and in a bizarre twist, toronto offers segregated schools ag

[Tikker]

you're nitpicking for the sake of nitpicking mart

[Martrae]

No, I'm coming from a position where I've worked with various curriculum over the last 4 or so years and I know how even ones on the same subject can differ in scope and sequence.

[Gypsiyee]

Gyps stated that learning needed to be uniform across the grades so kids transferring wouldn't have issues. I was pointing out why that would work.

nono, I mean on an semi-annual basis.. not throughout the year, I know that's not feasible. you don't earn credits toward your diploma except on a per-semester basis (at least where I was) so people who transferred in the quarter would be okay, they could still earn that credit, but if their past years weren't sufficient it meant shit-all.

Each semester, I believe you should have to have covered x, y, and z. I don't care how you got there or what extras you learned along the way as long as you got the necessities in. That is what should be uniform, imo.

I certainly wouldn't want a robot teacher who's not going to help my kids get where they need to go, but even more I don't want my kid to do all this work for a year, shit happens and we move, go to another school and he/she's delayed graduating for a year because the schools didn't cover the essential material depending on what state or city you're in.

[Martrae]

That's just the thing, Gyps, even by semester that wouldn't work. As an elementary example, the one math program I have only teaches single digit addition and subtraction for the entire 1st grade. Sure, it's slow, but by the end of the year they know those math facts solidly.

Another one teaches addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, fractions, percentages and time. These same topics are repeated in the next grade and the next grade, each time building a little bit more on the basic 1st grade foundation.

BOTH are valid approaches to teaching the subject they just chose different methods of getting kids to 'own' the topic. How could you divide what would be required by semester with such disparate ways of doing things?

[Gypsiyee]

I think we're on two totally different wavelengths atm

In your example, what I'm saying is that x goal has to be reached by the end of 1st grade. So, you need to know addition and subtraction by the end of 1st grade. If you're building on that, great - it'll help in 2nd grade. By the end of 2nd grade, you should be well versed in addition, subtraction, and simple multiplication and division. If you want to add stuff for those who learn quicker during 2nd grade, wonderful, as long as you know x and y well.

I look at it like a house

When someone is looking for somewhere to live, the very basic every single person needs in any scenario is a bathroom, somewhere to sleep, and somewhere to store food. Bigger families need extra bedrooms, extra bathrooms, bigger kitchens, etc. Each need is different here, and you add on specific to each individual situation, but no matter what situation you're in you have a universal need that has to be filled.

As you get farther along in your life, your basic needs increase, which is just the same as grade levels - you might want extra amenities and that's totally cool, but you still need your bare minimum requirements met.

[Tikker]

No, I'm coming from a position where I've worked with various curriculum over the last 4 or so years and I know how even ones on the same subject can differ in scope and sequence.

no, you're nitpicking

I don't care how the individual school decides to teach math, as long as by grade 12, the student is competent at it

[Lyion]

In your example, what I'm saying is that x goal has to be reached by the end of 1st grade. So, you need to know addition and subtraction by the end of 1st grade. If you're building on that, great - it'll help in 2nd grade. By the end of 2nd grade, you should be well versed in addition, subtraction, and simple multiplication and division. If you want to add stuff for those who learn quicker during 2nd grade, wonderful, as long as you know x and y well.

What happens to the kids who haven't met goal X. Do you simply keep them back?

What do you do with the people who finish 4th grade X in the second grade. Do you just jump them up to the 5th grade? What if someone is 4x in math but only 2x in english?

What happens if 1/2 a class is very advanced, and 1/2 a class is barely passing? Is it fair for those two groups to be competing in a grade?

Our schools are generally one size fits all. What we need is options, choice, and competition. Unfortunately, as was mentioned every child will not turn into an Academic or excel or like school. However, the goal is to maximize the potential of the most kids, be it in learning trades, learning advanced math & science, or just getting out of school so they can work and live.

