Where are all the men?

[JMohegan]

I usually expect all of those majors to have comparable expository writing skills since they all greatly require it. Writing an expository essay for a lit class is a little different than it is for a history class, but its no less important or necessary.

Comparability is exactly my point.

 

[Netzach]

I have been tested for just about every LD out there, and the only one that would stick was ADD. All it gets me is extra time on tests, which is pretty unhelpful when I'll be done with the test in the first 5 minutes after reading through the questions and realizing that I won't be able to answer a single one. I'm going to try and get as much extra help and tutoring as possible, and Seb who's is all math-smart said he would help me, but I can't have other people take the tests for me, y'know? And yeah, no approach to math has sunk in for me, and I really did try and want to pass.

Geometry made more sense in that I can recognize shapes, but once it got more advanced than this is a square and this is a triangle, I was pretty lost.

The only time I did somewhat well in a math class was when in my sophomore year my teacher would give one logic problem a day as extra credit. I always managed to answer the logic problem quickly and correctly and my professor was completely dumbfounded and once told me that he couldn't understand why I was so good at logic problems and so awful at math, since math really is just logic. I don't understand it any better than he does, but as soon as numbers are put into equation form its like trying to read Egyptian hieroglyphs.

Ah, yeah they are for me too. I ask because I was a B+ geometry student, to everyone's confusion. Apparently being good at that and awful at calculation is one of the dyscalculia diagnostic markers.

Meh, I could go on and on about how inflexibly bad most math teaching is.

 

[Netzach]

Comparability is exactly my point.

Some of the better writing I read when being asked to edit for my pals was from poli sci and anthro and other kinds of people. Literature and art history were both really soggy with PoMo Critical jargon at that point.

 

[Keroin]

Consider being tested for some kind of LD. I'm not sure what that will get you other than some directed help and maybe some untimed testing, but I know that none of the ways math is taught sunk in for me and it was definitely not for lack of trying and wanting to pass. Did geometry make more sense to you than other kinds of math?

This is interesting. Geometry was a piece of cake for me. Actually, I was an A student in math until Junior High. That whole negative number thing really rocked me. Then they threw in letters and I...huh? No, no, no does not compute!!

My boyfriend in HS was good at both math and English and when he explained algebra to me I got it - temporarily. He explained the formulas and equations as stories and that just made so much sense. Unfortunately, I couldn't bring him to class with me and that kind of knowledge just never stuck around for long.

I wrote killer expository essays in History class.

My problem was always with literary analysis, not writing itself.

OK, this makes sense. Similarly, I can add, subtract, multiply and divide very well but abstract mathematical principles...nope.

I would never assume that an English major had expository writing skills superior to those of History, Political Science, or other writing-intensive majors.

I would assume that the English major had an interest in literature, creative writing, or both.

I think I didn't make my point clearly. I'll think on that for a moment and come back.

 

[JMohegan]

I think I didn't make my point clearly. I'll think on that for a moment and come back.

My comment was made in response to two things.

First, your surprised reaction to my "tortured in Lit class" comment (paraphrased as: omg, then how on earth can you write?), and second, your statement wondering what the heck people will do if they don't know any English majors and there's editing to be done.

Personally, I always found English classes to be ghastly in terms of instruction of writing skills. I'm not trying to impugn the expository skills of English majors, but rather, trying to help you see that English classes aren't necessarily all that.

Which brings me to your point.

I get hit up all the time to help friends with editing - resumes, websites, business letters. But what about the people who don't have an English major in their list of contacts? I don't think everyone needs to be able to understand the proper usage of semi-colons, (though I wish they would - kidding, kidding), but basic spelling, basic grammar, basic formulation of ideas on the written page are worthwhile skills, however difficult they are to acquire.

How do you teach people these things without holding them back in what they do excel at? Good question.

I absolutely agree that the formulation of ideas on the written page is a worthwhile skill.

To answer your last question - for god's sake, take literary analysis out of the equation. Change traditional high school English classes to actual Writing classes, in which students are allowed and encouraged to write about whatever they want, as long as the point is to explain and persuade. Introduce students to the notables and classics of literature in a separate course.

 

[Keroin]

My comment was made in response to two things.

First, your surprised reaction to my "tortured in Lit class" comment (paraphrased as: omg, then how on earth can you write?), and second, your statement wondering what the heck people will do if they don't know any English majors and there's editing to be done.

Personally, I always found English classes to be ghastly in terms of instruction of writing skills. I'm not trying to impugn the expository skills of English majors, but rather, trying to help you see that English classes aren't necessarily all that.

