Jump to content
Aveyond Studios Community
Sign in to follow this  
Kleptin

Education- The purpose of High School

Recommended Posts

 

This may be an example of an argument by popularity: Flossing is recommended by most people. Therefore, it is good.

 

But if flossing was recommended by most dentists, it is not only good but also not a fallacy or an argument by popularity.

 

I’m no genius, but surveys have concluded that attending high school, getting a high school diploma gives you higher chances of earning a higher income compared to those that don’t attend high school:-

http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/press/cost05/education_pays_05.pdf

 

So, I don’t see any harm in setting up a poll in this thread, because the argument “high school helps people in colleges/further education/jobs etc” is not a fallacy.

 

Putting up a poll is not a hard thing to either:-

http://www.amaranthia.com/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=14680&forum=2

 

 

I admit that I don't have facts, because what type of facts are you looking for? A comparison trial between kids who have gone to high school and kids who haven't?

 

What I'm looking for is some rationality. It's one thing to argue that students should be forced to branch out in order to expose them to things they might be interested in. However, it becomes absurd to make compulsory classes that basically continue at more sophisticated levels if the student had absolutely no interest in it whatsoever at the basic level.

 

And don't you think there's a reason that some students have seemingly no will to study? There's no learning disorder going on. It's just that the piano prodigy who dreams of going to Juilliard and becoming a concert pianist doesn't have much interest in the study of Earth Science. Instead of wasting those 10 hours a week of studying, sitting in class, and doing homework for a subject he is going to wipe out from his brain the second after finals are over, he could have spent that time furthering his goals.

 

Kids don't like doing what they are forced to do. Not at that age. The younger generation is not being well served by the old methods of gathering information. Not with the booming use of the internet.

 

A fact sheet to prove your argument that states “90% of high school education is waste”

 

Math is taught in all high schools and it is necessary whether you like it or not. When a student takes it for four years straight, it will benefit the student in later life to pay his/her taxes, bills, run errands etc.

 

Oh, when a student has absolutely no will to study anything at all, it isn’t due to some learning disorder. It is simply because s/he does not want to study. The piano prodigy has to require skills and in order get the knack, he has to study the required domain of adroitness. Also, taking earth science in addition wouldn’t be a complete waste. What if he didn’t get into Juilliard? What if this prodigy changed his mind and decided to become an environmentalist? Not all people are completely fixed on their goals. People do constantly change their minds. And because of the ability of having broad knowledge about everything from high school, it’s not hard to switch to economics in college, when you were doing chemistry the whole time through, which a lot of people do pull off.

 

Forcing causes resistance. You can’t force a person to give the answer they have absolutely no idea of. Kids aren’t forced to gain knowledge of a subject, their entitled to do so. Teachers are mentors, tutors that eventually persuade a student to grasp the subject matter that is being taught in class. Why else are they called teachers? It is not forcing but inducing. As for the internet, you know, there are a growing number of high schools that use cyber tutoring. But are still in the process of escalating that growth as it is time consuming and expensive.

 

 

I'm starting to get a little frustrated with our continual miscommunication. Do you really think my argument is "High school teaches you the basics in life, therefore, we should ban it"?

 

Before we continue, could you reflect in your own words, what you think my problem is with high school? I just want to check that we're on the same page, because it's like you're arguing with a completely different person.

 

Nope. Your argument from the very beginning was “90% of what you learn in high school is wasted”. We are on the same track. In fact, I did respond to your previous post in the preceding thread. But unfortunately, my post was deleted; that was because we were off-topic anyway. And I’m too lazy to write the entire post all over again.

 

@theone: okay, that’s scary. You might as well fail in the tests you took. lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@lovinlife

 

Kids aren’t forced to gain knowledge of a subject, their entitled to do so.

 

I'm going to have to disagree with this. Kids are forced to learn the material. If don't learn it, then you don't pass. You don't pass, then you have to wait even more to graduate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But if flossing was recommended by most dentists, it is not only good but also not a fallacy or an argument by popularity.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

 

I’m no genius, but surveys have concluded that attending high school, getting a high school diploma gives you higher chances of earning a higher income compared to those that don’t attend high school:-

http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/press/cost05/education_pays_05.pdf

 

What is this obsession you have with dichotomizing high school education as it is and no high school education at all? I never said that students should stop going to highschool, but that highschool needs to be changed. Please pay attention. My focus is on the quality of education. Your statistics only reflect the formality of a degree.

