facebook . . .

That is a very astute observation! You get an A+





n_pertuset A+
everyoneelse F

A few quick notes:

* The American GOVERNMENT may be pissing off the rest of the world, but that's different than assuming that's the will of the American people (as the American government pisses off plenty of Americans as well).

* Just an FYI for non-Americans: the term "college" is the US is used a synonym for "university". Almost no one in the US says "I'm going to university" or "I went to university". Students at fancy schools still say "I'm going to college at: Yale|Harvard|MIT|Berkeley" etc. There is no prestige distinction between the term 'college' and 'university'. (Traditionally a 'university' is a collection 'colleges' and at the university there would be the 'college of medicine', 'college of education', 'college of science', 'college of fine arts', etc). However "Community" colleges are typically not degree granting institutions.

-=Raistlin

"Community" colleges are typically
not degree granting institutions.

I agreed with all of your post but this.

Community colleges award AA or AS
degrees, which are Associate of Arts
or Associate of Science degrees that
basically allow someone to attend a
university & earn BA or BS degrees.

Green,

Ahh, you're right, I'd forgotten about those. The reason I brought that up is that in Canada if you say "I went to college" people believe you went to a non-degree granting institution akin to a trade school or community college. Canadians use the word "University" the way Americans do "College". Canadians use the word "college" to refer to what Americans might call a "community college", although in Canada I don't believe there are AAs or ASs. (or if there are I haven't seen them.). Since Canadians hold a significant difference in prestige between a 'college' and a 'university', they'll think less of school you went to if you say 'I went to college at...'. It took me some time living here to figure that one out. And to this day I've never heard an American say "I went to university at..." or "I'm going to university" or "I'm a university student". (Additionally, transferring credit from a community college to a 4 year degree granting school is often quite easy in the US, even across states.)

This is interesting to me as I know many people in both countries and this particular linguistic difference has never been addressed. Most Canadians who hear an American say "I went to college" believe that American went to an institution inferior to a "university"... in fact they'd believe you went to the US 'community college'.

Education is a little different here, in Canada, as well. In the US students take the SAT, colleges and universities are certified by an accreditation board, and courses and grades are often, relatively easily transferrable from one school to another. The US also has many different educational institutions even in a small city including a mixture of public and private schools, whereas in Canada there are a few schools in each province, they tend to be large, and there are very few private schools.

Transferring grades or courses in Canada is quite difficult as each province sets it's own standards. For instance, a student who takes a course in Ontario and moves to British Columbia may well have to repeat that course in British Columbia as the school doesn't believe the Ontario course was up to par with British Columbian standards. (and vice versa). The common argument is that since there is no standardized test, such as the SAT, in Canada, and instead each province has 'provincial exams', each province believes it's exams are the best, hardest, etc and thus believes scores from other provinces to be unfairly inflated.

Another difference is there tends to be more schools (often smaller schools) in the US than in Canada. For example in Portland, OR (population ~600,000), there are several accredited degree granting universities including Portland State University, University of Portland, Marylhurst University, Reed College, Concordia University, Oregon Health and Sciences University, Linfield, Lewis and Clark, Pacific Northwest Art College. (Now that's just Portland, that isn't counting all of Oregon). Whereas in all of British Columbia (population ~4million), there's 9 universities: UBC, University of Victoria, Simon Fraser University, Kwantlen University, Malspina, Okanagon, Quest, Royal Roads, Thompson Rivers, Trinity Western, and UNBC. BC also has many 'colleges', but they are equivalent to American 'community colleges' and universities in other provinces often won't accept transfer credit from them. (and the universities in one's own province may look at them skeptically).

Just a few interesting differences I've noted having lived (and gone to school) on both sides of the border.

-=Raistlin

How does the behavior of the students in class differ?

I find/found many American University & College students
to be rude, apathetic, and basically uninterested and this
is based on my experiences as a student and professor.

However, I am led to believe that the students in other
countries tend to have more respect for teachers and
education in general.

Does your experience match this?

Yo Inzite, how about you?

Any other peeps who have lived in the USA and elsewhere?

Reason I ask is because I am curious what we as a country
can do to improve education. I have some ideas but want
input from others.

In the end, student attitude makes a huge difference!!

Regarding the "college" vs. "university" distinction, my experience has overwhelmingly shown that outside of the USA, the term "college" refers to some sort of 1-2 year degree granted by a technical institute, trade school, or community college. It specifically does not refer to an accredited university, or what most Americans consider a "four-year degree program". At least, that's the way it is in Russia - there's a big distinction between saying you went to "college" and saying you went to "university".

It's taken me a long five years to get used to this, and to this day I'm the only American I know of who actually says "I went to university" or "I was a university student".

Regarding students' attitudes towards education, my observations have been mixed. In Russia, for example, in some ways students are better than in the USA, and in some ways they're worse.

On the one hand, students in Russia have less of a social safety net to support them if they don't earn a degree, so the ones who are motivated to learn generally take their studies much more seriously than those in the USA. Society has simply forced them to grow up faster, whereas university students in the states are effectively kids in young-adult bodies.

On the other hand, Russian standards regarding honesty and fairness are much lower in the educational system. Students regularly buy grades, cheat on exams, copy their homework, etc. etc. etc. Of course, this happens regularly in the USA as well, but the level of cheating in the USA is several orders of magnitude lower. In Russia it's simply accepted; it's part of the system. Whereas in the USA a lot of students, teachers, and parents don't tolerate cheating in any form.

Overall, I don't believe Russian students are on average better or more mature than students in the USA. The majority are just as lazy, hedonistic, and (un?)talented as the majority of American students. However, the 20% who take their studies seriously take them VERY SERIOUSLY, and are light years ahead of 95% of American students. Put another way, there is little difference between the mean Russian student vs. the mean American student; however, the distribution of Russian students is heavily skewed by the 20% that really study their asses off.

One resource the USA and Europe (and Australia/Canada) do have, however, that is not present in Russia and most of the rest of the emerging markets, is an excellent educational system in certain specialties. It's no secret that most of the best business schools are located in the USA and Europe. Most of the best finance programs are located in the USA and Europe. Most of the best medical schools are located in the USA and Europe. Many of the best law schools are located in the USA and Europe.

For a Russian interested in earning a master's degree or PhD in finance or business administration, there are no legitimate options in the CIS - you have to go to a western institution. While there are a lot of programs available in the CIS, the material they teach has almost no use in modern financial markets or business. By and large, only western institutions provide an education that provides a good introduction to modern business (although I suspect there are probably a few respectable programs that I don't know about in the Middle East and Asia).

I'm by no means an expert in any of the above, and I'm sure more worldly posters will tears some holes in the statements above.

P.S. Another linguistic distinction between American English and the rest of the world...globally, the word student usually refers exclusively to someone studying in an institute of higher education. In Russia, for example, a student is someone age 17+. In the USA, the word "student" can mean anything from someone in kindergarten all the way up to someone earning a PhD.

During the long three years it took me to earn a
two year master's degree in applied economics
there were a total of 65+ student enrolled.

Only 8 of us got degrees and out of them only
four were American, 1 Chinese, and the rest
were from Azerbijian, Khazastan, and Russia.

Side note - you coming to visit soon?

Sarah Palin's kids commuting all the way from Alaska to take your course has probably pissed-off a few liberals in this country.

Yeah, I always find myself utterly surprised at the sheer stupidity of many students in my classes, during discussions and whatnot.

