Setting: It is 11:30 at night and I have just realized that my Biology and Chemistry homework not only made sense, but also made me excited.
They should not say that there is a difference between a Physical Property/Change and a Chemical Property/Change in my textbook.
Why is it necessary to distinguish between the two at an elementary level if it will just confuse things at a higher level (I assume)?
How can something Chemical not be Physical (Insert irrelevant comment on human attraction)?
How is a Physical property different from a Chemical property?
I think that they're trying very hard to dumb down concepts for us Freshman, teaching the same things since high school; but really, I'm sure, the problem isn't in the information they're presenting. It's in the method of presentation. It's in the tightening of the stomach muscles of every student who sits down with a textbook, or the sweat on the brow of people taking notes and not paying any attention to what they're writing.
School should not be a big deal. It is a readily shared collection of fascinating and exciting concepts.
And yet, it has been conditioned into us from the beginning of our childhoods that school is to be dreaded, to be feared, and, above all, to be hated.
Why?
I could write a three-paragraph essay, all neat and clean and shiny; a relic from my Honors Student days; but this is Rant format. You will be tested on this later.
The media is to blame, at least partially. Every children's show I watched growing up (Save Pokemon) propagated the idea that time spent outside of school walls is "Freedom," a precious window (That is sometimes mutilated by homework) before the mundane indoctrination that will take place the following morning. (See "Recess," "Fairy Oddparents," etc.)
These fictional shows are very effective not only because of the closed-mindedness to lectures, note-taking, and general student-teacher interaction, but also because of their portrayal of the social environment. Humans are social creatures, and through these shows, playgrounds are battlegrounds: they divide the weak and strong and show perpetual conflict and tension.
Think about it: many children watch these shows before they ever step foot in a classroom. Their first impression comes from these ideas and possibly older siblings who complain about this perpetual ordeal they're going through, the hours wasted on homework.
Homework. Now there's a problematic concept. Learning outside of the classroom. Extra brownie points. Scores that add up and fund schools. Homework could be awesome. It could be interactive and exploratory and exciting; it could be looking up the kind of bird that comes to your bird feeder, or helping bake something to practice math. Why is it not so?
Because the schools are too big and have too much pressure put on them. These are commonly explored ideas, of course, so in summary: teachers are underpaid and tired, leaving them little motivation to do extraordinary curriculum (Not to discredit teachers. They often go above and beyond, there is just so little that they can do); with No Child Left Behind, more pressure than ever has been put on test scores, causing schools to panic and insist on longer hours and (Frankly) more boring materials meant for quick regurgitation (Rinse and repeat); and classroom sizes are between 25-35 students to a teacher, meaning that even if a child is falling behind or is struggling, little attention can be paid to them (Easily leading to disinterest).
No wonder American kids are stupid. Fact, not personal insult.
Now, let's look at the part of our education system that "works": the fast-track kids, the over-achievers, the college mass appliers. Here, I am speaking from a personal point of view; thus, a little history is in order.
[[Edit: I'm ******** tired. I'm not writing any more tonight. Funny: if there is an important point in this rant, these next few paragraphs would be it.]]
View User's Journal
Notes
 |