Which brings me to your point.
I absolutely agree that the formulation of ideas on the written page is a worthwhile skill.

To answer your last question - for god's sake, take literary analysis out of the equation. Change traditional high school English classes to actual Writing classes, in which students are allowed and encouraged to write about whatever they want, as long as the point is to explain and persuade. Introduce students to the notables and classics of literature in a separate course.

Yes, apologies. I can certainly see how my question could be interpreted as patronizing - that was not my intention.

My experience has been that people who struggle through English, (not English Lit, different subject), generally have poor written communication skills, which would be obvious in a forum such as this. The former GM of the five star resort down the road from me here could barely put together a legible email of one paragraph, and this man is university educated and has twenty years of experience.

English classes, at the high school level, at least as I knew them, were definitely not all that. Agreed. I also agree that there should be classes for people who want critical analysis of literature as well as classes for those who just want/need technical writing instruction. Likewise, could there not be math classes for those who understand X + 6 = as well as classes designed to teach something the non-numerically inclined would find useful after graduation? In my high school, you could take a remedial English or math class but the problem was that these courses were not acceptable for entry into college or university, which makes them useless for people like you and me.

Maybe times have changed? From what you and Syd have said, it doesn't sound like it. I can't vouch for the Canadian system, since it's been more than twenty years since I was in it. (I'll have to ask my nephews about it next time we email).

The comment about friends needing an English major could be re-phrased as "What about people who don't have the resources to help them with their writing?" For example, I'm referring to someone who may have only a high school education but needs to write something important, such as a cover letter for a job application. I was responding to Netz's comment that people who aren't good at English can just hire someone who is. For some people, this is not an option. This is why I consider basic English skills, (not of the variety that gave you difficulty), something everyone should learn.

It still floors me that someone can make it to college and not know how to write a proper essay, though.

 

[midwestyankee]

<snip>

It still floors me that someone can make it to college and not know how to write a proper essay, though.

Ever try to get more than two English teachers to agree on what constitutes "a proper essay?" You'll find that the matter becomes even more difficult when the team you have to convince also includes a state legislator who couldn't sign his own name properly without the help of a personal assistant.

Part of the problem with teaching is that there are far too many "experts" on teaching and far too few people who actually understand how learning happens on complex levels. It's a bit like a room full of auctioneers, each hawking his own wares, and no one can figure out which one has the wares that are worth buying.

 

[Keroin]

This talk about linguistic skills reminded me of a TV documentary I watched a few years ago. (Wish I could remember the name but I think it was "Gender Wars" or something). The show consisted of a variety of tests, performed by a group of men and women, to test traditional gender attributes.

One of the tests concerned language. Subjects put on a set of earphones over which a series of words could be heard. They were instructed to repeat whatever they heard. Both sexes scored the same on this test. However, on the second run through, unknown to the subjects, one word would come from the left earpiece while a different word would simultaneously come from the right earpiece. The women all heard both words and repeated them every time. The men only ever heard one word.

I found this fascinating.

There were many other tests and the end result was basically as we'd expect, with a few individuals on opposite ends of the spectrum but the majority falling in line with gender stereotypes.

 

[Keroin]

Ever try to get more than two English teachers to agree on what constitutes "a proper essay?" You'll find that the matter becomes even more difficult when the team you have to convince also includes a state legislator who couldn't sign his own name properly without the help of a personal assistant.

Part of the problem with teaching is that there are far too many "experts" on teaching and far too few people who actually understand how learning happens on complex levels. It's a bit like a room full of auctioneers, each hawking his own wares, and no one can figure out which one has the wares that are worth buying.

I was wondering when you'd finally poke your head in

I imagine it must be a nightmare. The essay format at the university I went to was slightly different than the one I'd been taught in highschool but the differences were so minor as to be irrelevant. The basics were all the same.

My goal, in university, was to become a highschool English teacher. Talking to my teacher friends now, I'm glad I didn't follow that path. The teaching part may have been fun but the bureaucracy would have driven me crazy. Also, I realized, sooner rather than later thank goodness, that I was more enamored with the idea of teaching than the reality of teaching. Getting hit by cars held much more appeal.

Why do you think most people become teachers?

Learning is complex. Agreed.

 

[midwestyankee]

I was wondering when you'd finally poke your head in

I imagine it must be a nightmare. The essay format at the university I went to was slightly different than the one I'd been taught in highschool but the differences were so minor as to be irrelevant. The basics were all the same.