It's also very unnerving to hand in papers that I think are terrible only to find I've gotten the highest grade in the class.

That doesn't always mean anything, but to think that something that isn't even my best is better than 30 other peoples work is just sad. And University has felt like an extension of high school. It's not just community college that is the 13th grade. In my classes instructors will consistently extend due dates, give out points for tests, give extra credit and things like that just because people don't try.

I just got a 93 on a test for Film History that got 5 points just added to it because other people didn't finish, or did poorly. One guy I know got a 44. You pretty much have to try to do that poorly.

But whatever. I have been called an over-achiever. But I find it troublesome that kids will have their parents pay thousands, or pay themselves, to go to school and then waste it. It's like many people have decided to ignore the world around them, because seriously, anyone who can't name two North American countries is pretty retarded.

Green,

I think this is a difficult question as it's hard to compare apples and apples. The students from podunk community college in podunk, USA as compared to the students at the "Big State School" of most of the US, as compared to the top schools in the US (the Ivy League, etc) are likely all different in quality and caliber. The science machine with the MIT degree who goes on to John Hopkins Medical School is likely one of the best students you'll encounter, as opposed to the guy who parties hard at the big state school, graduates with a C+/B- average. However, that isn't to say that the top percent of the community college or state school aren't good students, but given the cost differences in schools in the US, it definitely creates some limits for certain individuals.

A few other notable differences between the US and Canada is that in Canada grading varies from province to province. Some provinces report your final grade as a percent out of 100 (for example your final grade in a course may be 88%), others use the A-F model, although modified. In British Columbia, 85-100 is an A and 80-85 is an A-. Whereas it was almost universal in the many schools I attended in the US that 90-100 is an A, 80-90 is a B, 70-80 is a C, etc, etc, etc. With pluses and minuses being given at the upper and lower edges of the range. So a BC student may be elated to get an 80 on a test, as that represents an A-, whereas the listening American would think said student just skirted a C+. Additionally, how do you compare the students in both countries? Take the top students from both countries? Take the best from McGill and University of Toronto against the best from Harvard and Yale? In what specialties? What about specialties like law school, medical school, etc? Or do you take high school graduates and compare them against each other (given that there's no standardized tests in Canada, Canadians can't objectively compare students between provinces...). I'm not sure how one would realistically compare the two.

The behavior of students, in my limited experience is generally universal. Some are focussed on their academic success, others are attending because someone told them, when they get their degree some employer will pay them 40% more money (or some such number... makes you wonder why employers hire anyone with degrees if they could hire someone without one and pay them 40% less... but that's another topic.). Some have little qualms about cheating, some don't attend classes, some are intentionally belligerent to the professors, and most are frustrated with the bureaucracy they have to deal with.

The major difference I've found in my experience is the US educational system seems much more flexible and human than the Canadian system. For example, when I enrolled in a Canadian school they demanded I take the TOEFL (Test of English as a Foreign Language) test because I was an 'international' student. (Nevermind that the majority of the textbooks in the bookstore were written by American authors and published in the US (including texts on CDN history...)). Despite having been an English major in the US and completed several 300 and 400 level courses, (and having AP credit, and having maxed the writing sample on the MCAT) they demanded I take first year English. The list goes on, and my stories are not unique by any means. The rigid bureaucracy of the schools I attended here is immensely frustrating. As opposed to schools I attended in the US, where a conversation with a professor, dean, or department head along with transcripts always meant I could advance my education by enrolling in interesting and challenging courses, instead of having to take lower level courses that I already knew the material to.

They're just optimizing for different things: the smaller number of larger schools adhering to a strict set of rules (however annoying they may be) does, in fact, produce a highly consistent type of student. Therefore Canadians can have high confidence of what a CDN degree represents. Whereas the US system has many more schools of varying sizes that are all certified by the same accreditation board but may have radically different standards, aims, goals, and focuses and tends to find ways to help students transfer courses, grades, etc so students can move into appropriate courses and move on with their education. Just the number of different schools in the US leads to competition between schools which forces schools to provide a high quality product/service, whereas in Canada education is basically a state run monopoly. Some people feel one system is superior to the other. The competition in the US leads to people claiming one school is 'better' than another, with private schools often being considered more prestigious. Whereas in Canada (or at least BC), the general culture views private universities as somehow inferior to the state run public ones.

Further is the issue of financing education. In the US, student often apply for FAFSA, then lots of loans, scholarships, etc and tuition for the student tends to be much higher than in Canada. The difference being that in Canada the tuition the student sees on the university bill tends to be much lower than the US, but taxes in Canada are much (much!) higher than in the US. (if you consider annual provincial and federal taxes, then add up all the things like PST/GST, etc if you're making more than $80k CDN in BC (Alberta is an exception), you're likely paying ~50% of your salary in taxes)). Taxes fund the universities to a much higher tune than they do in the US, which gives students a lower tuition cost. The schools need about the same amount of money, but in Canada the tax payer bears much of the tuition burden, whereas in the US, the student bears the majority of the tuition burden. Is one more fair than the other? People disagree in both countries.


-=Raistlin

teachers attitudes suck too, don't just blame the students

I completely agree, attitude of both
the students and the teachers make
a difference in the learning process!!

there is no way to force someone to learn. thus a motivated student can overcome a casual teacher much easier than a motivated teacher overcoming a casual student.

heck, we have a thread here challenging a potential newbie to work for his answers! if he really wants it, he will find a way.

you make solid points, but possibly forgot a big one.

the stupid questions come from the students, at these institutions. the higher quality institutions probably have a ton of stupid questions as well.

(you focused on those folks who graduated. I doubt those asking the questions regularly get degrees!)

Not so.

A good teacher finds a way to reach their students. It's the reason they teach. They engage their students and create an environment in which the student wants to learn.

A talented teacher wants the challenge of changing a students attitude toward education or a specific subject. If they became teachers to teach only the motivated, exceptional children then what's the point of being a teacher.

I think we are talking about higher education here, your describing basic grade school teachers.

Have you read "The Last Lecture"?

I do believe Dr. Randy Paush of Carnegie Mellon, who was a professor of computer science qualifies and exemplifies what I am talking about.

Teachers "educate", "enlighten", "inspire" and "motivate" regardless of what level they are employed at in the education of students.

Hmm, I'm curious what you mean in this case. I wasn't particularly focussing on those who graduated or didn't. In my own experience I was largely dealing with undergrads (those who had not yet graduated), and while there is certainly some attrition, I'm not certain what the delta is. As to those who were asking questions, I'll have to raise my hand high and say that was often me. I think I asked more questions than most of my classmates in any given course. Strangely most students would -not- ask questions and that seemed to be a general source of frustration for the professor who was often hoping the closing statement of one of their paragraphs would invite questions. (This seemed to be true in both countries).

In my own experience I can't really speak to those who graduated as I haven't done any post graduate work (at this point), although I did graduate with two undergrad degrees (B.A. and B.S.) So I'm not sure what you're getting at in terms of the relationship between those who asked questions and those who earned degrees.