 

So, I don’t see any harm in setting up a poll in this thread, because the argument “high school helps people in colleges/further education/jobs etc” is not a fallacy.

 

It is not. However, that wasn't your argument. Your argument was "90% of what we learn in high school isn't worthless because lots of people disagree". *THAT* is a fallacy.

 

Putting up a poll is not a hard thing to either:-

http://www.amaranthia.com/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=14680&forum=2

 

Things that are easy aren't necessarily useful. A poll doesn't show whether something is right or wrong unless the argument is whether not not something is popular.

 

Math is taught in all high schools and it is necessary whether you like it or not. When a student takes it for four years straight, it will benefit the student in later life to pay his/her taxes, bills, run errands etc.

 

What type of taxes, bills, and errands involve imaginary numbers, conical sections, limits, and trigonometrical proofs? You must have some very complicated spending habits.

 

Oh, when a student has absolutely no will to study anything at all, it isn’t due to some learning disorder. It is simply because s/he does not want to study.

 

Strawman fallacy. Did I ever say we were talking specifically about students who have no will to study ANYTHING AT ALL? Or did I mention students who don't feel like studying things they consider irrelevant to their interests? *Hint*, it's the latter.

 

The piano prodigy has to require skills and in order get the knack, he has to study the required domain of adroitness.

 

Stawman fallacy. Since when did I say the pianist doesn't need to practice piano? I said that a pianist doesn't need to know Earth science. Stop twisting my arguments just because yours are failing.

 

Also, taking earth science in addition wouldn’t be a complete waste. What if he didn’t get into Juilliard? What if this prodigy changed his mind and decided to become an environmentalist?

 

If he hates Earth science, why would he decide to become an environmentalist? Also, should we also make ventriloquism class, basket weaving class, and introduction to goat milking mandatory classes, in case they want to do that?

 

Not all people are completely fixed on their goals. People do constantly change their minds. And because of the ability of having broad knowledge about everything from high school, it’s not hard to switch to economics in college, when you were doing chemistry the whole time through, which a lot of people do pull off.

 

Even people who *aren't* fixed on their goals will benefit from more freedom in choosing what they want to learn than being forced to waste their time in something they despise.

 

Forcing causes resistance. You can’t force a person to give the answer they have absolutely no idea of. Kids aren’t forced to gain knowledge of a subject, their entitled to do so. Teachers are mentors, tutors that eventually persuade a student to grasp the subject matter that is being taught in class. Why else are they called teachers? It is not forcing but inducing. As for the internet, you know, there are a growing number of high schools that use cyber tutoring. But are still in the process of escalating that growth as it is time consuming and expensive.

 

I'm sorry, but this is an extremely idealistic point of view. Students are FORCED to LEARN. They are FORCED to attend classes, FORCED to take exams, FORCED to study, and FORCED to earn passing marks, else they are FORCED to do it over and over again until they do. And as part of their resistance, they dump out everything they learned after finals. In one year, the student forgets over half of what he or she was tested on in a class the year before.

 

Nope. Your argument from the very beginning was “90% of what you learn in high school is wasted”. We are on the same track. In fact, I did respond to your previous post in the preceding thread. But unfortunately, my post was deleted; that was because we were off-topic anyway. And I’m too lazy to write the entire post all over again.

 

Then the confusion is definitely on your end. You've done nothing but attempt to argue that a highschool diploma has some benefit (and judging by your statistics, not much, only a $7000 difference yearly). A highschool diploma is not indicative of a quality highschool education.

 

Your highschool GPA is a reflection of how well you knew the material during the exam. Highschool is structured in a way that makes it nearly impossible to retain more than 1 out of every 10 things you learn in any class.

 

But before we continue, answer me these questions:

 

1. Have you attended highschool?

2. Have you attended college?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was not what I meant about the patenting thing.

 

I said they should learn how to patent things. Part of the problem is that foreign people know how to patent things in the US better than people from there. Thus you get people moving to the US and patent milling everything they can so that the US inventors can't make anything without having to pay copyrights to at least 10 different people from China and India. China and India don't enforce US patents in their countries ever unless it benefits one of their companies.

