Kids are better off at college/university than in high school.
The government is spending money on a pointless concept that teenagers can learn from high school. Guess what, it doesn't work that way.
The only thing that teenagers learn from high school is how to forge friendships and how to avoid being bullied.
Instead of teenagers going to high school, they should go straight to college or university. In University, there will a majority of smart and open-minded people. There will also be more people who will accept you for who you are.
Let's keep going.
High school education:
Mathematics: algebra, pre-calculus, trigonometry, sequences and series--all of which you can easily learn from a book. Thus, you should just go to college to learn this.
Physics: dynamics, kinematics, energy, momentum, etc--again, easy to learn from a book. The formulas are in the book--learn the formulas and your exam will be easy.
Chemistry: molecular structures, moles, equilibrium--way too easy.
Biology: plant diagrams, animal diagrams, male and female reproductive systems--work on your memorization skills and you'll receive and A, easily.
Information Technology: basic HTML, Java, C++, VB, adobe photoshop--honestly, do I even need to note how easy this is?
English: essays, analyzing poetry, writing poetry and reading--too easy. I learned most of my English from writing dozens of essays. Teenagers can do the same before the transition from elementary school to college.
Okay, I outlined a few of the major academic school subjects that you learn in high school. My point? Building a high school is pointless and is a big waste of money. I think society is too judgemental. They completely underestimate the mind of a teenager in development. That's why I propose a new plan--skip high school and go straight to college or university. A social life can easily be achieved over time while at university or college.
High schools are pointless. Students should go from elementary school to college or university because you learn far more and the government doesn't have to waste money on non-profit organizations (high schools) that keep sucking up funds.
Hah, eat that. That's my quick solution to the current economy.
Last edited by BuezaWebDev; 08-13-2004 at 12:30 AM.
I hated the entire school system whilst I was in high school. I had no problems with the students, the actual methods of educating students was the problem.
I dropped out of high school at the end of year 11 and got straight into a Diploma of Software Development. Now I am 2 years ahead of my school buddies.
Oh yer, there is quite a few young kids who went to uni/college at the age of 10.
They are savont's -- normally extremely talented in certain areas and almost completely incapable in others. For example, one kid can look at something for about 5 seconds and then go away and paint it with perfect accuracy, though, he cannot catch a bus... Its a strange phenomenom.
I agree high school was utter **** the teachers couldnt teach let alone handle the classes. I got chucked about hald way through 4 yearthis will be different becuase im scottish for others)then i went to college got my highers in IT and Computing then a HNC in Web Dev. Im off to University this year but im not relishing this becuase last year at college all they taught was how to create a inaccessible invalid table based layout with dreamweaver in design view but then i found here and seen the light
Im learning with books and web tutorials like ALA, i got to go to 6th form the higher education of my school to do A levels but im dropping out once i get all this web stuff down.
They messed me about saying i probably wont be able to do A level in I.T because I didnt do GCSE I.T, which was because they didnt let me change and forced me to do R.E . And at 16 I seem to be the only one with a career path set and doing something about it.
Im trying to learn everything as fast as possible and now at the moment doing PHP.
Just so you know, I completely disagree. One cannot say that one could learn 5 different subjects from 5 books overnight. There simply doesn't exist the time. One would need extensive practice, and moreover, reinforcement to retain the knowledge one has gained.
There is simply no way one woul learn this way to benefit future studies in any topic one attempts to learn.
Mathematics ... you forget Calc. in there, which requires much more than reading to learn (experience). One must not just read the skills, but learn to understand, and understand to master them.
Your 4 different listed sciences listed are much more complicated than you make it look. Physics is more than formular. Physics includes applications to other sciences as well. Chemistry is much more than molecules and moles. Anyone else want to explain '86 or '79, or should I do this since I spent time learning, instead of bookreading.
Biology is much more than simply reproduction, and diagrams of animals and plants. What about bacteria, the human body, macromolecules, biomes, bioaccumulation? Should we just ignore all of these bio topics?
Computer sciences may be the only one you will thrive with a book, so I won't provide arguments against that. But realisticly, they teach you with books, and reinforce the topics of teaching through examinations and skills, which is two moe things than one can do by simply reading.
You can't say either way is right or wrong. Everyone is different and thusly needs to learn in a different way. Personally school drove me crazy. I learn fast in scientific and mathematical subjects, application and manipulation of logic and so on is all second nature to me. So when I apply any newly gained knowledge in a practical way, in a "real world" situation just a few times it's as good as learned and I will only need to go back to brush up very occasionaly. My literary skills on the other hand have always left much to be desired.