Further in my own experience as an employer (entrepreneur since the age of 19, hired my first employee at 20, and several afterwards) I can say from my experience in the software sector that that all my employees who had degrees performed worse than those without degrees. Is that to say the trend is the same throughout all sectors or even all companies in software? No. But it has been my experience. Give me the hacker who's been at it since he was a teenager, didn't see the point of a computer science degree, taught himself some good coding, got involved in some open source projects, secured himself an internship somewhere and did well... I'll take that guy any day over the 22yo CS graduate who's resume involves a few class projects in an academic environment (unlimited time, unlimited resources, specs that don't change, and projects the relate to this week's lecture). So while I'm willing to share my experience in the world of academia, I'm not yet convinced that the generally accepted equation of:
degree = smart
no degree = not smart
is really applicable. As an employer and member of the local business community (at least in software) I can say that no other employers I dealt with cared one way or the other about formal education. They simply wanted to know if they could put X dollars into you and get some multiple (greater than 1) of X out of you. Employees are supposed to be money machines: the more you put in, the more you get out. When they cease to be that, employers start looking for under performers and weed them out.

Strangely the question of "what is a degree for" is a hard question to answer. Given the cost in terms of both time and money, it best have some kind of financial payoff. So many educational institutions find themselves marketing the financial benefits of formal education. They also find themselves trying to stick to their ideals that post-secondary education is a determining factor in whether or not someone is "educated" or "smart". Personally, I have a hard time swallowing that one. I know too many people with degrees I consider morons, and too many people without degrees I consider brilliant. As to financial success? Well, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs (Reed College drop out (from Portland, Oregon, mind you))... the list goes on.

Sadly, though it seems hard for those who invested the time, effort, money, and faith in academia to believe that there can be smart people who don't have degrees. They seem willing to admit it in concept but still have a hard time acknowledging instances of it.

Those who are intelligent, ambitious, willing to take risks, and willing to do something great: will do something great, with or without formal education. Some of them argue formal education is a handy tool to accomplish their goals while others, who march to the beat of a different drum, claim its an absolute waste of time. Those who are not inherently intelligent, ambitious, independent, willing to take risks or internally motivated to do something great often look at higher education as a hoop to jump through to 'get a better job'. These aren't people who would inherently succeed without a degree, in fact the belief that they need one to 'get a better job' is a statement about their level of intelligence, ambitious, and ability to succeed without one.

I have respect for those who have successfully obtained degrees for their commitment to begin and fulfill the obligations to a difficult long term project. Some of the individuals I know with higher degrees are, in fact, brilliant, and interesting people. But, I don't believe their degrees have much to do with that. I think they are simply the kind of people who chose to engage the structure of academia to pursue their goals. For others, that structure is everything from limiting to demeaning, and a terrible environment for their mental growth. History vindicates that many of the brilliant and amazing historical figures had little formal education, and many brilliant and historical figures had lots of formal education. Thus it hardly seems to be an appropriate line to divide on.

However, since mainstream culture values the concept of a degree, and some companies (and most governments) demand one for specific jobs, those who seek jobs are best served by having one. Otherwise individuals have to stay in more fringe sectors, such as software, where the bureaucratic restrictions are a little looser. But confusing societal demand for a degree with the supposition that a degree is reflective of intelligence or ability would be a mistake.

Something to consider.

-=Raistlin

I like what you said.

A person who can not name 2 countries on the North American continent (or other such questions) probably will not succeed at college/university. They probably will not succeed as an entrepreneur. They may find success as an employee.

Motivated, intelligent people will find ways to learn. Some will tolerate teachers, some will not. Thus some find success without a degree. It actually might allow them to "think outside the box" better than following the higher education trail.

All this is why I think the key to learning is found within the student. Driven, motivated, hungry to learn people find ways to make it happen. It is a mindset the will have no matter the topic, and carry with them throughout their lives.

A solid teacher can inspire students, just as TLN stated. One teacher can affect many. Unfortunately, the effects only linger beyond that particular course if the student becomes motivated and driven.




ps
just found an interesting editorial on the subject.
David Brooks piece

Have You Ever Taught?

If Yes Please Give Background.

Calvin19, thank you for pointing out what I
thought was obvious by the thread name

I have taught a variety of subjects to people
of all ages including children, full grown adults,
and college kids who qualify definitely as 'Other'.

Whether it's Martial Arts, Swing Dance, Economics,
Skydiving, or a particular Software Application the
students who show up and give half a shit always
learn more than those who have a bad attitude!!

and again, Have you read "the last lecture"? You obviously are not the same caliber of teacher as Dr. Paush was or his colleagues or my best friend that holds a doctorate Education.

Instead of making jokes about your students perhaps you should try opening their eyes to the world they live in and how they can make a difference.

The education system is failing, nothing funny about it.

I think you're oversimplifying the problem, though.

The educational system is failing, but that's just it. The SYSTEM is failing. Accusing teachers working within the failed system of not being the same caliber as a teacher who, through terrible personal tragedy, out grew the system is unfair. Sure making fun of stupidity isn't productive, but he just needed to vent. Everyone does.

There can be a big difference not just in individual students but entire classes. My peers in the Fine Arts program right now are being hailed by our professors as the best they've seen in a long time. Students will only let teachers open their eyes to the world if they are willing to let their eyes be opened, and sadly, in many places, that doesn't happen. Dr. Paush and his colleagues were lucky enough to be working at a school that probably had a majority of students who didn't just want a degree but wanted to LEARN. They were WILLING. Just saying that a teacher fails if the students don't learn is just inaccurate.

Even in classes with the most dedicated, inspirational and amazing professors people WILL be slackers, and stupid. Because entire educations are not on the shoulders of single teachers. Before GreenMachine these kids failed to learn anything from twenty or more other teachers. If twenty other teachers could not teach them, how can he?

I'm not saying I know anything about GM's teaching style or whatever. But your blanket statement was, imo, too black and white.

But I agree with your sentiment. There's something wrong with the foundations of the system, but that starts in preschool.

He can be that one teacher/one person that makes the difference.

Just because twenty other teachers failed, doesn't mean you give up trying or caring. And I am not speaking to Green in particular as I don't know how his students would evaluate him as a teacher.

Dr. Paush found ways around the system to foster his personal goals and those of his students. Proving where there is a will there is a way. The cancer didn't make him a better teacher, it ended his teaching career and finally his life.

I think in many ways the statement that "Google" has dummy downed everyone is true. Why remember all the states or countries when if you need to know you just Google it? It's like people who can't make change without the cash register. They learned to do math by using a calculator and are unable to think on their own in what should be a simple task.

There are teachers that teach in the worse conditions, in the poorest of school districts and make a difference. Being a professor at Harvard doesn't deem you a great teacher, there are great teachers throughout the educational system.

The question is how do we keep them teaching, how do we attract more of the same and what do we need to do to provide them with all the resources they need to teach in their classrooms?

it's a trick question. there is only one country on the north american continent, North America!

http://www.sporcle.com/games/northamerica.php


How many countries of North America (which includes Central America and the Caribbean Islands) can you name? Type a country into the box below. If you correctly name a country, it will show up on the map below.
You've got 10 minutes after you hit the start button.

Agreed.

Teachers must provide instruction to as many as possible in their classes. Sometimes that means they can't focus on the extreme students, but on the middle segment. There is simply not enough time to give all the same consideration. The fringes will fail to get the "quality" time they need. It matters not if they are above or below average.

Dr. Paush created an exceptional, incredibly popular program. The video I watched described an amazing course that stunned Dr. Paush to see some student's creativity.

Popular programs permit administrators to try to accept only the best and brightest.