If I ran DOE, the first thing I'd personally do is remove grades 11 & 12, and graduate all teenagers at 16. Then allow them to go to a trade, prep, military, or just work if that's their preference. The only reason we have those grades is to have more teachers paid to provide daycare to kids who are practically adults, and yet still coddled and often times suppressed.

[Zanchief]

If I ran DOE, the first thing I'd personally do is remove grades 11 & 12, and graduate all teenagers at 16. Then allow them to go to a trade, prep, military, or just work if that's their preference. The only reason we have those grades is to have more teachers paid to provide daycare to kids who are practically adults, and yet still coddled and often times suppressed.

That's actually a really good idea. They could bridge students into apprenticeships right from high school. It might give some of the more manual kids something to look forward too.

[Martrae]

No, I'm coming from a position where I've worked with various curriculum over the last 4 or so years and I know how even ones on the same subject can differ in scope and sequence.

no, you're nitpicking

I don't care how the individual school decides to teach math, as long as by grade 12, the student is competent at it

Is there some reason you're jumping on me today? You're not bothering to actually keep up with what the conversation between Gyps and myself is about, you're merely attacking me. I'm discussing the problem with placing standards on students who transfer schools. Try to keep up.

To address your 'not caring', it's misguided to worry that the kids learn xyz without worrying about HOW they're going to learn that. Sure you can set all the standards in the world but the schools are the ones that'll have to implement them and if you haven't given consideration to how it'll actually work in practice then you have no business trying to set rules.

[Gypsiyee]

What happens to the kids who haven't met goal X. Do you simply keep them back?

err.. this is why there's summer school

What do you do with the people who finish 4th grade X in the second grade. Do you just jump them up to the 5th grade? What if someone is 4x in math but only 2x in english?

no you don't just jump them to the 5th grade, I'm not sure what you're talking about here. kids jump grades all the time, but it's only when they've demonstrated that they're past the entire grade's learning ability

What happens if 1/2 a class is very advanced, and 1/2 a class is barely passing? Is it fair for those two groups to be competing in a grade?

This is why there are advanced classes.. Lyion really, this is kind of silly, especially for you - did you read anything I've posted? Where did I imply we should keep all kids in a one size fits all lesson? All I said was the minimum requirements should be met and if kids need a bit of customization beyond that, great, do it. We had 4 ranks of classes within our school. .one was meant for slower learners, one for the average, one for honors, and then there was the IB ones that I mentioned before. Each one was a totally different acceleration, but there were mandatory requirements for you to graduate and I don't see why that's an issue - I think that mandatory requirements should be universal.. that's my whole point.

If I ran DOE, the first thing I'd personally do is remove grades 11 & 12, and graduate all teenagers at 16. Then allow them to go to a trade, prep, military, or just work if that's their preference. The only reason we have those grades is to have more teachers paid to provide daycare to kids who are practically adults, and yet still coddled and often times suppressed.

I tend to agree with you here - we had a program called VOTECH that kind of addressed this - for half the day kids would go and learn a trade and it was something they could put on their resume.

[Tikker]

If I ran DOE, the first thing I'd personally do is remove grades 11 & 12, and graduate all teenagers at 16. Then allow them to go to a trade, prep, military, or just work if that's their preference. The only reason we have those grades is to have more teachers paid to provide daycare to kids who are practically adults, and yet still coddled and often times suppressed.

That's actually a really good idea. They could bridge students into apprenticeships right from high school. It might give some of the more manual kids something to look forward too.

we have that in saskatchewan, except it starts at grade 9

at the completion of grade 8, you have a choice of attending academic highschool, or vocational, and start learning a trade

[Tikker]

Sure you can set all the standards in the world but the schools are the ones that'll have to implement them and if you haven't given consideration to how it'll actually work in practice then you have no business trying to set rules.

that's just ass backwards

you need to know what level of detail/knowledge of a subject you're aiming at before you can worry about how you get there

[araby]

heh.