 

Music/game piracy should never be the main focus of a class studying copyrights. Patenting and copyrighting are important to know how to do in any field.

 

 

 

@Kleptin: Are you asking those last 2 questions of everyone?

I've attended both of those, trade school, ground (for flight training) school, state level networking competitions, and grew up in industry and business. At the moment I am working on physically designing a control panel for concrete screeds. Solder burns TTT______TTT owchiez

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those subjects that taught in schools just give more choices for one to find their job. If you taught with many things, then you'd probably can do many things as you'd taught. That's why students are forced to swallow all of those *unnecessary* subjects. Plus, they also need to know which subject they best. Yet, if someone who can do everything in average will having dilemma.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Fish Sanitago - You want to teach how to write patents in schools? Most people don't actually create things which requrie new patents - artists, lawyers, teachers, firefighters, doctors, writers, administrators, etc. don't usually create new products, they just use things which are patented. It's far more likely that a student will create intellectual property which require rules such as copyright, trademark, etc. Even in my work where we do patent our ideas, we hire a patent lawyer to actually do the writing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@theone: i point to my lovely hs that made my first 2 years of college relatively easy. :P

 

Compared to many of my college peers, I was greatly prepared for college. Of course, few hs have standards like mine to begin with lol. (Which is to say, you were eaten alive, just survived, or thrived in my HS)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what is wrong with high school.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110216/ap_on_hi_te/us_teacher_suspended_blog#mwpphu-container

Quoting:

My students are out of control," Munroe, who has taught 10th, 11th and 12th grades, wrote in one post. "They are rude, disengaged, lazy whiners. They curse, discuss drugs, talk back, argue for grades, complain about everything, fancy themselves entitled to whatever they desire, and are just generally annoying."

 

This is the general state of students and why high schools are failing

 

P.S- My hs was great too

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@theone: i don't see how that is a general statement for the hs in US. That one is either a sucky HS [she's lucky they only argue. Some HS in my city you fear for your life] OR the teacher is exaggerating/being pissy/being a horrible teacher to begin with.

 

One emotion filled blog by one teacher in one hs doesn't mean anything. Compared to a given total number of HS in US, it could be an outlier, right in the middle, or anywhere in between.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This debate reminds me of another related issue - the usefulness of standardized tests, especially the college entrance exams like the ACT and SAT that many high school students end up taking.

 

I'm curious whether people think that high school, or just school in general, actually prepares students for the exams and whether they are a good indication of how students are doing (for example, standardize tests are used to see how well the school is doing) or how well students will do in college (like the ACT or SAT)?

 

It's been awhile since I've done the standardized exams and they kept changing them while I was in school so I'm not sure if they're still the same but even then I failed to see the usefulness of them. The fact that they took a entire week to do seemed like a waste of class time to me.

 

As for the college entrance exams, I can't stand them and don't think they say much about how well a student will do in college other than how well they can take a standardized exam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What is this obsession you have with dichotomizing high school education as it is and no high school education at all? I never said that students should stop going to highschool, but that highschool needs to be changed. Please pay attention. My focus is on the quality of education. Your statistics only reflect the formality of a degree.

 

There is no such fixation:-

Unless you go to a vocational school, then 90% of what you learn in high school is wasted. I'm sticking by that until you can prove otherwise.

 

^This is what you said.

 

 

It is not. However, that wasn't your argument. Your argument was "90% of what we learn in high school isn't worthless because lots of people disagree". *THAT* is a fallacy.

 

That is not a fallacy either.

 

 

Things that are easy aren't necessarily useful. A poll doesn't show whether something is right or wrong unless the argument is whether not not something is popular.

 

Yes, a poll does not necessarily show the right/wrong thing. However majority usually does win.

 

 

What type of taxes, bills, and errands involve imaginary numbers, conical sections, limits, and trigonometrical proofs? You must have some very complicated spending habits.

 

My spending habits have got nothing to do with how important math is for everyone in day to day life.

 

 

Strawman fallacy. Did I ever say we were talking specifically about students who have no will to study ANYTHING AT ALL? Or did I mention students who don't feel like studying things they consider irrelevant to their interests? *Hint*, it's the latter.

