Dumbest Generation Getting Dumber

[Revmitchell]

No. I was pointing out that using a broad brush to brand an entire generation as "dumb" or "the dumbest generation" is a form of ignorance in and of itself. I am sure our generations parents thought we did some dumb things. Children live up to or down to what is expected of them.

Then you did make a claim. And did nothing to support it as the write of the article in the op did.

 

[matt wade]

Can anyone prove the current generations does not suffer from a lack of education that previous generations have had?

Now, this is a question I can deal with. Does the current generation have a lower quality of education than previous generations? On that, I would say it depends. It depends on what school districts you are in and how much the parents are involved. If the parents are appropriately involved, I'd also say that the school district doesn't matter since the parent should be doing everything necessary to get the proper education for the child.

Does lack of quality education make a kid (or generation) dumb though? Given the definition:

dense: slow to learn or understand; lacking intellectual acuity

I'd certainly say no. Lack of quality education may make this generation ignorant or under educated, but certainly not dumb or stupid.

 

[billwald]

When I graduated from HS in 1958 I was qualified for half the available jobs and all of the apprenticeships. Back then a even a store clerk had to write a sales slip by hand, make change, and total the bill. Now all of this is done by the cash register. In other words, the entry level jobs got easier but HS grads can't do them.

I graduated from college 4 years later. no big deal back then. Now days half of college students have not graduated in 6 years. Because the first 2 years is finishing up their high school education. In 1962 a 4 year degree was valuable but now they are dime a dozen. A person needs a masters to get any respect. Thanks to grade inflation, another 10 years and one will need a college degree to drive a garbage truck.

 

[daybreak]

The teaching establishment and politicians have hoodwinked taxpayers into believing that more money is needed to improve education. The Washington, D.C., school budget is about the nation's costliest, spending about $15,000 per pupil. Its student/teacher ratio, at 15.2 to 1, is lower than the nation's average. Yet student achievement is just about the lowest in the nation. What's so callous about the Washington situation is about 1,700 children in kindergarten through 12th grade receive the $7,500 annual scholarships in order to escape rotten D.C. public schools, and four times as many apply for the scholarships, yet Congress, beholden to the education establishment, will end funding the school voucher program.

More Here

We need to improve their self-esteem before we can improve their education.

Children need to be nurtured. We have to focus on how they feel before we can address what they think.

Most important, we have to do away with testing. No more test scores. We can't have one child feeling inferior to another.

Oh, and we must raise teachers' pay, which takes me back to the premise of the piece that we don't need more money to improve education.

We certainly do!

 

[targus]

We need to improve their self-esteem before we can improve their education.

Children need to be nurtured. We have to focus on how they feel before we can address what they think.

Most important, we have to do away with testing. No more test scores. We can't have one child feeling inferior to another.

Oh, and we must raise teachers' pay, which takes me back to the premise of the piece that we don't need more money to improve education.

We certainly do!

Of course. Any fool knows that there is a direct corelation between a teacher's pay and the students level of knowledge.

If they want to improve students level of learning by 25% all they need to do is raise teachers pay by the same.

I'm not suggesting that teachers are not already giving their 100% best effort - but a raise would only help them to give 110%.

 

[Magnetic Poles]

Of course. Any fool knows that there is a direct corelation between a teacher's pay and the students level of knowledge.

If they want to improve students level of learning by 25% all they need to do is raise teachers pay by the same.

I'm not suggesting that teachers are not already giving their 100% best effort - but a raise would only help them to give 110%.

If teaching pay was better, it might attract some higher caliber teachers who will not currently work in education because of the limited income opportunities.

 

[targus]

If teaching pay was better, it might attract some higher caliber teachers who will not currently work in education because of the limited income opportunities.

Being married to a teacher and as the father of a teacher, I know that your statement is incorrect. Bringing people into the teaching profession because they are lured by money rather than a calling to serve is not going to improve the education of our children.