IIRC, Dr. Paush even discussed having trouble teaching and benefiting greatly from his mentors. Obviously his first students did not benefit as much as his later students. And, the special program he developed rated EVERYONE. They created graphs and charts on each individual. Some appeared quite lacking, even under Dr. Paush's tutelage. ('course that was in comparison to their classmates. Still, I doubt Dr. Paush reached everyone equally.)

there are 7 different ways to learn, as postulated from the studies of educating military personnel quickly during WWII. the least effective of them all was lecturing. the most effective of them all are donald duck cartoons.

i find David Perkins' concepts of learning to be very interesting, particularly since it challenges the notions of what IQ is. He helped start Project Zero at Harvard. His belief is that there are several forms of intelligence, not one.

No, I have never read anything by Dr. Paush or your friend.


Just as off topic, have you read Bukowski? Dostoevsky? E.F. Schumacher? Dan Poynter?




Probably not, since those people have been doing it much longer than I have, however, I don't suck and you have nothin to gage my skill as a teacher so, umm, yeah how about this: [edit of frustration/vulgarity/possible PA -- wwarped]



As for the other points, I agree lecturing puts people to sleep so I use a mix of approaches, I start each class asking kids about them, their weekend, things they heard in the news, etc. I explain that college used to be a place where smart people came together to freely discuss ideas so that everyone left the room smarter including the teacher.



All of my assignments are optional and include fun things such as: listen to NPR for an hour and tell me what you heard, any of it relay to economics, watch one of the hollywood movies on my list and tell me about the economic concepts you noticed, compare the variable cost of operating your vehicle compared to any 2 other vehicles, what is the opportunity cost of you attending college compared with whatever you would be doing if you did not go to school, pick 3 other states you would like to live and compare the cost of livings compared to where you live now, why are they different. etc.

Almost all of the professors on campus use number 2 pencil bubble tests, my tests are taken in pen and require the person to write words.

I tell kids in my class to avoid using the word Like and follow it up with I rather you use the F-word than the L-word.

You don't know me!!!

I personally think discussing the educational system is part of the problem. I have always noted that the parents who emphasize education end up with better educated children.

Virtually all the high achievers in all my studies had parents who expected they do well. The parents ensured the students did their homework. The parents provided the individualized attention that students need, but teachers have trouble providing.

Thus discussing "the system" ignores one of the best ways to ensure kids are educated. Parental involvement. (and really, who wants "the govt." to raise their kids anyway?)

Opps someone has his panties in a bunch.

Actually the only teaching I have done was in my high school honors program my junior and senior year. I taught Montessori pre-school.

My counselors and teachers had hopes that I would do as they planned and attend the University of Notre Dame . I threw a wrench in all that when I decided I rather travel about the country instead of being tied to any further schooling.

As Illinois has programs in place now to "fast track" professionals into teaching positions I suppose if I really wanted to teach I could get off my butt and do so.

Oh! Oh! I did!

I didn't like it.

When i was 14 and 15 I taught kids how to swim. It was the most nerve wracking, unrewarding experience of my life. The kids didn't pay attention. The parents yelled at me when i focused on the kids who were bad at swimming instead of their darling little Olympic angels. I was constantly worrying that a kid would drown. (And then I became a Lifeguard and it got worse.)

It is extremely difficult to balance helping the ones who suck at it with keeping the ones who are actually good interested. Luckily I never had to give homework, but the worst part was judging the kids. Giving grades is very difficult. It's not like any teacher WANTS their students to fail.

So then all the kids without parents are screwed.

For me, my parents stopped making sure I was doing my homework very early on, around the 6th grade, I'd say. And maybe it was just because I would do it whether or not they told me to because I love to learn. Yo, Calvin, what was your experience with the parental units?

Oh, in that case. I coached boys little league baseball for 5 years.

I was a corporate trainer for 6 years.

And I was a mentor to physically, sexually and emotionally abused boys in a state home for 3 years. Talk about children that get left behind.

We still have the issue though, that although we have taught, were we ever teachers in the career sense? No. No we haven't.

Montessori Pre-School entails all aspects of teaching. Although I didn't get paid for doing the job, I did the job and was graded on performance as if I was student teaching.

but no I haven't earned a degree in education and been employed to teach.

only if they fail to have someone who cares for them. a caring sibling, aunt, grandfather, step parents, etc. they all work.

it really helps to be either extremely self motivated or have someone set high expectations. it is not actually mandatory.

"Never try to teach a pig to sing. It sounds terrible and irritates the pig"
--Mark Twain

I think the old adage here is akin to "you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink." In general you can put students in a classroom, (and in most countries it's mandated that children under a certain age be in school), but that's different than forcing them to become educated. A student isn't simply an automaton for a teacher to manipulate the controls to. No... students are individuals just as much as you or I, with all the idiosyncrasies and nuances of any individual. The aim of teachers is to implant concepts and ideas into the minds of students, and their employers and the law have placed very specific restrictions on the methods they may use. This is a heavy task placed upon teachers, and until one has walked a mile in their shoes I find it hard to criticize their efforts (even professors I've found intolerable and horrible, I'd approach with the understanding that I do not have significant experience on their side of things.).

Given that teachers are competing with students who spend the majority of time playing video games, watching TV, being bombarded by advertisements carefully crafted by writers, psychologists, and large corporations to hypnotize them into buying whatever it is they are selling (products, services, ideas...), it's a tall order to tell a teacher who has a resistant or apathetic audience to not only put ideas into these individuals' heads, but to make it appealing to the student. Also given the size of classes does the teacher teach to the most advanced students? The slowest? The average? In any case they're leaving someone either struggling to keep up, or they're frustrating smart people, or both.

Teachers often can't choose their students, they are simply handed a motley crew by the administration and expected to use their magical talents to charm the students and 'make them smart'. And they're supposed to it in accordance with the ideas of the school, government, and PTA, all the while being told how their hands are tied to accomplish these goals. Now, I'm from the software sector which is basically an unregulated sector. There are very few laws about what I can and can't do by virtue of the nature of my industry. Education on the other hand is a highly regulated industry with laws governing who may teach, where, when, how, etc. For those who haven't worked in a highly regulated industry this is probably very difficult to comprehend.

Further, teachers are human beings too. However, unlike most any other job, they are on stage in front of a critical audience most of the day. At any moment students, parents, other teachers, administrators, politicians, etc may lodge complaints, investigations, audits, etc of a teacher and their career may well be the line for petty problems. People become very petty and aggressive in their pet battles with the educational system. Henry Kissenger said it best when he said "University politics are extremely viscous precisely because the stakes are so small.". I can say that in my limited experience, I've found this maxim of his to be accurate.

It's one thing to have been a student and to sit back and criticize how a teacher could have taught you better, it's another thing to take the task of teaching everyone in the room well. It's one thing to have stood up in front of a group of people and taught them something for awhile, it's another thing to work in the educational system, where you have to become board certified, find a job, work within the constraints of that job, join the teacher's union, etc, etc, etc. I can't say I know a lot about the details of being a teacher, and each state/province has its own laws, but the teachers/professors I've known have let me know, it's anything but simple.

Lastly, in my limited experience, becoming a teacher isn't a road to riches. Nor is it often a road to prestige. It's a labor of love, pursued (mostly) by those with high ideals and intentions. Sadly the bureaucracy and restrictions of the educational system, students who are products of modern culture, and frustrations with failed attempts to teach do burn out teachers and drive them to a sense of bitterness. (This is true in many sectors, but teachers affect many people all at once, whereas a burned out software developer or factory worker tends influence machines more than humans). So teacher burnout/bitterness is quickly noticed, and criticized by, at a minimum, students, and at most administrators. However, given the teacher's unions, and lack of opportunities in other sectors some teachers feel 'trapped' in their current jobs. And while the pay is a little lower it can afford a comfy lifestyle: summers off, pensions, benefits, etc. (of course, they're always fighting budget cuts, at risk of being accused by a child of something nasty, etc, so it balances out).

