Boys are being failed by our schools

[Beige]

school is boring :/ and atleast college becomes a little more interesting but you still have to take all BS courses that have nothing to do with your moajor. You might be able to count the number of majors that don't require Chemistry. It will vary from collge to college and im sure there are alot but sheesh seems like almost everything requires Chem..WTF?! i hate chem..

I went comepletely off topic >_>

 

[montanafan]

A nice little theory for an author who wants to be controversial and sell books, but hardly an explanation for why boys aren't doing as well as girls in school, maybe more of an excuse though.

The article was written about schools in the UK which is not comparable to the curriculum and extra-curricular activities at US schools. In fact, the trend in US schools has been just the opposite lately. Competitive activities have been pushed for the last few years in our high schools. Last year, our state hired consultants to come into the classroom each month to monitor activities and then hold mandatory seminars after school for teachers to help them create and apply competitive activities.

I've always used those types of activities in my classroom and I've found that boys have become less and less competitive over the years. For example, last year I had a competition in Economics class where the class was divided into marketing teams to sell a product. One group of four boys was very competitive and did very well, but in the other groups where boys and girls were mixed, the boys seemed content to sit back and let the girls do all the work. What's the explanation for that? Could it be that in today's society girls are becoming more competitive and boys are unwilling to do the work necessary to compete with them or have they become just plain lazy and expect everything to be done for them or given to them?

And it's not just in the classroom. Coaches have been complaining over the last several years that boys aren't willing to put in the time and effort to be competitive on the playing field, wheras girls are working harder than ever to be more competitive in sports. We had one coach who quit coaching football because the boys wouldn't come to off-season weightlifting workouts to prepare for the season and when he met with parents to try to get them to help, they complained that he was asking too much of their kids, they had to have fun time. He took over coaching the softball team because the girls and their parents were more cooperative. So what's the explanation for that?

Another very strange thing I've noticed is that more and more boys are turning in homework that's been done by their girlfriends or parents, usually the mother. I can't tell you how many papers I've had to put zeroes on after questioning the boys and finding out that was the case. Why are they thinking that they shouldn't have to do the work to get the grade? Why are their girlfriends and parents going along with it?

One theory I have is the way the sports system for young kids work these days and the way it's spoiling boys to think they deserve a pat on the back or things done for them for not much of anything in return. There are all kinds of sports programs set up for boys around here where they pretty much just have to show up for practice and games and then get a bunch of trophies and ribbons at the end whether they accomplished anything or not. The only sports program for young girls around here is for those who play tee-ball or little league baseball with the boys, so not as many of them are being affected by it. Most girls don't get into sports until junior high or high school where you really are expected to be competitive, so that's what they learn.

It's just one part of the problem, but basically it seems that more and more boys are being spoiled by their parents and being taught that they can be lazy or just show up and expect to be rewarded for it.

 

[GoingUp]

Thats what you get with all of the political correct BS and that everyone needs to feel special.

 

[altonb1]

My son had a horrible time in school this year because the teacher would always write notes, etc home because he was not "behaving" in class. Essentially, my son may have some issues with ADHD. Are they extreme? i don't think so, but he was in 2nd grade and is a boy. The school graded in colors--red day=bad, yellow=some trouble, and green=great. He was coming home with red a LOT in the beginning of the year. He is now on medication to help with some of the behavior, but he is still a BOY and some of the things that caused him to have red days (in my opinion) were crap. Overall, i think his teacher demoralized him so much he just stopped caring about homework, etc.

examples of "red" days: Chris was rolling his pencil back and forth on the desk. he was humming/singing to himself. he was fidgety.

I went to his class for American Education Week last year and while I was there, the kids were supposed to be working quietly. 1 girl got up to sharpen her pencil and started talking to another classmate. The 2 girls were not loud at all, but the teacher singled the original student out and yelled at her for talking while sharpening her pencil. There were at least 3-4 parents in the class--I could not believe the teacher embarassed the child like that. I was pretty agitated. The entire year, my son got mediocre report cards, implying he was not a very good student, etc. In the early spring, they had state testing. The results came back and he basically aced almost ever area of study. So I was worrying that he might not pass the 2nd grade, yet he is one of the brightest in the class AND they also sent paperwork home for us to approve Gifted & Talented testing for him.

Let my boy be a boy and teach him to be successful by focusing on his strengths. sheesh! Damn teacher...

 

[ActuaryTm]

Cannot believe I was the only one catching the irony of who posted this.

(were the rest of you too incapacitated with side-splitting laughter?)

 

[z42]

Originally posted by: montanafan
A nice little theory for an author who wants to be controversial and sell books, but hardly an explanation for why boys aren't doing as well as girls in school, maybe more of an excuse though.