 

[Magnetic Poles]

Being married to a teacher and as the father of a teacher, I know that your statement is incorrect. Bringing people into the teaching profession because they are lured by money rather than a calling to serve is not going to improve the education of our children.

Well, I know very capable folks who would LOVE to teach, but can't take the income hit. So your sample (nor is mine) large enough to be statistically valid.

 

[targus]

Well, I know very capable folks who would LOVE to teach, but can't take the income hit. So your sample (nor is mine) large enough to be statistically valid.

Let's look at it another way. The teaching profession is subject to market forces. If teacher pay is too low teachers will quit and take higher paying jobs. At any given time most school districts have an excess of applicants for any teacher position that is open.

Also not taken into account when considering teacher pay is that published salaries are for a school year. Teachers have additional opportunities to earn additional pay during the summer break - either teaching summer classes or taking other employment. Published teacher pay also does not include benefits such as medical insurance and retirement benefits - both of which are normally superior to what can be obtained in just about any other industry.

As for your folks that would love to teach but don't want to take a pay cut it is really immaterial to the discussion. For everyone person that you find like that there are several who would be quite happy to take the position.

 

[Magnetic Poles]

Let's look at it another way. The teaching profession is subject to market forces. If teacher pay is too low teachers will quit and take higher paying jobs. At any given time most school districts have an excess of applicants for any teacher position that is open.

Also not taken into account when considering teacher pay is that published salaries are for a school year. Teachers have additional opportunities to earn additional pay during the summer break - either teaching summer classes or taking other employment. Published teacher pay also does not include benefits such as medical insurance and retirement benefits - both of which are normally superior to what can be obtained in just about any other industry.

As for your folks that would love to teach but don't want to take a pay cut it is really immaterial to the discussion. For everyone person that you find like that there are several who would be quite happy to take the position.

Any evidence besides the two people you cited? The folks I know are as valid as yours. There are market forces at work...but because someone needs more income doesn't mean they wouldn't love to teach.

 

[targus]

Any evidence besides the two people you cited? The folks I know are as valid as yours. There are market forces at work...but because someone needs more income doesn't mean they wouldn't love to teach.

You seem to have failed to notice that I moved the discussion from our individual experiences to the broader discussion of the market forces that act on the teaching profession. For that reason to continue to cite a few more individuals would be pointless.

True, that someone needs more income than they could earn in their local schools system does not mean that they would not love to teach - but what does that have to do with the discussion? The available teaching positions would no doubt be filled by others willing to work for less who also would love to teach.

If your acquaintances need to earn more money they should obviously look at other professions. Teaching requires sacrifice beyond accepting the current pay level (which is a greater or lesser sacrifice to some than others). That your acquaintances are not willing to make that particular sacrifice may be an indication that they would also not be willing to make the other necessary sacrifices required for a teaching profession.

The greater point is that raising teacher pay does not necessarily mean that education levels would improve.

 

[Magnetic Poles]

The greater point is that raising teacher pay does not necessarily mean that education levels would improve.

Agreed, but I believe that higher pay, coupled with competency testing and proper training, is one step in the right direction. Not saying throw money at the problem...but address it from several angles.

 

[Revmitchell]

We need to improve their self-esteem before we can improve their education.

Children need to be nurtured. We have to focus on how they feel before we can address what they think.

Most important, we have to do away with testing. No more test scores. We can't have one child feeling inferior to another.

Oh, and we must raise teachers' pay, which takes me back to the premise of the piece that we don't need more money to improve education.

We certainly do!

Was this post serious?

 

[targus]

Was this post serious?

Looking at the other contributions that this poster has made on the board I would say that it is tongue in cheek.

Aside from that the "no tests" and "not having one child feeling inferior to another" are tip offs that he is kidding.

 

[Revmitchell]

Looking at the other contributions that this poster has made on the board I would say that it is tongue in cheek.

Aside from that the "no tests" and "not having one child feeling inferior to another" are tip offs that he is kidding.

Hope so. With new guys you never know.