So overall, I have to say, it seems that being a teacher is a challenging job. I'm not sure how to measure success either. A 'great' teacher might be able to effectively 'teach' a room of misfits, although could they teach a room of misfits, scholars, apathetic students, motivated hardworking students, all at once? How often do we say "that's a bad teacher" without considering the context of the students? I'm curious if most teachers are about average and people are really commenting on the caliber of students in the class.

Just some thoughts.

-=Raistlin

I like the well thought out post. I'll add two quick points regarding primary education.

- some of the students are smarter than the teachers. sure the teachers might know more, but students can sense when they are sharper than the person standing in front of them.

- I remember some teachers thinking socialization is far more important than mere grades. they felt it was their civic duty to produce good citizens as well. There is a lot going on in a classroom!

That is so true. I teach people everyday skillsets that will allow them to survive in many ways. From paperwork, awards, finance, areas of law, combat, mentor, counselor, etc..

Biggest thing I have learned, is that no 2 people learn the same exact way. For me, some people are easy to figure out their learning style, others, well they are leadership challenge. Some people just are a box of rocks and you have to tell them everything "barney style" with crayons.

How do I measure success? I have to be able to say that I will fight with this Person/Soldier in Combat. If I can unequivicably say yes, then I have done my job.

Trust me it isn't easy either; people come from all walks of life, from the althletic and motivated, video game couch potatoe, to the hood rat hoochy mama. Some do not want to be here, some were "forced" (highly encouraged) by their family unit, and this is just one of my challenges.

What I am learning and am continuing to learn is that life is not in a fixed state. We must learn to flow and stay moldable. If we stop learning, if we stop changing or become resistant to change, thats when things can become "difficult."

Raistlin/SkyDaemon - wow dude, great post!

Wwapred - yeah, smart kids notice slow teachers.

LeroyDB - I agree with your yard stick, if I taught someone
to skydive a good measure might be would I take them on
an 8 way? if I taught someone martial arts a good measure
might be would I want them on my side in a fight, etc.


Now back to the mine field that is the modern, sue happy,
American college classroom... I have no real power over
these kids, I can not even make them repeat a word...


Monopsony - a market with one buyer, price tends to be
lower and consumption higher than a competitive market
due to the use of market power by the sole buyer.


Alright, simple concept for most of us here who are smart
enough to huck our meat at the earth and still live again
and again but to the addled brain of 19 year old who is
suffering from cell phone withdraw it can be a bitch.


Knowing this AND knowing that people learn in different
ways I write the word on the word, I suggest they write
the word in their notes, I briefly explain the word, then
I say the word and have the whole class repeat it cause
if you can't say a word you tend to forget it. Then I
give them the friend/bar room version...


Think of the movie "Walking Tall" starring the Roc where
he comes home to find his one horse town being owned
and run by a rich family...

Or think of rural area where 80% of everyone in the town
works for The Mill and the other 20% all have jobs related,
such as I am a barber and I cut the hair of the people who
work at the mill, etc.

Hence a market structure like this one would give the sole
prominent employer huge power and tend to manipulate the
market to their advantage with lower price and larger quantity
of labor consumed than if it was a competitive market.


So this young bitch would not repeat the word...

I asked why, she replied why should I? Cause it helps to learn
how to say it and remember it, she replies, I don't want to.
So I point at the door and she leaves the room with 3 minutes
left till class ends, 3 minutes later my boss is there with this
student asking me why I did what I did and giving me shit.

Thats what I like about my job... I have many tools at my side to assist in the learning process, smirk, but you can only teach those who want to learn is something to note.

That being said, I have people over me asking my why I do what I do.... I think as long as I break no laws, the method shouldnt matter as much as the end state. Is what I am doing getting the wanted end state? So what If I teach CBA or ABC, as long as the students know the alphabet is ABC, should it matter as long as the endstate is met.

Green,

Thanks :-) I have some level of sympathy on both sides of the equation. At this point in my life I've spent the majority of it building and running tech companies, avoiding academia like the plague. However, in recent years I've made some career choices that are taking me back into higher education and I'm coming to terms with what that means.

Stay tuned though, on May 15th, I should have some interesting news, one way or the other ;-)

Hope all is well!

-=Raistlin

Nice attitude.

Maybe she didn't feel the need to repeat 3rd grade and play repeat after me with the teacher.


Yeah, I am sure that your pleasant personality & attitude shines through and they all can't wait to come to your class.

It's a fact that we remember 90% of the things we say or write, but only about 50% of what we see and 20% of what we hear. My numbers may be off, but you get the picture. Having a student say the word is being a good teacher.

I also doubt that Green was standing there screaming into her face "SAY IT, BITCH!! SAY THE WORD!!!"

He doesn't have to be screaming it in her face.

As he said himself,
If he refers to his one class as the "dimmest", someone's 19 year old daughter as a "bitch" and that he has "no power over these kids, he can't even get them to repeat a word", then maybe, just maybe, as SkyDaemon pointed out, "Sadly the bureaucracy and restrictions of the educational system, students who are products of modern culture, and frustrations with failed attempts to teach do burn out teachers and drive them to a sense of bitterness. So teacher burnout/bitterness is quickly noticed, and criticized by, at a minimum, students, and at most administrators. However, given the teacher's unions, and lack of opportunities in other sectors some teachers feel 'trapped' in their current jobs."

Thus, he just might want to evaluate his attitude and if teaching is the career choice for him.

He called her a bitch on an internet forum, long after the point where she had a tizzy () and ran off and... bitched... to an administrator about the whole thing. That can't possibly reflect on his attitude in the classroom in any way.

If he's reading a post about dumb students, and sees a parallel to a student of his, he can call her a cock-hungry crinkleclitted bitch all day long to us today and still go to work tomorrow and sincerely try his damnedest to get her to rub her two brain cells together hard enough to make a spark.

An indicator that he might not be "burned out" would be how much economics I've learned over time from simply reading a BASE forum

Back on topic, Raistlin makes some damned good points. In my own experience in running a website business, I've never, ever, EVER been asked if I had a degree, neither by my own clients nor even when being hired part-time with a firm to take care of overflow work. I've also occasionally hired part-timers straight out of high school with no degrees who really knew what they were doing.

Yet, I have friends who are now graduating with related 4-year degrees who can doodle some pretty designs, have ImageReady generate some HTML and make a website out of it, but who don't know the first thing about actually writing (modern) HTML. Never mind all of the other "details" that may have been briefly mentioned in passing by their professors such as web servers, scripting, databases, search engines, marketing, copywriting, traffic, e-commerce, SSL, mail exchange, things that are all required material for somebody who is expected to have an all-around understanding of the web. These people can now be effective only if a) they work for a company which employs people who possess the skills and knowledge that they lack, or b) they stick to doing very basic projects until they figure the rest out on their own, starting four years late.

One friend of mine is now making $8/hr with his $80,000+ graphic design degree and comes to me for help with things that my "un"educated friends in the business would consider pretty basic.

again in his own words,



Whose the professional and who is the 19 year old? Perhaps if he had talked with her after class instead making a case of it in class, she wouldn't have felt the need to have his superior call him out for it. He got into a pissing match with a student. Repeat the word or get out of my class? Come on.

