SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Nikita Bush's career as a public school teacher came to an end when she faced the decision of how to educate her own children. Having been told for years that American public schools would eventually get better for black children, the number of African-American homeschooling parents like Ms. Bush has doubled in little over a decade.
As Patrick Jonsson of the Christian Science monitor reports, studies show all kinds of public school problems disproportionately affect black children, and many parents have decided to take matters into their own hands. Even single parents are forming co-ops to make it possible to educate their children together outside of the public school system.
What do you do when you feel the system is failing your child and their education?
(Score: 4, Informative) by bzipitidoo on Monday August 22 2016, @02:56PM
Has it occurred to you that attitudes of "public schools suck watermelons" and "government is the problem, is to blame", and your lone wolf kind of thinking of doing education yourself and refusing to participate, contributes to the problems?
1) Schools are not the ones ultimately responsible for why sex ed is so bad. That blame lies with society, with all the adults who are too squeamish, embarrassed, afraid, religiously moralistic, or whatever it is, to want to tell it all to the kids straight, and demand that schools not do so either.
2) Nothing wrong with knowing some basic wilderness survival, but let's face it, that knowledge is really not that useful to most people. You say "none of that scientific stuff matters on a practical level", but wilderness survival knowledge does? WTF? As to why survival knowledge isn't too useful, it's that it is utterly impractical for any significant portion of humanity to adopt such a lifestyle. There is not enough wilderness left for that. There never was enough wilderness to support several billions on that lifestyle, we've long since had to move to and intensify farming. Why not instead teach children what the ag business is like? Teach kids how to grow a veggie garden? Wilderness survival is a fantasy, a romanticized version of stone age hunter-gatherer living made much easier with a few choice modern gadgets and a great deal of knowledge acquired through that much maligned tool, science. If I was serious about some wilderness survival, I sure as hell wouldn't bother fishing with a rod, line, and hook, I'd use a net. And, starting a fire by rubbing sticks together? Bull! Use a frigging lighter, at least the sparker, or matches, or sunlight through a magnifying glass. If "be prepared" means that among other things you ought to have a Swiss Army knife on your person, then why not also a few other tools such as the aforementioned fishing net and magnifying glass?
3) Science does matter on a practical level. Science is our best tool for sorting out reality from dark fantasies inspired by fear and paranoia, so that innocent women are no longer accused of being witches, blamed for causing plagues or droughts or other mischief, and burned at the stake, virgins aren't thrown into volcanoes to appease mythical gods, and other uneducated and cruel follies. That some people can still buy into nonsense such as Falwell's ravings that 9/11 was divine punishment for being too tolerant of homosexuals, reinforces the importance of science education. We are completely surrounded by the fruits of our long quest to better understand the world, smart phones that use the electromagnetic spectrum for near instantaneous communication, engines and vehicles and roads that rapidly transport all manner of material vast distances and do all kinds of labor, but somehow people can overlook all that to wallow in silly fantasies about the paranormal, going for palm readings, psychics, astrology (Nancy Reagan *cough*), and of course, creationism.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @05:02PM
You're missing a few points.
1) Sure, schools aren't the decision-makers on what sex education will look like. This is true. Who is? A government agency. You're really just proving his point that the government is successfully buggering schooling for everyone by trying not to offend anyone (and failing).
2) Wilderness survival is about a lot more than roughing it out in Alaska with a beard your axe couldn't cut. It's about knowing how not to be stupid when your car stalled out down a dirt road in Arizona. It's about knowing whether the snake that just bit little Jimmy is venomous or not - and if so, what to do about it (if anything). It's about things like recognising and treating hypothermia in someone you've just pulled out of a river. These are real, practical concerns today, and the fact that they happen to overlap with general wilderness survival skills makes that a coherent skillset worth teaching.
3) Sure, science matters. I'm all for that, both on a theoretical and a practical level, but for day-to-day decisions, I'd actually say that a foundational set of courses in philosophy might have more value. What the hell, get the philosophy of science in there as well, to help kids pick out hucksters.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @06:38PM
3) Sure, science matters. I'm all for that, both on a theoretical and a practical level, but for day-to-day decisions, I'd actually say that a foundational set of courses in philosophy might have more value. What the hell, get the philosophy of science in there as well, to help kids pick out hucksters.
Not GP, and I'd agree that philosophy would also be a good thing, although the philosophy of science is science to a large degree.
But I'd argue that on a day to day basis, science is more important. What kind of light bulbs are going to save you the most money? Should you leave that meat out on the counter or put it in the fridge? Should you store it in an air tight container? Should you get your kids vaccinated? Are flush toilets and fresh water really worth the expense? Should you buy property in Florida with the expectation it won't be flooded in a century? Which is better to use for birth control, condoms?, the pill? , the rhythm method? How about for STD's? Should you wear seat-belts regardless of the legality? Bike helmets? Motorcycle helmets? I could go on all day, but you get the idea.
Science is so ingrained in our lives that we don't even think about it.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Monday August 22 2016, @06:29PM
but wilderness survival knowledge does? WTF?
Where I live, about ten months out of the year, "lost in a park" will kill you in a couple hours, days at most, if you're carefully unprepared enough. Or in an urban environment again most of the year you're in serious danger of heatstroke or hypothermia (often both the same day!).
You might be confusing dramatized reality TV survival (Anything with survivor in the title, Bear Grylls, anything with a fixed blade knife, etc) shows with what the scouts actually work on, which is more along the lines of "don't fall thru the ice into the river" "don't stick hand into fire" "don't work hard and sweat until you faint and die when its hot out and you have no water" "stay dry and out of the wind when its cold out" etc.
There's a pretty short list of things you don't go into the woods without, and established protocols for what to do when you get lost, none of which involve panic or any exotic gear (well, a safety whistle, map, and a compass aren't too exotic, and the implication is you're carrying the compass and map because you know how to use them... and WTF would you be doing in the woods without a map anyway?)
Even if you never "go out" you can get stranded in a car in a blizzard if you push your luck, has happened to me. Given enough blankets in the car and a MRE or two its more annoying than a serious danger, although there are idiots who manage to get themselves killed every year.
Science is our best tool for sorting out reality
If you actually learn it. If you're a low performer and just ritually repeating stuff for the multiple guess test, you've learned nothing. There's unthinking repetition not much more thoughtful than a parrot bird, then there's training level learning, then actual education. If the school isn't going to do much beyond trivial pursuit (What year is Darwin's birthday, 800-something 1800-something or 1900-something?) then may as well skip it and stick to creationism. I'm not a fan of it personally but I see the appeal if poor enough education is a given.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @09:19PM
Who cares? What does any of that survival nonsense have to do with academics (not that schools care about education anyway)? The situations you describe are wildly improbable, so I'll take my chances. We don't need less time spent on other things for this.
If you actually learn it. If you're a low performer and just ritually repeating stuff for the multiple guess test, you've learned nothing.
This I agree with. This is what schooling is all about at the moment.