Catherine Johnson and I are continuing to blog, sporadically, on our new blog, catherineandkatharine, and hoping to pick up speed this coming year. In the mean time, I'm going through the wealth of great comments here in OILF for one last Favorite Comments of the Year.
On Please visit an actual classroom before you make recommendations, IX
- High school is more stressful than it should be because kids are not adequately prepared for it. If kids have weak basic skills and they've never been taught to really study, then of course high school is going to be stressful. If the K-6 curriculum were strengthened, high school would be much easier.
- Kids do way too many extra-curricular activities, so they're spread too thin. If you're spending hours swimming every morning and evening, and you're doing a whole lot of music and drama, and you're actively involved in service, then of course, you won't be able to get all your academic work done easily. To ease the stress, kids should be encouraged to pick one or two extra-curriculars to focus on. Kids need more depth, less breadth. And more mastery, less superficial exposure. Depth and mastery are SO much more satisfying than superficial breadth and mere exposure.
- And finally, social media, too much screen time, too little time with parents (who are also very stressed), the breakdown of families, too much junk food, and increasing peer pressure all contribute to stress, depression, and anxiety. The fact of the matter is that our kids live in a stressed society. Perhaps it's 21st century living that's to blame.
It's easy to blame academics, but really, many kids that I work with enjoy rigorous academic work. It's everything else that makes them stressed.
Screen time is a huge problem. Through phones, tablets, gaming devices, and laptops, students are constantly consuming media. Generally--unless they're reading books on those devices--this time is doing little to increase their real-life skills and often much to damage their developing sense of self. And they keep consuming that media late into the night, which is bad for their bodies, too; I'd go so far as to say that parents who love their teenagers should turn the wireless/data plans off at midnight every night.
A. results in watering down courses to the point that those wishing to excel on the Regents Exams must buy supplements to cover all the units omitted. The grading scale favors g.o.b.s...we have had entire quarters where the grade is based on in class participation. Reworking tests gives B students enough points to look like A students. Students who arent g.o.b. dont get picked to contribute to discussion. We end up with most of the top ten students not qualifying for a NY State Excellence Award, which is the state recognition for the students with the highest average on all their Regents Exams.
B. Significant class time is used for remediation, even at the level above Regents. Those who dont need review and reteach still have to do the associated hw. The truly good students are able to excel at sports or music because they are using the review/reteach time to knock off the hw for a different class. They will learn their supplementary material on their own in time to grab a 5 on an AP exam and ace the R. Exams. They will also have SAT section scores that start with a 7 or an 8. They go to state schools, or smaller privates, as they cant get g.o.b. recommemdations and they dont have the level of stem coursework or ecs available to obtain admission to top tech schools.
Here's an example; the fancy private schools where I live require 3 years of team sports in high school. Why? It looks good on your college application. A friend of mine with a son at one of these private schools says her son would begin his school day at 7 a.m. Classes were over at about 3 p.m. Then he had his sports practice till about 7 p.m.; he would come home, have dinner, and do homework for at least 4 hours. On a really good night he was asleep by 1 a.m., to get up at 6 a.m. This is considered normal.
For me, the question of high or low academic standards isn't even the point. I don't see any standards, or none that I care about. The purpose of school K - 12 isn't to learn anything in particular; it's to create a good college application and high test scores. The teachers don't know what it would mean to be well-educated in the subject they teach. That's not even the point.
I might have to take my rant to my own blog --
If "high academic standards" means "kids get into Ivy League schools", then I live in an area with high academic standards. At the same time, I can see that kids who do everything "right" -- and get into those competitive schools -- can still emerge with not much in the way of actual knowledge and skills, along with serious mental health problems.
I would prefer to see students who arent prepared out of school have access to a way to become prepared in school. Let them stay until they are 21.
Sometimes I wonder why our society is so determined to push everyone through in 13 years, regardless of any learning or environmental difficulties a child faces. My son competes in gymnastics and is repeating a level and nobody thinks anything of it. His scores at meets this season compared to last are much better. If he'd been passed along, like many kids at school, he would've had a terrible season at the new level because his foundational skills were too weak. Instead, he got another year to shore up the weaknesses and will be able to do well when he moves up, rather than drown.