4 ms·
I honestly think the author is full of crap. The students I grew up with were either school oriented or not. The students who failed to produce coherent writing
by TheCapn 15y ago
I honestly think the author is full of crap. The students I grew up with were either school oriented or not. The students who failed to produce coherent writing in English class weren't excelling in the sciences to say the least. Kids were either there to learn or they weren't and there was very little in-between.
So by emphasizing the english portion of education over more sciences we'd only get more of the same crap at the expense of students who DO want to gain formal education in the sciences. Kids don't see the connection between the education and the practical nature of the knowledge they're fed. Stupid is as stupid does.
I was a gung-ho math/science kid. I pulled 95% in my classes of choice and low 60's in the english classes because I refused to participate in the circle-jerk discussion that was english 30. "Now class can you tell me where the foreshadowing is?", "what was the meaning of this poem?". I'm certain I could have pulled out better marks with the effort but I decided my time in classes was better spent doodling. Having more of my time pushed towards english courses and away from the sciences I'd be hard pressed to say that I'd be half the engineer I am today without it. Hell, too much of that 65% crap and I probably wouldn't have gotten the post-secondary education at all.
Provide the tools children need to make formal decisions about their future and provide the fundamentals they need to get there. You can tell which kids are going to be working with their hands or with their heads pretty early so help them get where they want. Everyone needs a fundamental level of communication but over-emphasising it instead of something more practical to the child will only put us full circle to where we are now but with "sciences" and "english" reversed in the discussion.