The feelings of "Woah slow down a little" in English class and "For the love of god I learned this 5 weeks ago! Would you quit repeating this sh** to me and let me learn something!?" in other classes were familiar ones.
If I had have been allowed to swap the time they wasted repeating stuff I already knew to me for anything up to 6 weeks for extra time learning stuff I wasn't as good at, or just let me move on ahead in the stuff I did well in and liked, I'd have been a much happier chappie. But then schools have to be a "one size fits all" kind of thing because they are compulsory for everyone.
I suppose, since I go to a public (in the English sense; private to Americans) school, my experiences are obviously going to be different to many people's. However, I have found school very good. I've learned a lot more than just basic facts that I could have learnt from a book, and am doing my A-levels next year. Although the few compulsory subjects, e.g. IT, could be a bit boring, the others went fine and next year I will take 5 A-levels - French, Maths, Further Maths, Physics and Computing. Personally, I like the education system in England, I found it really... educational.
Originally posted by steelersfan88 Just so you know, I completely disagree. One cannot say that one could learn 5 different subjects from 5 books overnight. There simply doesn't exist the time. One would need extensive practice, and moreover, reinforcement to retain the knowledge one has gained.
There is simply no way one woul learn this way to benefit future studies in any topic one attempts to learn.
Mathematics ... you forget Calc. in there, which requires much more than reading to learn (experience). One must not just read the skills, but learn to understand, and understand to master them.
Your 4 different listed sciences listed are much more complicated than you make it look. Physics is more than formular. Physics includes applications to other sciences as well. Chemistry is much more than molecules and moles. Anyone else want to explain '86 or '79, or should I do this since I spent time learning, instead of bookreading.
Biology is much more than simply reproduction, and diagrams of animals and plants. What about bacteria, the human body, macromolecules, biomes, bioaccumulation? Should we just ignore all of these bio topics?
Computer sciences may be the only one you will thrive with a book, so I won't provide arguments against that. But realisticly, they teach you with books, and reinforce the topics of teaching through examinations and skills, which is two moe things than one can do by simply reading.
... I hated high school
I see where you're coming from. Yes, different people have different ways of learning. While in senior Chemistry class, most of it was mole calculations. Redox reactions was the most difficult section because of the timespan. We had exactly one week to finish a whole section before studying for final exams. It was harsh.
That's why I'm saying, skip high school while at the age of 12 and learn straight from college.
Oh yeah, about Physics, I do agree there is a large portion of it that is conceptual, but formulas guide your thinking. For example, (this is high school physics) it is clear that a ball thrown straight up will have a final velocity of zero at the top of its trajectory. Thus, the formula (V(final) = V(initial)at + 2ad), you substitute in zero for Vfinal and everything becomes so much more easier. It's a matter of using the formulas to guide your thinking. By the way, that's as high of education that is taught at senior high school, then it goes on to electrostatics and magnetism, which has a lot more theoretical study to it. And yes, you can read it from a book, then picture it in your mind. Well, that's how I assimilated concepts. Assimilated. Last night, I watched Star Trek: Voyager.
Okay, you have to agree that there are a lot less mannered and less intelligent people in the teenager population. So, why not just eliminate high school and implement polytechnic schools for those who aren't bookworms?
People who learn from practical studies => polytechnic colleges/universities at age 12 (after elementary school)
People who have an affinity for book learning => colleges/universities at age 12 (after elementary school)
People who don't want to study and want to work at McDonalds => rot on the streets. Although we cannot forget about these apathetic people, with the money that isn't spent on creating high schools can be put into special learning.
**EDIT**
Calculus isn't taught in high school; it is taught in first year university. Pre-calculus is taught in high school.
Last edited by BuezaWebDev; 08-13-2004 at 03:45 PM.
Originally posted by BuezaWebDev **EDIT**
Calculus isn't taught in high school, it is taught in first year university. Pre-calculus is taught in high school.
That is where you are wrong. I remember in HS I took Advanced Algebra II freshman year, Advanced Geometry sophomore year, Advanced Pre Calc, and then Adv Calc BC (650+ on SATs). I didn't have to take Trig. at all. That's one reason I am a Dr. not a Mr.
well if it weren't for high school, i might have never gotten into HTML, and probably never have found this site (be that good or bad)
Yes, I'm a supermoderator. I'm not an administrator, but I like to pretend that I am. I have my own little administrator cape that I like to wear while I browse the forums.
Reply With Quote
Assimilated. Last night, I watched Star Trek: Voyager. 
Bookmarks