Answer this Ghetto.

A 19 year old student who is paying for her education refuses to say a word out loud in class. The teacher then tosses her from class because she is undermining his authority and refusing to do as he asked.


Two 19 year BASE jumper's, jump an illegal bridge. The NP ranger nabs one of the jumpers. The ranger tells the jumper to give up the name of the other jumper who has gotten away. The jumper refuses. The ranger then arrests the jumper for not responding and ignoring his authority.

What's the difference? The 19 year female student basically told Green "fuck you". In the world of BASE she would be celebrated for telling an authority figure the same.

As for "he can call her a cock-hungry crinkleclitted bitch" all day.

You like statistics, read up on how abuse against females starts when the male society lowers it's viewpoint of females. So when would it be wrong for a male to "name call" and speak "derogatorily" of a woman? Maybe when your baby nieces are being called "bitch", "whore", "cunt", because it's an accepted attitude you'll see the difference.

2 things

you may be good at writing words, but your dictoral/speach/argumentative techniques are lacking something.

Mr Green is not who you make him seem like. I know him in real life to be slightly ecentric and an outside of the box thinker (there is no box)

I ask you to please, when you respond to a post, please take out your dislike of him.

just use facts and take the emotion out.

I am still trying (albeit not much) to figure out what your purpose is? Are you going to be the savior of BASE jumping by bring all the lemmings, redbull, regular guys, etc... all together in harmony or something?

 

again his own quote.

I am not making him out to be one thing or the other. He demonstrates who he is with his own statements and words.

Let's check, has Leroy ever asked Green to "take out his dislike of Tizzy" when responding to a post. Nope, never happened. Double standard. Fail.

Strange huh? I mean look even you took the time to comment. Go figure.

"He demonstrates who he is with his own statements and words"
You don't know him, you've never met him, and all you know is bs you've read on an internet forum, but you claim to know who he his from his "statements and words" Get a clue!

"Let's check, has Leroy ever asked Green to "take out his dislike of Tizzy" when responding to a post. Nope, never happened. Double standard. Fail."
Obviously Leroy has never seen the need to ask him to withdraw his emotion from his posting in the way that he (and I) sees it in you!

This started as an awesome thread that I enjoyed reading and has made me a more worldly person, but it is really going downhill.

[image]http://demotivateyou.com/wp-content/gallery/demotivational-poster-gallery-1/1064434.jpg[/image]

heck, it seems people here can piss each other off! most appear to be from the US. any wonder about the our ability to upset the rest of the world?

Agreed. I was going to say something about how Green's attitude to the girl on the forum, after the event is no indication (positive or negative) of his attitude in the class, or how we only see the tiniest slice of the picture here and don't know if she was previously setting herself up for it, and I was even going to make the argument that both men AND women get "name-called" all the time, regardless of social status.

But it's not even worth arguing, so the only posts I will make in this thread from here on out will be ones that are relevant to the very interesting and thought-provoking subject of the general state of higher education in America that was just getting good before the Battle broke out about Green's student, whom we know nothing about and for all intents and purposes might have literally begun shitting in her hand and slinging it at him before the ejection (3 minutes before the bell). Or maybe she's a perfect Angel and Tom is a sexist Nazi with a temper as thin as Calvin19's hair. Those of us who have met him know that not to be the case.

All I know is that I really need to work on my run-on sentences lately

Burn.

Anyway, I have a hard time believing, based on speaking with others around the world, that our POTENTIAL education in the US is inferior to anyone elses. Because at the end of the day I think learning is ENTIRELY IN THE STUDENTS HANDS. If the teacher doesn't teach well, find a tutor. If that doesn't work, read the books. Research deeper.

In Japan, kids have to apply to highschools. Even before university their institutions are selective. I'm not sure how well this works, as I only ever interact with the more proactive Japanese students (the ones studying abroad, or living here), so it's not a fair judgment of their system.

But one problem I find with the American system is that so much is placed on the teachers shoulders.

I support GreenMachine's action in making the student leave the class. If she is not going to participate, why go to class? It's just counterintuitive to enroll in a class that she's going to be passive in. She's the exact kind of person I typically find aggravating. I would equate this more to a BASE jumper seeking out a mentor, and then refusing to follow the mentor's instruction on packing or something.

I think that THAT attitude is more what's making people pissed at America. The "why should I?" attitude. Not in law abiding, but just in everyday life. "Why should I pa attention to where I'm going? Other people will move." "Why should I keep an eye on my belongings? The establishment should be, not me!" Etc. etc. That's why hotels tell you they're not responsible for your stuff.

In my opinion, there are some great systemic
differences in Japanese primary and secondary
education compared to how we do things.

School Days
America - 180
Japan - 243

School Attire
America - whatever
Japan - Uniforms

My buddy taught English there for a year
and the wife and I visited him for 3 weeks.

Their entire society is much more organized
and polite than ours, even in the way they
use their cell phones in public, w/o yelling.

"I was even going to make the argument that both men AND women get "name-called" all the time, regardless of social status." ...Ghetto

And this makes it alright? Perhaps, what pisses people off about America the most is our desensitization.

Try this one, if you constantly use the word "like" in sentences then eventually it becomes part of your standard vocabulary. If you take the attitude that "name calling" or "looking down upon others" or that "things are hopeless", eventually it becomes part of your attitude.

Annibal stated that , it showed up in the thread regarding paying a bill in Switzerland. Obviously the jumpers in that area didn't take to the notion of "fuck it, don't pay for the rescue". Some wondering why anyone would consider not paying the bill.

Dave and Ghetto, you need to get a clue..."Just because twenty other teachers failed, doesn't mean you give up trying or caring. And I am not speaking to Green in particular as I don't know how his students would evaluate him as a teacher."

That was a statement I made earlier in the thread...however you all keep bringing it back to "why you picking on Green?" Green made the thread about himself when he shared his personal stories, you continue to make the thread about him in trying to justify him.

As for Leroy asking me to keep my emotions out of it, I don't give a shit about Green. Do I respond to his digs at me on the forum. No. Did Leroy tell Green to ever get his emotions in check? No. Even though the moderator had to remove a inflammatory, personal attack remark from on of Green's own statements on this thread towards me. Again, "attitude check".

Ghetto points out that this is just an internet forum, no big deal, so what if derogatory statements are made towards men or women. Yet, he also claims he has learned a great deal about economics on the forum and Dave says this thread made him more worldly. You can't have it both ways. It's either a forum where comments can be considered throw a ways or it's an example of attitudes expressed towards society in general.

How well do you know Green? How much time have you spent with him in his daily life that you have all this insight? I don't imagine very much at all, but you draw you conclusions based on perhaps jumping with him at Bridge Day, a social event or from the exchanges on the forum.

 

Please do tell, "what list?"

As our only common friend is Calvin19, I will be sure to ask him too. Perhaps he can enlighten me as to what you are speaking about as it must have come from him.

Do you have a copy of said list?

I propose a new poll:
TizzyLishNinja pissing everybody off

you are on a BASE jumping forum cupcake. Harden the fuck up.

PS and trust me, I am in no way trying to defend those 2 homos Ghetto and Green.

You say that now, but when I needed your vote against BASE75, you wasted it on Sangi.

base75 is mildly entertaining, but more than anything else - HE IS (was) A BASE JUMPER.

Sangi has no jumps, barely has enough skydives to get an A license, yet he comes in here and gives advice. Kind of like you :)

What advice have I ever given regarding jumping? For that matter what advice have I given at all?