The article was written about schools in the UK which is not comparable to the curriculum and extra-curricular activities at US schools. In fact, the trend in US schools has been just the opposite lately. Competitive activities have been pushed for the last few years in our high schools. Last year, our state hired consultants to come into the classroom each month to monitor activities and then hold mandatory seminars after school for teachers to help them create and apply competitive activities.

I've always used those types of activities in my classroom and I've found that boys have become less and less competitive over the years. For example, last year I had a competition in Economics class where the class was divided into marketing teams to sell a product. One group of four boys was very competitive and did very well, but in the other groups where boys and girls were mixed, the boys seemed content to sit back and let the girls do all the work. What's the explanation for that? Could it be that in today's society girls are becoming more competitive and boys are unwilling to do the work necessary to compete with them or have they become just plain lazy and expect everything to be done for them or given to them?

And it's not just in the classroom. Coaches have been complaining over the last several years that boys aren't willing to put in the time and effort to be competitive on the playing field, wheras girls are working harder than ever to be more competitive in sports. We had one coach who quit coaching football because the boys wouldn't come to off-season weightlifting workouts to prepare for the season and when he met with parents to try to get them to help, they complained that he was asking too much of their kids, they had to have fun time. He took over coaching the softball team because the girls and their parents were more cooperative. So what's the explanation for that?

Another very strange thing I've noticed is that more and more boys are turning in homework that's been done by their girlfriends or parents, usually the mother. I can't tell you how many papers I've had to put zeroes on after questioning the boys and finding out that was the case. Why are they thinking that they shouldn't have to do the work to get the grade? Why are their girlfriends and parents going along with it?

One theory I have is the way the sports system for young kids work these days and the way it's spoiling boys to think they deserve a pat on the back or things done for them for not much of anything in return. There are all kinds of sports programs set up for boys around here where they pretty much just have to show up for practice and games and then get a bunch of trophies and ribbons at the end whether they accomplished anything or not. The only sports program for young girls around here is for those who play tee-ball or little league baseball with the boys, so not as many of them are being affected by it. Most girls don't get into sports until junior high or high school where you really are expected to be competitive, so that's what they learn.

It's just one part of the problem, but basically it seems that more and more boys are being spoiled by their parents and being taught that they can be lazy or just show up and expect to be rewarded for it.

Your examples are exactly what the article is talking about. It has always been the case that boys have a much harder time with the drudgery involved with homework, off season training, and research. Boys like to play and compete, not prepare. I think you're misinterpreting your data, or maybe the article. The author's point was that our system is designed more for girls because of the emphasis on homework/research/preparation. All of the examples you gave support his theory, they don't discredit it.

 

[montanafan]

z42, though I can see how you could interpret that way, I think you're confusing play with competition. The article says that if you emphasize competition in school boys will do better, but if they're not willing to do the work or preparation to be competitive, how does that help?

I may misunderstand your point, but it sounds more like you're agreeing with me when you say that boys like to play and compete, though you're not addressing the problem that they are not being competitive. They can play and compete all they like, but if they aren't putting in the work and preparation they're hardly competitive, except maybe with a bunch of other lazy mediocre opponents. Is that what you're saying boys should be allowed to aspire to be?

 

[Excelsior]

Originally posted by: altonb1
My son had a horrible time in school this year because the teacher would always write notes, etc home because he was not "behaving" in class. Essentially, my son may have some issues with ADHD. Are they extreme? i don't think so, but he was in 2nd grade and is a boy. The school graded in colors--red day=bad, yellow=some trouble, and green=great. He was coming home with red a LOT in the beginning of the year. He is now on medication to help with some of the behavior, but he is still a BOY and some of the things that caused him to have red days (in my opinion) were crap. Overall, i think his teacher demoralized him so much he just stopped caring about homework, etc.

examples of "red" days: Chris was rolling his pencil back and forth on the desk. he was humming/singing to himself. he was fidgety.

I went to his class for American Education Week last year and while I was there, the kids were supposed to be working quietly. 1 girl got up to sharpen her pencil and started talking to another classmate. The 2 girls were not loud at all, but the teacher singled the original student out and yelled at her for talking while sharpening her pencil. There were at least 3-4 parents in the class--I could not believe the teacher embarassed the child like that. I was pretty agitated. The entire year, my son got mediocre report cards, implying he was not a very good student, etc. In the early spring, they had state testing. The results came back and he basically aced almost ever area of study. So I was worrying that he might not pass the 2nd grade, yet he is one of the brightest in the class AND they also sent paperwork home for us to approve Gifted & Talented testing for him.