 

This is what I said and I was referring to kids who don’t like studying at all. And when I said don’t like studying at all, I also meant don’t like studying anything at all, as well:-

 

You’re argument is entirely opinion based. You haven’t stated facts to support it. Perhaps high school is a waste of time for you, but not for everyone else out there who, as mentioned before, don’t even like studying to begin with, and would end up doing nothing if they hadn’t attended high school.

 

This was your counterargument, which ignored the partial implication in my post, and stated the prodigy example instead:-

 

And don't you think there's a reason that some students have seemingly no will to study? There's no learning disorder going on. It's just that the piano prodigy who dreams of going to Juilliard and becoming a concert pianist doesn't have much interest in the study of Earth Science. Instead of wasting those 10 hours a week of studying, sitting in class, and doing homework for a subject he is going to wipe out from his brain the second after finals are over, he could have spent that time furthering his goals.

 

And that was when I pointed out my implication:-

 

Oh, when a student has absolutely no will to study anything at all, it isn’t due to some learning disorder. It is simply because s/he does not want to study.

 

It’s always better to get the picture first, and then you can criticize it all you want.

 

 

Stawman fallacy. Since when did I say the pianist doesn't need to practice piano? I said that a pianist doesn't need to know Earth science. Stop twisting my arguments just because yours are failing.

 

Did you ever mention anywhere in your example that the pianist needed to study the required skills in order to become one? No.

Yes, you did say that the pianist did not need Earth science, but the same went for him studying keyboard skills.

 

And don't you think there's a reason that some students have seemingly no will to study? There's no learning disorder going on. It's just that the piano prodigy who dreams of going to Juilliard and becoming a concert pianist doesn't have much interest in the study of Earth Science. Instead of wasting those 10 hours a week of studying, sitting in class, and doing homework for a subject he is going to wipe out from his brain the second after finals are over, he could have spent that time furthering his goals.

 

Judging someone’s argument without looking at their own first makes it rather thick.

 

 

If he hates Earth science, why would he decide to become an environmentalist? Also, should we also make ventriloquism class, basket weaving class, and introduction to goat milking mandatory classes, in case they want to do that?

 

Well. There is no harm in keeping all your doors open.

 

 

Even people who *aren't* fixed on their goals will benefit from more freedom in choosing what they want to learn than being forced to waste their time in something they despise.

 

Was that supposed to contradict my argument? Cuz it looked like a new contention.

When people are not fixed on their goals, they do not benefit from choosing what they want to learn as they still have no idea what it is they are to go in for. But they do pretty much aspire and benefit from taking all subjects that are available to them. Why? For the reason that they are not positive/certain about what field they are going to pursue in the future.

 

 

I'm sorry, but this is an extremely idealistic point of view. Students are FORCED to LEARN. They are FORCED to attend classes, FORCED to take exams, FORCED to study, and FORCED to earn passing marks, else they are FORCED to do it over and over again until they do. And as part of their resistance, they dump out everything they learned after finals. In one year, the student forgets over half of what he or she was tested on in a class the year before.

 

I don’t find this as an idealistic point of view as it is not. Also, what makes you say your point of view isn’t?

 

 

Then the confusion is definitely on your end. You've done nothing but attempt to argue that a highschool diploma has some benefit (and judging by your statistics, not much, only a $7000 difference yearly). A highschool diploma is not indicative of a quality highschool education.

 

Your highschool GPA is a reflection of how well you knew the material during the exam. Highschool is structured in a way that makes it nearly impossible to retain more than 1 out of every 10 things you learn in any class.

 

But before we continue, answer me these questions:

 

1. Have you attended highschool?

2. Have you attended college?

 

Looks like even that zilch didn’t seem to work. As for the last stance, it’s the exact opposite in my high school.

Furthermore, am *attending* high school. So this makes the last answer obvious – not *yet* and have full hopes to, thanks to my splendid high school which gives me the ability to explore/learn/opt/settle on every aspect of my didactic verve. You know what; I’m going to keep the water down, since it is already under the bridge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, a poll does not necessarily show the right/wrong thing. However majority usually does win.

 

Actually no. This was explained to you before in a different thread. Poll turnout =/= who is winning. Polls just let the author know how people feel about the topic. It has nothing to do with the debate itself.

 

 

I don’t find this as an idealistic point of view as it is not. Also, what makes you say your point of view isn’t?