I've always wondered why they keep demanding to be equal when they do everything they can to set themselves apart. just shut up and fit in as a person who cares what color you are.

[Martrae]

I'm done talking to you Tikker. You're being an ass just to be an ass. Go home and take a nap or something.

[Tikker]

wipe the sand out and read it again

you're being crusty for nothing

[Gaazy]

Our VOTECH here actually kicks some ass tbh (ESPECIALLY compared to the high school beside it). Theyve got some great teachers and courses there. I took a couple classes in high school. Thats where I used CAD at, learned to read blueprints, stuff like that, even took a welding class. Theyve got full programs set up that you can get welding certified, diesel mechanics, machine work, drafting, masonry, woodworking, can get a 2 year CAD cert by the time you leave high school, all kinds of different 1 and 2 year class systems that go into networking and all kinds of shit, so ours here isnt just manual labor even. The building is damn near the size of the high school. The teachers there actually enjoy what they do, and most of the students seem to also since its all electives and hands on shit. So lots less trouble, more learning

[Lyion]

What happens to the kids who haven't met goal X. Do you simply keep them back?

err.. this is why there's summer school

Great, so take frustrated, underachieving students and push even more school at them. This union mentality is why we have such high dropout rates.

What do you do with the people who finish 4th grade X in the second grade. Do you just jump them up to the 5th grade? What if someone is 4x in math but only 2x in english?

no you don't just jump them to the 5th grade, I'm not sure what you're talking about here. kids jump grades all the time, but it's only when they've demonstrated that they're past the entire grade's learning ability

In which case they have wasted a year, or two, or three with mediocre teachers teaching down to the bottom of their class holding them back. Schools have limited teachers and a huge spread of student talent levels. Public schools have tenured teachers who often don't have the capacity to excel themselves and generally have little reason to be superior in their work ethic.

What happens if 1/2 a class is very advanced, and 1/2 a class is barely passing? Is it fair for those two groups to be competing in a grade?

This is why there are advanced classes.. Lyion really, this is kind of silly, especially for you - did you read anything I've posted? Where did I imply we should keep all kids in a one size fits all lesson? All I said was the minimum requirements should be met and if kids need a bit of customization beyond that, great, do it. We had 4 ranks of classes within our school. .one was meant for slower learners, one for the average, one for honors, and then there was the IB ones that I mentioned before. Each one was a totally different acceleration, but there were mandatory requirements for you to graduate and I don't see why that's an issue - I think that mandatory requirements should be universal.. that's my whole point.

You are missing the point. A school with 1000 students spread out below, at, and above levels with equivocal teachers for them and a set curricula does not allow for wide variance and fast progression and excelling. You don't have the teachers and resources to ensure that the advanced students are reaching their potential, and generally are teaching down to the lowest common denominator. Again, in a school where 20 to 25% of the body are essentially daycare enrollee's with no desire to be there and a poisonous demeanor that can spread to the better ones, it's tough to push people to succeed and to really promote a strong, good Academic environment.

There is little customization and the bottom people are not getting the support they need, plus the top ones are hampered by the parabola that is the general public school classroom, and the daycare school residents who are part of the problem and prevent many from Academic achievement.

I've done private and public schooling, and it's amazing how wide the difference is in the academic achievement and success levels are between the two. There is a reason for that.

[Tikker]

What happens to the kids who haven't met goal X. Do you simply keep them back?

err.. this is why there's summer school

Great, so take frustrated, underachieving students and push even more school at them. This union mentality is why we have such high dropout rates.

what's your solution then?

you can't build individual systems for each and every person

[Gypsiyee]

Great, so take frustrated, underachieving students and push even more school at them. This union mentality is why we have such high dropout rates.