Let my boy be a boy and teach him to be successful by focusing on his strengths. sheesh! Damn teacher...

Sh!t like that doesn't surprise me at all. When it becomes difficult to merely sharpen your pencil or to go to the bathroom, there is a problem.

 

[z42]

I'm saying that boys on average have less attention span and less willingness to devote hours and hours to preparing for something on a regular basis. I'm not saying this is a good thing, I'm just saying it takes boys longer (age wise) to develop those types of skills. Which is the point of the article, that boys are being demanded to do this in elementary school.

While I believe it is important to teach boys to work hard and prepare, it isn't something they should be penalized for in 4th grade. There is a lot of data that I have read (no links, i'm lazy) that shows that kids who consistently get lower marks in grades 1-6 continue to get lower marks throughout HS.

I realize that the answer is somewhere in the middle. We have to teach boys and girls to overcome whatever natural weaknesses they may have during the education process, at least enough to be able to function normally in society. But we also need to raise our kids to be the type of men and women we want them to be when they grow up. And I believe part of that is teaching boys that it's ok to be masculine.

BTW, I think most educators would be surprised how much the average boy "learns" during recess and lunch about how to get along in society. Common sense and inter-personal skills are very devalued in our school system today.

 

[montanafan]

altonb1, I don't know the specifics of the situation with your son, but as a teacher it bothers me that you're criticizing the teacher when it comes to trying to maintain discipline in the classroom. You have to keep in mind that the teacher has to be concerned about all of the students in the class and how the learning environment affects them all.

Your son might be able to roll his pencil around on his desk and hum or sing in the classroom and still learn just fine, perhaps obviously since he did so well on the state tests, but what if his doing that is distracting to the kids sitting around him? Don't you think the teacher has an obligation to make sure that what kids are doing in the classroom doesn't distract others around them?

When the kids were supposed to be sitting quietly working and the one girl who got up to sharpen a pencil started talking to the other girl, wasn't she distracting her and taking her off task? As for the yelling at her, if it really was yelling, that's uncalled for. I don't yell at my students, but I would have told the girl to stop talking to the one that was working because she was interfering with her getting her work done.

I understand about boys being boys, and girls being girls for that matter, that's why I don't get upset with them when they're fidgety or not being perfect angels, but I do try to get them back on task or stop them from doing something that's distracting to other kids around them. Kids understand that when you tell them why you need them to stop some sort of behavior like that. They're not being mean, or trying to cause problems, they're just being kids.

Maybe that teacher just needs to learn that. She could be one of those types who takes every little disturbance as a personal attack on her rules and authority or thinks the kids are purposely trying to cause problems in the classroom.

 

[waggy]

i have gone to plenty of different schools. many had different philosophies of teaching children. Some had not changed at all from when my parents went to school. They enforced learning the 3 R's. and doing your best at everything. They would also make sure we were outside on recess (yes even in Jr high etc) and compete in PE. if you did not you failed. EVERY sport had people trying out for it and yes not everyone made the team.
If you did well on a test etc you was rewarded. If you had a good report card it was acknowledged. If you did bad on it it was also acknowledged and you had help.
I did great in this school. I never had lower then an A in any class. I was happy and self confidant about myself (even though i did not make the basketball team) etc.

the school after this (in Oregon) was opposite. Everyone received the same grade (a positive for attempting it) and they had NO sports (luckily my dad put me in a wrestling camp and soccer over the summer). you did not have to participate in PE and there was NO recess.
My parents and the teachers worried about me. I was quite and all i did in class was read books (teachers didn't care what you did). my grades fell to C's (nobody got below a C!) and i was just miserable.

We had to move again when i was a Jr in high school. we moved to a town in IL where the school was normal. you did good in class it was acknowledged. we played games in class etc. There was sports after school etc. if you sucked at the sport you did not make the team. if you earned a F in class you received a F. Trouble was i was so far behind from the crappy school i had to work very hard to get where i should. I am just lucky the teachers i had helped me.

i feel part of the trouble is that schools are so afraid to hurt someones self esteem or confidence that they are makeing everyone the same. or trying to get everyone to be the same.

Also during the 70's and 80's there was some professionals that had some strange ideas on teaching. such as no classrooms, no grades, no homework and allowing everyone who wants to be on the team on it. This does not work.

how the school system is now (zero tolerance and crappy setting) it worries me about putting my kids in the school system. I wonder what ideas they are going to have then.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: montanafanFor example, last year I had a competition in Economics class where the class was divided into marketing teams to sell a product. One group of four boys was very competitive and did very well, but in the other groups where boys and girls were mixed, the boys seemed content to sit back and let the girls do all the work. What's the explanation for that? Could it be that in today's society girls are becoming more competitive and boys are unwilling to do the work necessary to compete with them or have they become just plain lazy and expect everything to be done for them or given to them?