Perhaps I like pointing out how idiotic people are, oh wait that's your interest.

You apparently think I post everything on here. I did, contrary to your statement, talk with mr green on this very topic.


I have spent plenty of time other than Bridge Day with Mr green and our associates...

Thanks to all you Goodfellas who stuck up for me!

OMG, that's funny.

Magic?

Just when I was betting that this thread couldn't get more inane then it already was, you score a gold star.

I can't top that comment. That's classic.

I'll have to add it to the list I have and am circulating to all my base jumping friends and whuffos alike. ***rolling eyes***

***scratching my nuts***

 

And you know I am a whuffo because you know so much about me?

You are so pompous it's amazing.

Post Script: and you call yourself a kids riding toy, do you have a friend called Big Wheel? Dude you are as lost as an easter egg in June. Get a grip.

we are feeding the biggest BASE Troll ever... She is feeding off of this... I am crackin a few of my psych books open for this case....

Ignore the troll!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XG5UQ5mb5ZQ


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJu0VW8RiuY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sG7MVjaIITM
this one I am developing into a bigger trick...

Nope I was wrong, it just became more inane.

Teaching is an interesting profession. It's one in which society grants it's children, its youth and its future to the hands of the idyllic teacher who holds an archetypical role in the human condition. The teacher is the individual who instills the student with knowledge. This is a beautiful and sacred relationship dating back to the dawn of human existence. The wisemen and the sages were pillars of ancient communities, the philosophers and teachers of Ancient Greece served as examples for how knowledge could be developed and disseminated. From the library of Alexandria to the Internet the world has thirsted for knowledge and people to teach them the ways of the world. From the teacher/student relationships of the Greeks, the guilds/apprenticeships of the Middle Ages, to the Industrial Revolution and popularity of universities the world has valued and sought to improve the methods by which individuals can become educated.

Given the population explosion of the past few hundred years the need for well educated people has become a source of competition among nations with each nation eagerly willing to pit it's most elite intellects against one another. National pride becomes invested in its educational system, and governments and societies alike flock to develop the 'best and brightest' to serve the common good (well, at least 'their' common good). Thus governments and societies look to their public education systems to answer the call for the smartest and best educated citizens it can find.

However it's a twofold call. Society demands the best students, who will become the leaders of industry, academia, government, military, medicine, law, business, etc, but most importantly teachers who will improve upon the existing knowledge base, educational methods, and ability to more quickly create smarter, more motivated, educated, and patriotic citizens. However society demands that the the future leaders of their nation be taught values and ideals that in line with the current ruling party. Academia is a government institution which is highly regulated and controlled to produce a very specific kind of result through very specific methods. Each country has its own standards and vision for the profile of their high school and university graduate and does its utmost to ensure students learn whatever is necessary to match that profile.

However, students (grade school, high school, and university/college) comprise of a majority of the nation's population. Government (in many cases) is only a small minority of the population. In order to meet the educational demands of the populous individuals are hired to teach students the values, information, and goals of the current ruling party. That isn't to say that the current government designs the syllabus or chooses the textbooks or designs course outlines, but they do, nevertheless, exert control over the methods of teaching, the certification process, the schools students may or may not attend, etc and thus education has become a highly regulated sector.

So who takes on this job of public service? Who decides in their heart of hearts they wish to become an educator? Who gets fingerprinted, passes board exams, gets their teaching certificate and opts to become someone who is going to advance the causes of education? Is it you? Maybe... I can say it's not me. <shrugs> My aims and satisfactions lie in other areas, but there are those who have decided to pursue their academic endeavors to earn Master's and PhDs (often 5-10 years of post secondary education) and instead of entering industry remain in academia with the altruistic aim of creating the nation's 'best and brightest'.

Well, as I've stated before, these idealists are often met with a rigorous and difficult set of restrictions, a mixed bag of students from different backgrounds, motivation levels, and levels of manners and respect for the educational institution they are in. This not only varies from country to country, but from school to school. Go sit in on a class in one school and an analogous class in a different school and you'll see what I mean. And then (to truly expand your perspective) do so in a different country... I found significant differences in all categories of both teaching, learning and profiles of both teachers and students. (And if you really want to add chaos to the mix, check out the early morning class versus the night class...). It's anything but an easy task to take a class in hand and proceed with a lesson plan and expect the same words to have the same affect on multiple classes. Teaching is a game of adapting rapidly to the circumstances you've been given. You never know what to expect that day. Students are often engaged in the most difficult and growing times in their lives. The phrase "Oh yeah, I experimented with that back in college" is almost cliche, but it attests to the distractions students undertake during this time in life. There isn't a instruction book written that reasonably explains how to adapt to the psychology of a class of students and teach them given their various states of consciousness, experience, understanding, motivation, interests, etc. It's an interesting challenge, and I, personally, wouldn't touch that task with a ten foot pole. But, I'm glad there are those that do (even if I vehemently criticize those who I believe do it poorly). It's a daunting and difficult task.

--

<sighs> Sadly all professions have their downsides. It's almost a cliche among those in the armed forces (Semper Fi!) to complain about the burdens of military life, a ritual among factory workers to complain about the inaneness of their daily chores, a sacred right among the proletariat to voice their grievances to anyone who will listen. For some, life is a rose garden, however for the majority life is anything but. Hence the success and eternality of Beckett, the English Romantic Poets, the Russian Romantic writers, Heinlein's complaints about the military, etc. And teaching is no exception. The teachers lounge is no doubt full of fun comments about great students in class who presents smart questions, interesting dialog, a clever solution, or an interesting observation that the teacher hadn't considered. It's also equally likely to hear the frustrations of the day: the projector that wouldn't work, the xerox machine that was jammed, the students who misbehaved, and the administrator who demanded yet another pile of paperwork. <shrugs> It comes with the territory. All professions have their den of commiseration, whether it's the teacher's lounge, the PX, (or BX, if you're Air Force), the coffee house, an internet forum, the hospital cafeteria, or what have you. Workers come together to celebrate the beauty of their jobs and to complain about the hardships. This is simply part of the human condition and to pretend it isn't is ludicrous.

Now. There is a sense of professionalism. The individual in technical support does not tell the caller that they are an idiot for calling to complain that email isn't working during a power outage. The doctor doesn't tell the diabetic overweight patient with a bag of McDonalds in their hand that they're a moron, and the teacher doesn't tell the lousy student that they're a waste of space. This is unprofessional conduct and isn't tolerated in mainstream society. However, in the dens of commiseration these are exactly the stories that are being swapped. Your tech support technicians sometimes want to wring your neck and tell other tech support technicians about your idiotic call, doctors DO, in fact, sometimes want to kick your ass for being an idiot and tell other doctors this, and yes... yes... teachers sometimes tell others about students that infuriate them. This is part of being human. To deny that you have the same impulses (or have commiserated in an analogous manner) is a lie. It's almost a staple part of the answer to the question "How was your day at work, dear?". The client who calls tech support, the patient who sees the doctor, the student in the classroom all pay the salaries of the professionals they sometimes infuriate. They are all someone's child, they are all human beings, and if you're prone the particular kick, they are all God's children: but that does not make all their actions intelligent, useful, or excusable. Sometimes people are ornery, stubborn, and useless. <shrugs> That isn't to say they are always that way, but they can fall into those habits. If you don't believe me, go volunteer at the hospital emergency room for awhile.... see who comes in and for what and how often... you'll see.

