4 ms·

In some countries, schools exist to teach students, rather than simply warehousing them and saying it's parents' fault for not teaching everything in the hours

by kaitai 7y ago

In some countries, schools exist to teach students, rather than simply warehousing them and saying it's parents' fault for not teaching everything in the hours from 3 pm - 10 pm and weekends. Truly, your comment does reflect the attitude of much of the teaching establishment: if children can't learn to read from their parents, they're hopeless [1]; if children can't learn math from their parents, they're hopeless. It's a total abdication of the vocation of teaching, and it's not universal. In Finland it's accepted that teachers teach children how to read, and accepted that every kid needs a good lunch in order to be able to concentrate. That's 'obvious' in their cultural context, but in the US cultural context poverty and struggle are just signs that God doesn't love you (the prosperity 'gospel' in action). [1] https://www.apmreports.org/story/2018/09/10/hard-words-why-american-kids-arent-being-taught-to-read https://www.apmreports.org/story/2018/09/10/hard-words-why-a...

mc32 7y ago
Teachers can't bear to carry that load themselves. That's ridiculous. Parents have a load to carry. Parenting isn't easy. I know people whose idea or rearing is limited to feeding, dressing and sending their kids to school. "Kids are not expensive" is what they tell me.
- braythwayt 7y ago
  > Teachers can't bear to carry that load themselves. Why can't they bear the load? - Because they are underfunded and understaffed - Because society doesn't think it's the school's responsibility to teach If society decided that reading and writing should be taught in school, then it would be taught in school and the system would be designed such that teachers would easily handle it. Your "parents have a load to carry" in this case is throwing people under the bus like single mothers who are working two or more jobs just to put food on the table. Your attitude is that their children should be left behind because those children belong to the unlucky sperm club. And those children grow up to be disadvantaged and poor and the cycle continues indefinitely. I find it vile and revolting that HN can talk about the wonders of Elon Musk disrupting the automobile industry, can debate whether scooters will disrupt the ride sahring industry, which in turn disrupted the taxi industry, and so on... And then when it comes to poverty, the attitude is, "C'mon, carry your load or fall behind." This community talks a good line about disruption, but if the only kind of disruption that interests us is the disruption that happens to make people into billionaires, it's time to stop pretending that we're "hackers" and start calling ourselves capitalists. The education system needs to be disrupted from the bottom up, but it needs people who actually care about educating children more than negotiating term sheets.
  - semoule 7y ago
    I don't know if we read "carry their load" the same. I think of it that parents need to teach their kids how to behave, not math. Kids who come to class and don't listen, talk when the teacher is talking and disturb the other kids is going to be a problem. Children who act out violently or with screaming when confronted create big problems. Children who are not adjusted to being respectful towards other children and grownups will ruin any school. That job is in my mind the job of the parent, the teacher should not have to use math class to try and get a child to be respectful. This is what it in my mind means when you tell someone that parents need to "carry their load". If the teacher needs to do all these additional jobs, then I think we need to change the whole institution of school.
    - tomatocracy 7y ago
      There’s a lot more to it than that. Even when they’re young, there’s a lot more hours in the day than the hours they spend at school (and below school age there’s an even bigger difference). Engaged parents will help their children a lot more in those hours (or ensure they have childcare providers who do if they are working). Reading to children at home. Having books they can read themselves and encouraging them to do it. Getting them to do simple maths puzzles in everyday settings (how much change? How long until bedtime? That sort of thing). Later on, making sure they do their homework and helping them out with parts they didn’t understand from school. Talking to them about the wider world. Etc. Those engaged parents will also be the first to complain if the teachers spend too much time with the children who don’t get that at home. So without engaged parents and a supportive home environment, children are at a significant disadvantage.
  - tripzilch 7y ago
    > If society decided that reading and writing should be taught in school, then it would be taught in school and the system would be designed such that teachers would easily handle it. I mean, society could also decide that houses shouldn't have roofs, but then they wouldn't be houses would they. The word for "school where you don't learn to read" in the rest of the educated world is "daycare".
- tripzilch 7y ago
  > Teachers can't bear to carry that load themselves. So I'm gonna make the assumption that "teacher" still somewhat means the same thing in the US, and that they must be teaching the kids something. What in goodness sake are they teaching the children if not how to read? Isn't that the very first thing you should be teaching them after kindergarten? If there is ONE thing a kid could learn in school. Wouldn't you pick how to read over literally anything else? The second thing would imho be math. But on that point people may say geography and history are also important and I can't really disagree cause I happen to be good at math and shamefully bad at the other two.
tripzilch 7y ago
Wait. Is that for serious? Kids in the US don't learn to read in school?? I'm scanning that article and I'm being aghast. There's a bar graph that mentions 4th and 8th grade, what ages do these grades roughly correspond to? Not that it really matters because the percentages are roughly equal, meaning they didn't improve their reading skill in 4 years. Guess that answers my first question. Guys you need to fix this. Education is the future, there's literally no better place to dump money and resources on.