Have you ever actually seen summer school or how it works? The students work very close with the teachers and the teachers are there because they choose to be there, not because they have to do it - they want to help the kids succeed. Summer school does not cause dropping out of school. People who ignore the kids who don't learn as quickly are why we have dropouts, and forcing them all into the same school while someone with their 'my kid is better than yours' mentality takes them and puts them in a "better" school (and by better, I mean snootier) - throw all the kids who aren't as successful in one school and give them specific lower standards, that really helps the self esteem in a critical age where kids need to be taught they have the same opportunities even if they have to work a little harder at it

In which case they have wasted a year, or two, or three with mediocre teachers teaching down to the bottom of their class holding them back. Schools have limited teachers and a huge spread of student talent levels. Public schools have tenured teachers who often don't have the capacity to excel themselves and generally have little reason to be superior in their work ethic.

this is a whole different problem, and has absolutely nothing to do with what you quoted

You are missing the point. A school with 1000 students spread out below, at, and above levels with equivocal teachers for them and a set curricula does not allow for wide variance and fast progression and excelling. You don't have the teachers and resources to ensure that the advanced students are reaching their potential, and generally are teaching down to the lowest common denominator. Again, in a school where 20 to 25% of the body are essentially daycare enrollee's with no desire to be there and a poisonous demeanor that can spread to the better ones, it's tough to push people to succeed and to really promote a strong, good Academic environment.

Uh, I'm not missing the point. Private or public, the IB program, once you're through, provides you credits toward your college years - I'm not sure how that's not accelerated enough. You literally can omit classes your first college years because you've already taken them in high school.. exactly how much harder do you want to push? I had a minimum of 6 hours of homework a night. Look up the program, you can't possibly *get* a wider spectrum than what was offered with the 4 levels of classes. Within the school people were in different classes. I had the same kids in my classes all day because it was a very limited program offered to 30 or so kids in the entire district, the program was only provided at my school. In honors classes it was the same way - you only had classes with the other honors students, less PE and other electives. What classes you were in was completely dependent on what you, your guidance counselor, your teachers, and your parents or guardians decided.

What you're talking about is a one size fits all fishbowl where everyone is thrown in and gets random teachers, but they all share the same exact learning experience and have to work with each other within those classes.. that's how stuff was before honors classes and similar programs were introduced, but it hasn't been that way in years, unless you just live in a really shitty area for education.. which is the problem and is exactly what I'm saying - if things were more uniform, it wouldn't matter where you went to school. The system would put you in the right classes no matter if you lived in California or Illinois.

My high school was great, I thought - in PE or in the halls sometimes I had to deal with dipshits, but I learned how to deal with them and I feel it's vital to socialize with people from many different backgrounds to define who you are. If you put a bunch of the same people from the same background with the same everything in the same school, you're going to have a bunch of mirrors of each other and then you're going to get dangerous uneducated opinions of other people's societies and in the end it's going to be more separation from each other.. theres just no need for that. We have enough of it in the world, and in schools as it is with their separate cliques that they form within the school.. at least they form them with a basis on what they don't want to associate with, if you're dividing them all based on a clique, the real world is going to be a rude awakening

Take Mart for instance - she homeschools her kids, but she has them active in heaps of social activities so they get the full spectrum. If you're enrolled in a school, you're inevitably going to be involved in extracurriculars with that same group of people - if you have certain kids together with little diversity, you're going to get a very, very small piece of the pie.

[Lyion]

An interesting twist in regards to our school discussion

http://city-journal.org/2008/18_1_snd-ed_schools.html

Adding Up to Failure
Ed schools put diversity before math.
Winter 2008

A good education requires balance. Students should learn to appreciate a variety of cultures, sure, but they also need to know how to add, subtract, multiply, and divide. Judging from the courses that the nation’s leading education colleges offer, however, balance isn’t a goal. The schools place far more emphasis on the political and social ends of education than on the fundamentals.