More likely, it is a result of the mixture of boys and girls on the team than an issue with the nature of men in general. Society teaches men from a young age that it is not acceptable to be competitive with females.

The group of all boys was competitive because it functioned similar to an animal pack and all the boys were vying for the the best idea of the four, in essence each was trying to "one-up" his other group members and secure the lead position. The benefits of this are huge in brainstorming sessions.

The groups with mixed boys and girls resulted in the boys being unwilling to compete against the girls. Society teaches boys they they aren't allowed to "one-up" girls, nor are they allowed to "take over" the group because doing so might be perceived as discriminatory to the girls. This creates a situation where the boy feels that he is not allowed to compete, nor to run anything. The resulting dynamic is that the girls simply assign work to the boys, who, having no real ownership of the ideas or processes, have likewise no motivation to complete their tasks.

The simple fact is that society today is conditioning children with the idea that it's OK for women to act like men, but that men should never act like men. A woman who is competitive is "strong" or "brave" or "a trailblazer", while a man who is competitive is "arrogant" or "pushy" or "uncarring".

ZV

 

[montanafan]

z42, I agree with you about boys of elementary school age and that it takes them longer to develop those skills, but I'm talking about high school age kids when I give my examples because that's who I teach. And it's not that they don't have those skills at that age, it just seems that they're not willing to use them even in the activities like the one I described where it's not highly structured, the work isn't methodical, and they don't have to be attentive, at least not to me. I gave them just a few rules to follow and then let them get in their groups and left them alone except to answer some questions and get them whatever materials they decided they needed to carry out their plan. The one group of boys I mentioned who did very well behaved just as I would expect a group of competitive boys to. They were enthusiastic, wanted to win, they had all kinds of ideas, they carried them out, and really went after the consumers. I just don't understand why most of the other boys were willing to just sit back and let the girls in their groups take control, especially when I kept track of how each group was doing and let them know about it each day so that the ones in the lead could hopefully goad the others into being more competive, which they tried to do.

I believe in letting boys be boys, but when they're at an age where I'm preparing them to be competitive in college, or the workforce, or even the military, in just a couple of years; I feel like I'm letting them down if I don't expect them to put in the time and effort, especially effort they may not like, but is necessary to prepare them to be competitive and successful under any circumstances.

I agree with you completely about how much boys, and girls as well, can learn from recess and other play type activities. I also agree that the schools are not emphasizing those types of activities enough. Most kids when they go home do their playing all alone in front of a computer screen and they're losing out on developing a lot of important inter-personal skills. Kids can learn a lot about dealing with people and situations when you just throw a bunch of them together and say, now go play.

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: montanafan
A nice little theory for an author who wants to be controversial and sell books, but hardly an explanation for why boys aren't doing as well as girls in school, maybe more of an excuse though.

The article was written about schools in the UK which is not comparable to the curriculum and extra-curricular activities at US schools. In fact, the trend in US schools has been just the opposite lately. Competitive activities have been pushed for the last few years in our high schools. Last year, our state hired consultants to come into the classroom each month to monitor activities and then hold mandatory seminars after school for teachers to help them create and apply competitive activities.

I've always used those types of activities in my classroom and I've found that boys have become less and less competitive over the years. For example, last year I had a competition in Economics class where the class was divided into marketing teams to sell a product. One group of four boys was very competitive and did very well, but in the other groups where boys and girls were mixed, the boys seemed content to sit back and let the girls do all the work. What's the explanation for that? Could it be that in today's society girls are becoming more competitive and boys are unwilling to do the work necessary to compete with them or have they become just plain lazy and expect everything to be done for them or given to them?

And it's not just in the classroom. Coaches have been complaining over the last several years that boys aren't willing to put in the time and effort to be competitive on the playing field, wheras girls are working harder than ever to be more competitive in sports. We had one coach who quit coaching football because the boys wouldn't come to off-season weightlifting workouts to prepare for the season and when he met with parents to try to get them to help, they complained that he was asking too much of their kids, they had to have fun time. He took over coaching the softball team because the girls and their parents were more cooperative. So what's the explanation for that?

Another very strange thing I've noticed is that more and more boys are turning in homework that's been done by their girlfriends or parents, usually the mother. I can't tell you how many papers I've had to put zeroes on after questioning the boys and finding out that was the case. Why are they thinking that they shouldn't have to do the work to get the grade? Why are their girlfriends and parents going along with it?