by kaitai 7y ago

mc32 7y ago

Teachers can't bear to carry that load themselves. That's ridiculous. Parents have a load to carry. Parenting isn't easy. I know people whose idea or rearing is limited to feeding, dressing and sending their kids to school. "Kids are not expensive" is what they tell me.

braythwayt 7y ago
> Teachers can't bear to carry that load themselves. Why can't they bear the load? - Because they are underfunded and understaffed - Because society doesn't think it's the school's responsibility to teach If society decided that reading and writing should be taught in school, then it would be taught in school and the system would be designed such that teachers would easily handle it. Your "parents have a load to carry" in this case is throwing people under the bus like single mothers who are working two or more jobs just to put food on the table. Your attitude is that their children should be left behind because those children belong to the unlucky sperm club. And those children grow up to be disadvantaged and poor and the cycle continues indefinitely. I find it vile and revolting that HN can talk about the wonders of Elon Musk disrupting the automobile industry, can debate whether scooters will disrupt the ride sahring industry, which in turn disrupted the taxi industry, and so on... And then when it comes to poverty, the attitude is, "C'mon, carry your load or fall behind." This community talks a good line about disruption, but if the only kind of disruption that interests us is the disruption that happens to make people into billionaires, it's time to stop pretending that we're "hackers" and start calling ourselves capitalists. The education system needs to be disrupted from the bottom up, but it needs people who actually care about educating children more than negotiating term sheets.
- semoule 7y ago
  I don't know if we read "carry their load" the same. I think of it that parents need to teach their kids how to behave, not math. Kids who come to class and don't listen, talk when the teacher is talking and disturb the other kids is going to be a problem. Children who act out violently or with screaming when confronted create big problems. Children who are not adjusted to being respectful towards other children and grownups will ruin any school. That job is in my mind the job of the parent, the teacher should not have to use math class to try and get a child to be respectful. This is what it in my mind means when you tell someone that parents need to "carry their load". If the teacher needs to do all these additional jobs, then I think we need to change the whole institution of school.
  - tomatocracy 7y ago
    There’s a lot more to it than that. Even when they’re young, there’s a lot more hours in the day than the hours they spend at school (and below school age there’s an even bigger difference). Engaged parents will help their children a lot more in those hours (or ensure they have childcare providers who do if they are working). Reading to children at home. Having books they can read themselves and encouraging them to do it. Getting them to do simple maths puzzles in everyday settings (how much change? How long until bedtime? That sort of thing). Later on, making sure they do their homework and helping them out with parts they didn’t understand from school. Talking to them about the wider world. Etc. Those engaged parents will also be the first to complain if the teachers spend too much time with the children who don’t get that at home. So without engaged parents and a supportive home environment, children are at a significant disadvantage.
- tripzilch 7y ago
  > If society decided that reading and writing should be taught in school, then it would be taught in school and the system would be designed such that teachers would easily handle it. I mean, society could also decide that houses shouldn't have roofs, but then they wouldn't be houses would they. The word for "school where you don't learn to read" in the rest of the educated world is "daycare".
tripzilch 7y ago
> Teachers can't bear to carry that load themselves. So I'm gonna make the assumption that "teacher" still somewhat means the same thing in the US, and that they must be teaching the kids something. What in goodness sake are they teaching the children if not how to read? Isn't that the very first thing you should be teaching them after kindergarten? If there is ONE thing a kid could learn in school. Wouldn't you pick how to read over literally anything else? The second thing would imho be math. But on that point people may say geography and history are also important and I can't really disagree cause I happen to be good at math and shamefully bad at the other two.

tripzilch 7y ago

Wait. Is that for serious? Kids in the US don't learn to read in school?? I'm scanning that article and I'm being aghast. There's a bar graph that mentions 4th and 8th grade, what ages do these grades roughly correspond to? Not that it really matters because the percentages are roughly equal, meaning they didn't improve their reading skill in 4 years. Guess that answers my first question. Guys you need to fix this. Education is the future, there's literally no better place to dump money and resources on.