To determine just how unbalanced teacher preparation is at ed schools, we counted the number of course titles and descriptions that contained the words “multiculturalism,” “diversity,” “inclusion,” and variants thereof, and then compared those with the number that used variants of the word “math.” We then computed a “multiculturalism-to-math ratio”—a rough indicator of the relative importance of social goals to academic skills in ed schools. A ratio of greater than 1 indicates a greater emphasis on multiculturalism; a ratio of less than 1 means that math courses predominate. Our survey covered the nation’s top 50 education programs as ranked by U.S. News and World Report, as well as programs at flagship state universities that weren’t among the top 50—a total of 71 education schools.

The average ed school, we found, has a multiculturalism-to-math ratio of 1.82, meaning that it offers 82 percent more courses featuring social goals than featuring math. At Harvard and Stanford, the ratio is about 2: almost twice as many courses are social as mathematical. At the University of Minnesota, the ratio is higher than 12. And at UCLA, a whopping 47 course titles and descriptions contain the word “multiculturalism” or “diversity,” while only three contain the word “math,” giving it a ratio of almost 16.

Some programs do show different priorities. At the University of Missouri, 43 courses bear titles or descriptions that include multiculturalism or diversity, but 74 focus on math, giving it a lean multiculturalism-to-math ratio of 0.58. Penn State’s ratio is 0.39. (By contrast, the ratio at Penn State’s Ivy League counterpart, the University of Pennsylvania, is over 3.) Still, of the 71 programs we studied, only 24 have a multiculturalism-to-math ratio of less than 1; only five pay twice as much attention to math as to social goals.

Several obstacles impede change. On the supply side, ed-school professors are a self-perpetuating clique, and their commitment to multiculturalism and diversity produces a near-uniformity of approach. Professors control entry into their ranks by determining who will receive the doctoral credential, deciding which doctoral graduates get hired, and then selecting which faculty will receive tenure. And tenured academics are essentially accountable to no one.

On the demand side, prospective teachers haven’t cried out for more math courses because such courses tend to be harder than those involving multiculturalism. And the teachers know that their future employers—public school districts—don’t find an accent on multiculturalism troubling. Because public schools are assured of ever-increasing funding, regardless of how they do in math, they can indulge their enthusiasm for multiculturalism, and prospective teachers can, too.

Accrediting organizations also help perpetuate the emphasis on multiculturalism. In several states, law mandates that ed schools receive accreditation from the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE). NCATE, in turn, requires education programs to meet six standards, one entirely devoted to diversity, but none entirely devoted to ensuring proper math pedagogy. Education schools that attempt to break from the cartel’s multiculturalism focus risk denial of accreditation.

Ensuring quality math instruction is no minor matter. The Programme for International Student Assessment’s latest results paint a bleak picture: U.S. 15-year-olds ranked 24th out of 30 industrial countries in math literacy, tying Spain and surpassing only Greece, Italy, Portugal, Mexico, and Turkey, while trailing Iceland, Hungary, Poland, the Slovak Republic, and all of our major economic competitors in Europe and Asia.

The issue isn’t whether we should be teaching cultural awareness in education colleges or in public schools; it’s about priorities. Besides, our students probably have great appreciation already for students from other cultures—who’re cleaning their clocks in math skills, and will do so economically, too, if we don’t wise up.

[Jay]

Ok so let me get this straight. Tikker thinks that there should be a standard for curriculum across the board. Students should know apples, oranges, grapes and cherries by the time they grab their high school sheepskin. Mart is saying, no, there's different ways kids learn etc etc. You have to teach it a certain way. Tikk says, leave the teaching to the teachers, so long as the apples, oranges, grapes and cherries are there by the end of 12th grade I'm ok. Mart says no you can't place the same standard on every kid, ones that transfer from school to school as a primary example. Stop me if I'm wrong here.

I whole heartedly agree with Tikker that yes, kids should have a universal criteria for the level of curriculum they learn before they graduate. How they learn it is not my concern. We pay good teachers for that. If you feel the school system will fail you like Mart and Kahar do, teach them your damn self, but the kids need to have apples, oranges, grapes and cherries by the time they get to the end of 12th grade no matter how they have to get it.