 

I have to agree with Kleptin. It was a pretty idealistic view. You're talking about that the teachers are gift to the students, and that the students have a choice in schooling. Kids don't have a choice until they are of the age to where they can drop out. You have to go to school; you have to study. There is no choice in this. Teachers aren't their to guide or be mentors. Teachers are there to teach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm well of course no one can be forced to study or actually retain any information for longer than it takes to "pass" an exam. It's also possible to flunk out of schooling or to do as my son does and scrape by on as little effort as possible. It's not a great way to get prepared for the rest of your life, but it's possible to do.

 

I have to say, that I don't know of any teachers in the US who "just teach" in high school. Teachers I know do a ton of other things - keep up their credentials/certifications, deal with special needs kids/students with limited language skills, police the class room (every thing from cheating to drugs to bullying), participate in fundraising/Parent teacher organizations, answer calls and emails/conference with parents, have after school help or study times, coach sports and clubs (which take many evenings and weekends away from their own families) and yes they might actually find time to advise and encourage students in a particular direction (I had several of those myself). It's a really demanding job and lots of people don't end up very good at all of those things or burn out. Those who do find their calling can make a big difference (I'm thinking particularly of a teacher I read about in inner city Philiadelphia I choose to stay).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i honestly sometimes feel that all high school is doing is teaching you how to get into college. from freshman year they are bombarding you with "oh you might wanna do this to get into college" or "oh, make sure you know how to do this to get into college" and sometimes i just wanna scream "WHAT IF I DON'T WANNA GO TO COLLEGE?!" and then i know they'll be like "if you don't go to college, you will fail at life."

 

then i bring in the mark zuckerburg reference :P remind me again how no college makes you fail at life?

 

anyway, all i wanna do with my life is explore the world. i feel as if high school just wants to make sure you settle down with a family and get the highest education possible, maybe sometimes not possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think you can really blame schools for encouraging people to go to college. It's statistically better for your future earnings and for gaining employment in general. Even jobs in tech types of fields don't really do much on the job training these days and you need to go to a technical college. That being said, it's not necessarily for everyone.

 

Just for the record, I don't see how Mark Zuckerburg fits into this argument against high school since he attended Harvard and definitely had a college-prep education.

 

Education is supposed to make it so that you have more choices (not fewer) in life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@pink

I agree with ljspence. Statistically, people with higher education have a better chance of getting good jobs, which means you can pay for a home, food, clothes, etc. When you hear stories of people succeeding without post-secondary education, they are the exceptions rather than the rule.

 

Life is far from easy once you get out into the real world, so it's best to do what you can to do well. I'm not saying that you need to work all the time and get rich - I'm just saying that it's certainly no fun constantly worrying about having enough money to pay your bills and for food.

 

And who says you can't explore the world AND have an education? In fact, depending on what you do, having an education may help you in this respect. I know of a high school classmate who, due to her field of work, is somewhere in South America for ecological research...or something (this is based on her Facebook statuses, lol). I also have a friend from university who is working as a nurse in South Africa, and before that, did some work in England. I have another friend who, after he graduated from university, was able to teach English in Japan. So, basically, lots of options out there!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In college, you can also study abroad working in places all over the world. So one is definitely able to travel and have a decent education.

 

For example, one of my friends in college went to china for a whole semester.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since this thread was about high school, not necessarily college, I don't think Mark Zuckerburg is a good example since he did have a college prep background and got into Harvard (something I couldn't have done)! His background definitely contributed to his ability to take advantage of opportunities once he reached there. You may not need a college degree to be successful (though most people aren't millionaires even with a college degree), but a solid education in high school is part of what we use to succeed in whatever we choose to do after it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Besides, you're taking the example of a man who ripped off the ideas of two of his fellow students to become rich then tricked his friend out of his shares. Not a great example

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, he went to college, and Harvard at that. That means he has money (harvard = expensive) and had some form of a college education before he dropped out.

 

So no, it's a bad example. Also, he is an exception. You're talking about only one guy out of how many college dropouts (and seeing as this is thread is talking about highschool specifically, this guy doesn't count in this discussion)?

 

Rather than looking at the rare exceptions, you should look at how many people actually get successful jobs once they dropped out/finish of high school and had no college experience. That would have more weight in this debate than a single outlier who doesn't even matter in this debate on highschool education.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×