One theory I have is the way the sports system for young kids work these days and the way it's spoiling boys to think they deserve a pat on the back or things done for them for not much of anything in return. There are all kinds of sports programs set up for boys around here where they pretty much just have to show up for practice and games and then get a bunch of trophies and ribbons at the end whether they accomplished anything or not. The only sports program for young girls around here is for those who play tee-ball or little league baseball with the boys, so not as many of them are being affected by it. Most girls don't get into sports until junior high or high school where you really are expected to be competitive, so that's what they learn.

It's just one part of the problem, but basically it seems that more and more boys are being spoiled by their parents and being taught that they can be lazy or just show up and expect to be rewarded for it.

In the past boys did "better" in school, particularly math and science. Traditional theory was that this was because the system was designed to discourage girls or something...and to at least some extend it was. The system was changed, now boys are doing worse. Your antecdotes are interesting, but you seem to be placing a lot of blame on the boys...which to me seems questionable given boys were still boys back when they were doing better. They haven't changed that much...so I would think its something else in curriculum myself. Some one has already spoken that his son did poorly in school and talked about the teacher breaking his spirits despite him doing well on tests.

Its possible that boys are being spoiled by their parents...but it seems odd that the same generation of parents wouldn't also be spoiling the girls in a similar manner. Why is their suddenly a tendency to coddle boys and push girls?

 

[ruffilb]

Originally posted by: virtualgames0

Originally posted by: quasarsky

Originally posted by: virtualgames0

Originally posted by: quasarsky

Originally posted by: virtualgames0
Schools like to celebrate qualities like doing what you're told and giving up your individuality to become a mindless, souless, conforming member of the american consumer society.
The education system is fvcked up.

truest post ever

Thank you.
History has also shown that a large percentage of the world's geniuses did poorly at school. Simply because you get much further in life focusing on things you're truly passionate about rather than being forced to do things you don't give a rats ass about.

Einestein math skills FTW!

I think he actually kicked ass at math, but just found it a waste of time to do the homework, so he ended up failing. Homework is a large percentage of your grade in gradeschool classes. People equate grades to mastery of skills, which is purely bogus. It maybe true in college, where grades are solely made up of test skills, but definitely not in grade school.

You win at life.

 

[montanafan]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: montanafanFor example, last year I had a competition in Economics class where the class was divided into marketing teams to sell a product. One group of four boys was very competitive and did very well, but in the other groups where boys and girls were mixed, the boys seemed content to sit back and let the girls do all the work. What's the explanation for that? Could it be that in today's society girls are becoming more competitive and boys are unwilling to do the work necessary to compete with them or have they become just plain lazy and expect everything to be done for them or given to them?

More likely, it is a result of the mixture of boys and girls on the team than an issue with the nature of men in general. Society teaches men from a young age that it is not acceptable to be competitive with females.

The group of all boys was competitive because it functioned similar to an animal pack and all the boys were vying for the the best idea of the four, in essence each was trying to "one-up" his other group members and secure the lead position. The benefits of this are huge in brainstorming sessions.

The groups with mixed boys and girls resulted in the boys being unwilling to compete against the girls. Society teaches boys they they aren't allowed to "one-up" girls, nor are they allowed to "take over" the group because doing so might be perceived as discriminatory to the girls. This creates a situation where the boy feels that he is not allowed to compete, nor to run anything. The resulting dynamic is that the girls simply assign work to the boys, who, having no real ownership of the ideas or processes, have likewise no motivation to complete their tasks.

The simple fact is that society today is conditioning children with the idea that it's OK for women to act like men, but that men should never act like men. A woman who is competitive is "strong" or "brave" or "a trailblazer", while a man who is competitive is "arrogant" or "pushy" or "uncarring".

ZV

I wanted to address the bolded part first because I disagree with it completely. I've heard way too many women in a leadership capacity or who try to speak up for themselves be described as arrogant, pushy, a femi-nazi, or a bitch. I think it's still much more likely that when a man is confident, opinionated, tough, and outspoken they are much more likely to be called a strong leader, wheras a woman is more likely to be called one of the examples I gave.

I agree with much of what you said about the competition, but some of it still doesn't add up. I agree with you that the group of four boys I described behaved in that way as I would expect them to. There was another all boy group though as well and they were not as competitive. I don't agree with the part about boys not wanting to be competitive with girls though. These guys had no problem competing against the female led groups or all female groups and taunting them when they had the lead at various times, which is fine by me. When we have competitions, guys have no problem trash talking and trying to beat the females or female led mixed group. When the groups are mixed and the competition is more of a physical type activity, the boys have no problem stepping up to the plate and taking charge over the girls, and the girls don't argue about it. So the problem isn't that guys don't want to be seen as discriminating against girls or have a problem with one-upping them.