Mart, I don't think you're wrong, but I do think you're on a completely different subject. We're talking about knowledge the kids possess, not method they acquired it. I think everyone can agree that we want our kids to have the ability to perform algebra by the time they've reached graduation. How they learn that algebra you may have a say in but that's not the topic at hand. Personally, I don't care how they teach so long as he/she is keeping up with the class and end of the day my desired result was achieved and no one's rights were violated. Mart, you're preaching on a subject few will understand. Neither Ashley nor myself have kids, and Tikker hasn't taught school to his. You might actually know how to teach your kids. We don't, however, in this conversation it really didn't matter if you taught your kids with books and interactions or with Wikipedia. We don't even know teaching methods except for the ones used on us because we don't teach. What matters is will they know the at least the same as the next graduate at the end of their teenage life and will that knowledge meet the proper standard that hopefully is agreed upon by the people.

[Harrison]

I had 5-6 paragraphs typed out about how fucking horrible public schools are and I decided, "fuck you guys."

I fucking hate every single one of you who had an advanced program of some sort. (Honors, and subsequently AP classes do NOT count. They're a fucking joke and I was in both.)

I wish my family could have afforded a private school for me.

[Tossica]

If I ran DOE, the first thing I'd personally do is remove grades 11 & 12, and graduate all teenagers at 16. Then allow them to go to a trade, prep, military, or just work if that's their preference. The only reason we have those grades is to have more teachers paid to provide daycare to kids who are practically adults, and yet still coddled and often times suppressed.

The truth comes out...

I dropped out of high school at 16, got my HSED and started working full time. I found the institution no longer had anything to offer me. Well... that and the fact that I didn't have a stable place to live with heat, food, etc made school a low priority at the time.

[Arlos]

I suppose I'm one of the ones you hate, then.

As I said before, I went through 2 different but excellent advanced programs. First in Phoenix, then in the San Mateo County school system in the SF Bay Area.

In Phoenix I was in elementary school, and the program I was in let every student in there work at their own pace in each of the differing subjects: math, reading, etc. You got given the same kind of tests that normal classes got, but you got them when you reached that point of the curriculum, not at the same time as everyone else. For example, by the time I was halfway through 2nd grade, I had finished the entire reading curriculum up through 6th grade, and they were having trouble deciding what to do next for me if we'd stayed in Phoenix. Math I was in 4th or 5th grade equivalent, etc. Admittedly, non-gifted kids were in classes that all moved at the same speed, but they DID recognize that that would hold a significant fraction of the kids back, and had the program in place that let the gifted kids work at their own pace.

In San Mateo, what the gifted program did was more supplemental to regular classes. They offered a variety of extra classes and specialized courses you could take, frequently in afternoon sessions after normal class got out, etc., but they did also do some in replacement for regular class as well. For example, in 5th grade in 1980, a bunch of us got bussed 3 times a week to the local middle school which had a computer lab full of TRS-80 model 1's, and we got taught introductory BASIC programming. In 6th grade I got to take a course in introductory symbolic logic, and had the opportunity to take a lot of other classes, but I was lazy and didn't bother.

In high school we had 4 seperate levels for basically every subject. English, for example, there was the AP level, College Prep level, Standard level and Remedial level. So, I think we had a bit more options there than the typical high school would offer. We also had optional classes that we could take, for example one of the AP English teachers offered a early morning (before normal 1st period classes) class in Latin. During Spring Break, the long-time main Bio teacher organized a trip down to the Mojave desert to teach a class in Desert Ecology, where we'd see rock formations, plants and animals, learn how to draw study maps, and more. Plus we got to go into some caves, a real oasis, and otherwise got to see lots of cool stuff while we learned about it. Also, I was allowed to, as a senior, invent my own class, "Independent Study: Pascal Programming", for which I got graded as if it were any other normal class, but worked directly with one of the teachers to work up the course of study, etc.