"Tough Love" is a bit of a lost art... many governments have outlawed it. Being told in no uncertain terms that your actions will have dire consequences and your current path is leading you astray is an important message to hear and it's paramount in BASE. Many lives are saved by harsh, strern, and sometimes cruel words spoken by individuals with wisdom and concern for their fellow jumpers. Those harsh words are a very sobering experience and can instill a strong sense of boundaries and limits for individuals who lack them. The same principle applies to other professions, including teaching. Telling a student that they, in fact, falling to learn, subverting their own education and, in so doing subverting the education of those around them. However, most governments have removed this tool from teaches' tool box and tied their hands from extending such 'tough love'. Then again, Roger Waters complains at length of the effects of 'tough love' in the British educational system in Pink Floyd's "The Wall". Is the trade-off worth it? It's an interesting question.

Nevertheless, given the intense restrictions placed on teachers in their highly regulated environment, it seems utterly unreasonable to remove their right to commiserate about the hardships of their jobs. Teachers are public servants and unlike most professions each and every word and action they take is heavily scrutinized by various agents. If Green wishes to complain about experience he's had in his classroom to a forum of comrades in a recreational sport, unrelated to his profession, it seems reasonable to allow him to do so. He hasn't violated the privacy of his students by naming them outright, and isn't making a point of the inherent value of his students, but rather is illuminating the challenges of his profession. <shrugs>. If I'd walked a mile in his shoes I might well feel the same way. Until I have, I'm going to reserve judgement on taking away his right to criticize the details of his job... as I would with anyone who wished to commiserate about their hardships of their life.

However, it might be time for Green to consider if teaching is really the career he wants to pursue (after 15+ years in the tech sector I'm finding myself ripe for a career change). Perhaps, teaching lacks the intrinsic reward it originally had and the negative aspects outweigh the positive ones. I would encourage him to evaluate that on his own time and make an intelligent decision about his future. As I would anyone in a career they found frustrating. BUT there is a difference between venting steam and lasting frustration with a career.

It's important to vent. This is why dens of commiseration exist: to allow the pressure to be released in a safe and sane way. I've seen what happens to people who 'bottle it up inside'. They become subject to the hydraulic principle. The pressure builds and builds and builds and if it's not given a path to escape, it begins to come out of any place it can find, often places that aren't related to the source of the pressure. If someone is holding everything inside... well, chaos ensues. You ask the drive-thru cashier for extra sauce and they explode in a rant about how their ex-husband stole everything and that the kids loved them best, or the US postal worker comes to work with an AR-15 with an auto-seer. <shrugs> It's not that you did anything wrong, you were just in the wrong place at the wrong time, and someone became subject to the hydraulic principle.

This is what BASE is for many people. It's a release. It's a way to release stress, problems with their identity, problems with their life, and problems with others. It's a way to cope with being who they are. Is it a healthy one? Well, that's for each individual to decide. We all jump for our reasons, but I've certainly met my share of individuals who jump to release the pressures of their lives. For some it takes many jumps, for others, one is enough to last a lifetime. The answer to "Why do you BASE jump" is a very personal answer. Some people know they answer and are open with it and will tell you the first time you ask, other's know the answer, but won't tell you the -real- reason they jump, and some don't know the reason, and may or may not tell you anything.

So why do people teach? It's likely not for the money, the fame, or the glory, it's likely for something else. Maybe they know, and maybe they'll tell you, but it's a part of who they are. Like many professions, few people just 'fall into it', it's a labour of love, and it's pursued by those with an unbridled passion for what it is. It's easy to criticize where they've erred and could have done better, it's easy to spot the mistakes they make and call them out to the audience, it's easy to despise them for their flaws, but they still remain the cornerstone of developing your nation's interests, their ideals, and their future leaders.

So even while Green (and others) may have strong criticism for some of his students (and perhaps the educational system in general (or is that just me projecting?)) he continues to go to class each day, to put on his nice clothes, and to stand in front of a room of students and do his best to build them into your nation's tomorrow. He doesn't do it for the fame, the money, or the fringe benefits... something else motivates him to do it. It'd be interesting to know what it is.

Just some thoughts from 2am in Canada.

-=Raistlin

+10.

"So even while Green (and others) may have strong criticism for some of his students (and perhaps the educational system in general (or is that just me projecting?)) he continues to go to class each day, to put on his nice clothes, and to stand in front of a room of students and do his best to build them into your nation's tomorrow. He doesn't do it for the fame, the money, or the fringe benefits... something else motivates him to do it. It'd be interesting to know what it is."

You keep mentioning the poor pay. Where does your data come from?

http://teacherportal.com/salary

From the TeacherPortal.com site:

Average Salaries for Teachers

Teacher Salary Table. Years Experience and salary rangesTeaching has traditionally been seen as a career that is not financially lucrative. When you look at the facts about teacher pay, however, you will see that teachers around the country are making a good living doing something they love. Add in great state benefits and teacher pensions and you have a secure career with a secure retirement that is not dependent on social security.

I have over a dozen friends that are teachers at all levels in the education system and pay is not their biggest complaint. Lack of opportunity to help students following by the wayside and lack of resources are their biggest grips.

I have a friend that teachers in the New Jersey school system and earns 68 grand a year teaching health to Kindergarten's. That's a nice chunk of change and the summer off.

Just because most teacher's biggest concern isnt their payment doesnt mean it still isnt an issue. I think one of the reasons teachers have the rep of not getting much pay is they get much less than those in other professions with similar years of formal education.

Of course it's an issue. As is finding teachers to teach in areas where the pay isn't at the high end and the school is run down, the support is minimal and the students are under privileged and complicated with issues.

A friend taught at one of the worse schools in Chicago, he purchased supplies for his students who came to school without, he was constantly breaking up fights between students, he had weapons pulled on him, his junior high students were drug users, prostitutes, gang members. He taught because he loved teaching and if he reached a student and helped turn their attitude towards education and life around, it was worth all the headaches. He was at the opposite end of my friend in Jersey.

So, yes when someone complains because an adult student wouldn't say a word in class, that his students frustrate him because they are "dim", well I say "boo hoo".

I do not think I've complained about my pay...

There is good money to be made in the private
sector as an economic and business consultant.
I chose to work in this capacity because I love
the subject, enjoy teaching, and the time off.

Nonetheless, teachers have expectations of students
based on the endeavor... I expect a bit of freaking
out by first time jumpers. I expect a lack of focus
when working with children, etc. teaching a college
class I expect college behavior.

However, at this point I would like to be removed
from the discussion and perhaps let the focus go
back to what can we as concerned citizens of this
country do to foster better education at all levels



Oh, and Tizzy, sorry about my remarks last night.
You are right, I do not know you, you may have
good intentions and thousands of jumps.

http://www.economist.com/...KEN=69437412#tuesday

AS THE Economist’s education correspondent, I’ve been invited by Economist Conferences, one of the businesses in the Economist group, to chair a conference in New York entitled “Global Education 2020”. It’s just one day, but if I’m going to make the trip from London, I may as well stay longer and visit some schools. Those in the city’s poor neighbourhoods have long been known for having serious problems—violence, astronomical drop-out rates and abysmal standards of achievement—but in the last few years exciting things have been happening under Joel Klein, the chancellor of the city ’s department of education, and I want to see some of the success stories with my own eyes.

  those that can, do... those that can't, teach.

What do those that can't teach do?

The cliche answer is "administrate"

-=Raistlin

Nice