My goal, in university, was to become a highschool English teacher. Talking to my teacher friends now, I'm glad I didn't follow that path. The teaching part may have been fun but the bureaucracy would have driven me crazy. Also, I realized, sooner rather than later thank goodness, that I was more enamored with the idea of teaching than the reality of teaching. Getting hit by cars held much more appeal.

Why do you think most people become teachers?

Learning is complex. Agreed.

Disclaimer: I have taught the following grade levels: fourth through twelfth, community college (both for standard-issue students in their late teens and early twenties and for working older adults), university undergraduate, and some graduate school. My experience includes mostly public schools, though the youngest students I taught were in a private school and my university teaching was all at a well-respected technical university in Chicago. My experience is in no way universal nor should it be taken to be representative of public school teachers in general.

In my experience, people become teachers for one of three reasons.

A few, mostly men but not exclusively so, go into teaching because they want to be a coach. So they learn some rudimentary Spanish and teach Spanish 1 all day so that they can coach football in the fall and track in the spring. Some of these folks end up in the administration, usually as disciplinarians. These people are in it to be life-long jocks.

Some go into teaching because they love their subject matter. In my experience, many of this type of teacher have not quite enough intellectual horsepower to teach at the college level but they have all of the intellectual snobbery that one associates with stereotypical college profs. They also seem to universally dislike high school students, looking down on them as inadequate. I advised my children to avoid such teachers like the plague. These people are in teaching because it gives them the opportunity to be the prize A student every day, lecturing to his or her less-skilled former classmates.

A small number of people go into teaching because they love the nurturing, guiding, and development that is the chief role of the teacher. Many of these people love the process of teaching far more than their subject matter. Some of these teachers may confuse Queequeg with Captain Queeg on occasion, but their students learn to love learning. These people are in it for little more than the satisfaction of of doing good for youngsters. Perhaps, maybe, someday they'll be getting a random email message from a former student reminding them of the impact they had had on a few good young minds.

The rarest public school teacher is the one who loves her (or his) subject matter deeply and is also a lover of teaching for the sake of developing young minds. Schools should identify these people early and do everything short of high-salaried bondage to keep them happy. These people are in teaching for the right reasons as well, and they also bring with them the ability to inspire love of their subject matter.

YMMV, of course.

 

[intothewoods]

My comment was made in response to two things.

First, your surprised reaction to my "tortured in Lit class" comment (paraphrased as: omg, then how on earth can you write?), and second, your statement wondering what the heck people will do if they don't know any English majors and there's editing to be done.

Personally, I always found English classes to be ghastly in terms of instruction of writing skills. I'm not trying to impugn the expository skills of English majors, but rather, trying to help you see that English classes aren't necessarily all that.

Which brings me to your point.
I absolutely agree that the formulation of ideas on the written page is a worthwhile skill.

To answer your last question - for god's sake, take literary analysis out of the equation. Change traditional high school English classes to actual Writing classes, in which students are allowed and encouraged to write about whatever they want, as long as the point is to explain and persuade. Introduce students to the notables and classics of literature in a separate course.

You could have a Writing Class, or you could require essay writing in history, English and other electives. That's how my high school worked. It was actually a fairly mediocre school, but essays were assigned routinely, especially in junior and senior year. Maybe before that. I honestly don't remember. At any rate, essays were assigned. It just wasn't that competitive.

I feel a strong desire to defend English literature, but I'm too tired. Many worthy subjects are out there. I hated graphic quadratic equations. *shrug* We all have our struggles, eh?

 

[AngelicAssassin]

The only time I did somewhat well in a math class was when in my sophomore year my teacher would give one logic problem a day as extra credit. I always managed to answer the logic problem quickly and correctly and my professor was completely dumbfounded and once told me that he couldn't understand why I was so good at logic problems and so awful at math, since math really is just logic. I don't understand it any better than he does, but as soon as numbers are put into equation form its like trying to read Egyptian hieroglyphs.

and in all seriousness, how adept are you at (pick as you like along the spectrum from basic math to geometry and beyond) word problems?

 

[JMohegan]

You could have a Writing Class, or you could require essay writing in history, English and other electives. That's how my high school worked. It was actually a fairly mediocre school, but essays were assigned routinely, especially in junior and senior year. Maybe before that. I honestly don't remember. At any rate, essays were assigned. It just wasn't that competitive.

I feel a strong desire to defend English literature, but I'm too tired. Many worthy subjects are out there. I hated graphic quadratic equations. *shrug* We all have our struggles, eh?

Defend it from what?

I'm not saying the study of literature shouldn't be required. All I'm saying is that asking me to write about Faulkner, poetry, or anything else with alleged hidden meanings and elaborate, obscure metaphors, the point of which I really don't understand, is an ineffective way to attempt to teach me expository skills.