ALL of these were public schools. My parents both went to Catholic schools here in the bay area their entire undergraduate lives, and then even went to a Catholic university, Santa Clara. (which is where they met). When it came time for me and my brother to be in school though, they had such a dim view of their educational experience that they made sure to send us to public school. The only time I ever was in a private school was in Kansas, where the public school system was indeed a disaster.

Sorry to have rambled a bit, but the point I am making is that despite the doom & gloom people like Lyion & Martrae paint with regard to public education, there ARE quality schools out there. Problems with public education are not the fault of some sinister evil conspiracy by the Dark Lords of the Sith (aka the Teacher's Union), but there are a myriad of factors at work. Yes, bad systems do exist, my own experiences in Kansas speak to that directly. But GOOD places exist as well, in spite of what some here might claim.

-Arlos

[Lyion]

Uh, I'm not missing the point. Private or public, the IB program, once you're through, provides you credits toward your college years - I'm not sure how that's not accelerated enough. You literally can omit classes your first college years because you've already taken them in high school.. exactly how much harder do you want to push? I had a minimum of 6 hours of homework a night. Look up the program, you can't possibly *get* a wider spectrum than what was offered with the 4 levels of classes. Within the school people were in different classes. I had the same kids in my classes all day because it was a very limited program offered to 30 or so kids in the entire district, the program was only provided at my school. In honors classes it was the same way - you only had classes with the other honors students, less PE and other electives. What classes you were in was completely dependent on what you, your guidance counselor, your teachers, and your parents or guardians decided.

Again, my point is a normal public school holds back the talented, and too often drops out or fails the underachieving. It's held back due to the structure of the school, as well as the bottled up start, and stunted growth allowed later due to the current structure of school. You describe it well. I have a child in the public school system so I know it very well in several states.

My honors math class was a great example. I took AP Calculus as a junior and it was a complete waste due to several people who enrolled, but couldn't keep up. Our teacher had no choice due to the union setup but to teach to their level.

You were in the gifted program. How did that correlate to college and your career?

What you're talking about is a one size fits all fishbowl where everyone is thrown in and gets random teachers, but they all share the same exact learning experience and have to work with each other within those classes.. that's how stuff was before honors classes and similar programs were introduced, but it hasn't been that way in years, unless you just live in a really shitty area for education.. which is the problem and is exactly what I'm saying - if things were more uniform, it wouldn't matter where you went to school. The system would put you in the right classes no matter if you lived in California or Illinois.

No, my simple point is the system is flawed and fails the people at the bottom and top too often. I can cite a dozen people on this board who are very smart, but were held back due to the socialistic craptastic setup of school.

Without superior schools for the smartest kids, a revamped system that allows the cream to be with the best teacher, and the challenged to be with the best suited teacher and environment to help them succeed, we'll continue to have a vastly inferior system to most other first world nations.

My high school was great, I thought - in PE or in the halls sometimes I had to deal with dipshits, but I learned how to deal with them and I feel it's vital to socialize with people from many different backgrounds to define who you are. If you put a bunch of the same people from the same background with the same everything in the same school, you're going to have a bunch of mirrors of each other and then you're going to get dangerous uneducated opinions of other people's societies and in the end it's going to be more separation from each other.. theres just no need for that. We have enough of it in the world, and in schools as it is with their separate cliques that they form within the school.. at least they form them with a basis on what they don't want to associate with, if you're dividing them all based on a clique, the real world is going to be a rude awakening

This paragraph pretty much reinforced my points throughout this thread, I think, if you dig deep enough, evaluate it based on the truths of the public school system, and look at where most of the 'gifted' people end up.

High school generally does not prepare one for the college or adult environments, and certainly does not prepare one for how to accurately socialize. If anything, most public high schools are quite the opposite and generally detract from personal and professional growth due to the way they're setup, and all too often the inmates are running the asylum.