I agree with you that whether it be boys or girls, if they are in a group and they are just assigned tasks to do and feel no ownership of the ideas or processes, they are less motivated and therefore less engaged in the activity. And you may be right about that being the case here with some of the groups where the boys were unwilling to lead their groups, but I'm certain from my experience that they did not let the girl take charge because they were afraid of being seen as discriminatory or didn't want to one-up a girl at something. In fact it was probably just the opposite. The problem here seems to be that the boys are less likely to step up to the plate if, 1) there's any real work or responsibility associated with it and 2) there's a girl willing to take on that work and responsibility because they see it as more manly for some reason to have the girl be the responsible one or do most of the work for them.

Even if these guys didn't want any of the responsibilities, you'd think that their natural competitive instincts would take over and when the competition between the groups was strong at first and the goading and gloating began, they would kick it into high gear; but it was mostly just the opposite. When most of the groups the guys were in got behind, most of them would just give up, even the one other all boy group. It came down to the one always competitive all-boy group and the one mixed female led group that eventually won.

It isn't that boys aren't competitive or that they're not willing to do what it takes to win. It's just that there seems to be an increasing number of them each year who, though they may want to play and they may want to win, they're less and less likely to be willing to put any effort into it or as the old adage says,...get going when the going gets tough.

 

[The Batt?sai]

Originally posted by: waggy
i have gone to plenty of different schools. many had different philosophies of teaching children. Some had not changed at all from when my parents went to school. They enforced learning the 3 R's. and doing your best at everything. They would also make sure we were outside on recess (yes even in Jr high etc) and compete in PE. if you did not you failed. EVERY sport had people trying out for it and yes not everyone made the team.
If you did well on a test etc you was rewarded. If you had a good report card it was acknowledged. If you did bad on it it was also acknowledged and you had help.
I did great in this school. I never had lower then an A in any class. I was happy and self confidant about myself (even though i did not make the basketball team) etc.

the school after this (in Oregon) was opposite. Everyone received the same grade (a positive for attempting it) and they had NO sports (luckily my dad put me in a wrestling camp and soccer over the summer). you did not have to participate in PE and there was NO recess.
My parents and the teachers worried about me. I was quite and all i did in class was read books (teachers didn't care what you did). my grades fell to C's (nobody got below a C!) and i was just miserable.

We had to move again when i was a Jr in high school. we moved to a town in IL where the school was normal. you did good in class it was acknowledged. we played games in class etc. There was sports after school etc. if you sucked at the sport you did not make the team. if you earned a F in class you received a F. Trouble was i was so far behind from the crappy school i had to work very hard to get where i should. I am just lucky the teachers i had helped me.

i feel part of the trouble is that schools are so afraid to hurt someones self esteem or confidence that they are makeing everyone the same. or trying to get everyone to be the same.

Also during the 70's and 80's there was some professionals that had some strange ideas on teaching. such as no classrooms, no grades, no homework and allowing everyone who wants to be on the team on it. This does not work.

how the school system is now (zero tolerance and crappy setting) it worries me about putting my kids in the school system. I wonder what ideas they are going to have then.

sounds like that movie accepted lol

 

[0roo0roo]

well therse always that book called "war against boys"

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: quasarsky

Originally posted by: waggy
i have gone to plenty of different schools. many had different philosophies of teaching children. Some had not changed at all from when my parents went to school. They enforced learning the 3 R's. and doing your best at everything. They would also make sure we were outside on recess (yes even in Jr high etc) and compete in PE. if you did not you failed. EVERY sport had people trying out for it and yes not everyone made the team.
If you did well on a test etc you was rewarded. If you had a good report card it was acknowledged. If you did bad on it it was also acknowledged and you had help.
I did great in this school. I never had lower then an A in any class. I was happy and self confidant about myself (even though i did not make the basketball team) etc.

the school after this (in Oregon) was opposite. Everyone received the same grade (a positive for attempting it) and they had NO sports (luckily my dad put me in a wrestling camp and soccer over the summer). you did not have to participate in PE and there was NO recess.
My parents and the teachers worried about me. I was quite and all i did in class was read books (teachers didn't care what you did). my grades fell to C's (nobody got below a C!) and i was just miserable.

We had to move again when i was a Jr in high school. we moved to a town in IL where the school was normal. you did good in class it was acknowledged. we played games in class etc. There was sports after school etc. if you sucked at the sport you did not make the team. if you earned a F in class you received a F. Trouble was i was so far behind from the crappy school i had to work very hard to get where i should. I am just lucky the teachers i had helped me.

i feel part of the trouble is that schools are so afraid to hurt someones self esteem or confidence that they are makeing everyone the same. or trying to get everyone to be the same.

Also during the 70's and 80's there was some professionals that had some strange ideas on teaching. such as no classrooms, no grades, no homework and allowing everyone who wants to be on the team on it. This does not work.

how the school system is now (zero tolerance and crappy setting) it worries me about putting my kids in the school system. I wonder what ideas they are going to have then.

sounds like that movie accepted lol

it was fvcking insane. i did not notice until wrestling season came around. walked into the wrestling room and there was maybe 60 guys. figured fine they will have to cut some or have diffrent levels no big deal.

NOPE! everyone was on the team. there was no varsity, Jr varisty or such. everyone wrestled if they wanted to and no records were kept. at the end of the season everyone got a little sign. needless to say they did not compete with other schools either.

should have seen the basketball team! hahah it had like 100 kids. it was insane.

 

[Xonoahbin]

Originally posted by: virtualgames0

Originally posted by: quasarsky

Originally posted by: virtualgames0

Originally posted by: quasarsky

Originally posted by: virtualgames0
Schools like to celebrate qualities like doing what you're told and giving up your individuality to become a mindless, souless, conforming member of the american consumer society.
The education system is fvcked up.

truest post ever

Thank you.
History has also shown that a large percentage of the world's geniuses did poorly at school. Simply because you get much further in life focusing on things you're truly passionate about rather than being forced to do things you don't give a rats ass about.

Einestein math skills FTW!

I think he actually kicked ass at math, but just found it a waste of time to do the homework, so he ended up failing. Homework is a large percentage of your grade in gradeschool classes. People equate grades to mastery of skills, which is purely bogus. It maybe true in college, where grades are solely made up of test skills, but definitely not in grade school.

Wow, you sound exactly like me when you say that. I'm extremely intelligent (I won't lie,) but I do somewhat poorly in school sometimes. It's because I find homework a waste of time and don't do it. Then I get straight As on tests, but I still get the mediocre grades because homework is often 60-70% of your grade here in high school.

 

[montanafan]

Originally posted by: PingSpike
In the past boys did "better" in school, particularly math and science. Traditional theory was that this was because the system was designed to discourage girls or something...and to at least some extend it was. The system was changed, now boys are doing worse. Your antecdotes are interesting, but you seem to be placing a lot of blame on the boys...which to me seems questionable given boys were still boys back when they were doing better. They haven't changed that much...so I would think its something else in curriculum myself. Some one has already spoken that his son did poorly in school and talked about the teacher breaking his spirits despite him doing well on tests.

Its possible that boys are being spoiled by their parents...but it seems odd that the same generation of parents wouldn't also be spoiling the girls in a similar manner. Why is their suddenly a tendency to coddle boys and push girls?

Yes, boys used to do much much better than girls in science and math. I don't know what you mean by the boys are now doing worse. Do you mean compared to girls today, or do you mean compared to the rest of the world, or do you mean compared to boys in the past?

Boys are still scoring higher than girls in math and science, and there is some data that suggests that the gender gap in interest in those two subjects is widening. That an even smaller percentage of girls are signing up for higher level math and science courses and that fewer of them are pursuing careers in those fields.

While boys' scores in math and science had been declining for a while, there are statistics that show that both boys and girls scores in those two subjects have increased a little over the last decade. There's still a gender gap, but boys scores are improving as well, especially with younger students and compared to those of other nations. http://www.ed.gov

I don't think the term "anecdotes" quite fits the thought and experience behind my examples when I'm speaking from the perspective of 27 years in education. I'm talking about the changes and trends I've witnessed during that time.

"...you seem to be placing a lot of blame on the boys...which to me seems questionable given boys were still boys back when they were doing better. They haven't changed that much..."

BINGO! That's exactly what I'm saying. I think that boys have changed quite a bit over these almost 30 years from what I've seen. Am I blaming them? Only to the extent that a child learns what their taught and see for themselves. My point is that the way children are taught in schools is not the problem. The problem comes from parents and from the media/culture/society today. Competition, hard work, losing, and failing and the lessons that come from them are being watered down and devalued. It used to be that if you lost at something or failed at something it was supposed to teach you that you needed to work harder to succeed. Now it means that someone is picking on you or the test or class or game or whatever wasn't fair. Now, to protect children's self-esteem, no one is supposed to lose, everything is supposed to come easy, you shouldn't have to work or sacrifice for anything - mommy and daddy will take care of it for you. And just look at the role models kids have in the media today for both boys and girls. Education has very little to do with the people they look up to today. They see that school doesn't matter, just do something outrageous or be good at something fun and be rich and famous at 21. It used to be, "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.", from one of their heroes. How many kids do you know today who would think that kind of thinking is for saps? Now it's just the opposite. Are the schools to blame for that kind of thinking? I don't think so, in fact I battle it constantly.

"Some one has already spoken that his son did poorly in school and talked about the teacher breaking his spirits despite him doing well on tests."

I've already addressed that in an earlier post. The boys was obviously being taught and learning because he did well on the state testing and his capabilities were taken note of by the school because of the paperwork sent home about the Gifted program. The only thing he was "failing", if you could call it that, was sitting still and as I said the teacher could have been just trying to keep him from disturbing other students or she could be taking it personally, but I hardly see that as an example of the curriculum "breaking his spirit". I do understand the father being upset though if the teacher only sent home criticisms of his son and never noted any of what he must have been doing well because of his test scores.

"Its possible that boys are being spoiled by their parents...but it seems odd that the same generation of parents wouldn't also be spoiling the girls in a similar manner. Why is their suddenly a tendency to coddle boys and push girls?"

Two things here. Yes, I think that boys are being coddled more by their parents than in the past. Do you think they aren't? Do you believe that boys are being raised to be men in the same way that they were in the past by parents and by the examples of the role models they had then compared to today?

And I do believe that girls are being more spoiled than in the past in some ways and some of the same problems apply to them as well. Paris Hilton as a role model? Give me a break. But I also believe that because of the opportunities affored girls and women over the last couple of decades in sports, college, and the workplace, more parents are raising their daughters to be more competitive and to have futures where they can be more independent than in the past. It wasn't that long ago that parents raised their girls thinking that the only skills they would need to have a successful life were the ones necessary to be a good wife and mother. Even girls who went to college were sent off in the hopes that it would enable them to find a husband more suitable to take care of them. That's not the predominant thinking for parents of girls these days and so yes, I do think they are being pushed more than in the past. I don't see all of the changes as positive ones though.

You bring up some good points and I can only tell you what I've seen over the last several years from students and parents and where I think it's coming from. And I'm only addressing the problems with boys in particular because that's what the OP was about, but girls have their own set of problems as well. If someone has any ideas of ways to combat the current trend with boys not doing as well in school as they once did, I'd love to hear them because I'll do whatever it takes to get all of my students ready to be successful adults.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: quasarsky
Boys are being failed by our schools

A generation of boys is leaving school unable to cope in the modern world because lessons have become "feminised", according to a renowned academic.

They are falling behind in exams and the job market because teachers fail to nurture traditional male traits such as competitiveness and leadership.

Dr Tony Sewell said schools instead celebrate qualities more closely associated with girls such as methodical working and attentiveness in class.

He warned that boys are becoming disaffected and flunk exams and job interviews because their competitive instincts have been discouraged.

This is the truth. As someone who grew up in the 80's (outside of California), I can quite easily see the impact on the youth of today, and ESPECIALLY many people on this board.

In short, people have become effeminate pansies. Real limpwrists.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: joshsquall
We are witnessing the pussification of America. We celebrate mediocrity like it was some major accomplishment.

QF f-in Truth.

 

[kogase]

The reason schools aren't encouraging masculine competition and agressiveness is because a system like that (as nature intended) always has its winners (alpha, some beta) and losers (beta). Bleeding-hearts want to eliminate the losers and make everyone feel accepted and happy, which is something of a noble goal. Unfortunately, even if the schools attempt to include everybody, the kids themselves are the ones who decide who the losers are. You cannot eliminate the losers (you can feel sorry for them, but you can't help them no matter how hard you try) because it is an intrinsic aspect of our psychology.

 

[Eeezee]

Originally posted by: quasarsky

Originally posted by: virtualgames0

Originally posted by: quasarsky

Originally posted by: virtualgames0

Originally posted by: quasarsky

Originally posted by: virtualgames0
Schools like to celebrate qualities like doing what you're told and giving up your individuality to become a mindless, souless, conforming member of the american consumer society.
The education system is fvcked up.

truest post ever

Thank you.
History has also shown that a large percentage of the world's geniuses did poorly at school. Simply because you get much further in life focusing on things you're truly passionate about rather than being forced to do things you don't give a rats ass about.

Einestein math skills FTW!

I think he actually kicked ass at math, but just found it a waste of time to do the homework, so he ended up failing. Homework is a large percentage of your grade in gradeschool classes. People equate grades to mastery of skills, which is purely bogus. It maybe true in college, where grades are solely made up of test skills, but definitely not in grade school.

i thought he was bad at simple math, but excelled in the calculus and physics. stuff not taught at public schools at the time (and not today really either)

It's not possible to suck at algebra and be able to do calculus At age 12 he was learning calculus,

It's actually something of a myth that he flunked math.