I agree with you that essay skills can, and should, be taught in multiple subjects. My 10th grade history teacher taught me to write.

 

[JMohegan]

Yes, apologies. I can certainly see how my question could be interpreted as patronizing - that was not my intention.

My experience has been that people who struggle through English, (not English Lit, different subject), generally have poor written communication skills, which would be obvious in a forum such as this. The former GM of the five star resort down the road from me here could barely put together a legible email of one paragraph, and this man is university educated and has twenty years of experience.

English classes, at the high school level, at least as I knew them, were definitely not all that. Agreed. I also agree that there should be classes for people who want critical analysis of literature as well as classes for those who just want/need technical writing instruction. Likewise, could there not be math classes for those who understand X + 6 = as well as classes designed to teach something the non-numerically inclined would find useful after graduation? In my high school, you could take a remedial English or math class but the problem was that these courses were not acceptable for entry into college or university, which makes them useless for people like you and me.

Maybe times have changed? From what you and Syd have said, it doesn't sound like it. I can't vouch for the Canadian system, since it's been more than twenty years since I was in it. (I'll have to ask my nephews about it next time we email).

The comment about friends needing an English major could be re-phrased as "What about people who don't have the resources to help them with their writing?" For example, I'm referring to someone who may have only a high school education but needs to write something important, such as a cover letter for a job application. I was responding to Netz's comment that people who aren't good at English can just hire someone who is. For some people, this is not an option. This is why I consider basic English skills, (not of the variety that gave you difficulty), something everyone should learn.

It still floors me that someone can make it to college and not know how to write a proper essay, though.

Thanks for explaining, I get you now.

With regard to useful math classes - I believe that every high school in the country should make successful completion of a Fundamentals of Personal Finance course a graduation requirement.

 

[BiBunny]

Thanks for explaining, I get you now.

With regard to useful math classes - I believe that every high school in the country should make successful completion of a Fundamentals of Personal Finance course a graduation requirement.

The only class I had in high school where I learned anything about taking care of one's finances was in Home Ec, of all things.

 

[Keroin]

Disclaimer: I have taught the following grade levels: fourth through twelfth, community college (both for standard-issue students in their late teens and early twenties and for working older adults), university undergraduate, and some graduate school. My experience includes mostly public schools, though the youngest students I taught were in a private school and my university teaching was all at a well-respected technical university in Chicago. My experience is in no way universal nor should it be taken to be representative of public school teachers in general.

In my experience, people become teachers for one of three reasons.

A few, mostly men but not exclusively so, go into teaching because they want to be a coach. So they learn some rudimentary Spanish and teach Spanish 1 all day so that they can coach football in the fall and track in the spring. Some of these folks end up in the administration, usually as disciplinarians. These people are in it to be life-long jocks.

Some go into teaching because they love their subject matter. In my experience, many of this type of teacher have not quite enough intellectual horsepower to teach at the college level but they have all of the intellectual snobbery that one associates with stereotypical college profs. They also seem to universally dislike high school students, looking down on them as inadequate. I advised my children to avoid such teachers like the plague. These people are in teaching because it gives them the opportunity to be the prize A student every day, lecturing to his or her less-skilled former classmates.

A small number of people go into teaching because they love the nurturing, guiding, and development that is the chief role of the teacher. Many of these people love the process of teaching far more than their subject matter. Some of these teachers may confuse Queequeg with Captain Queeg on occasion, but their students learn to love learning. These people are in it for little more than the satisfaction of of doing good for youngsters. Perhaps, maybe, someday they'll be getting a random email message from a former student reminding them of the impact they had had on a few good young minds.

The rarest public school teacher is the one who loves her (or his) subject matter deeply and is also a lover of teaching for the sake of developing young minds. Schools should identify these people early and do everything short of high-salaried bondage to keep them happy. These people are in teaching for the right reasons as well, and they also bring with them the ability to inspire love of their subject matter.

YMMV, of course.

Good explanation and, looking back, I remember all of these types. The worst ones, though, were the waiting-for-my-pension teachers. Ugh. You could tell the light had gone out years ago and now they were just suffering through the final years. And making us suffer with them.

There should be some sort of early retirement clause for these folks.

I think I need to email some old teachers and say thanks.

 

[ZRT]

Okay, long day, inevitably lots of motion in the thread. Grabbing what comments I've seen and not even trying to keep up at the moment with the later stuff. If I miss a comment from somebody, it's not ducking a point, just lemme know and I'll address it.

Also for some strange reason I heard a sound like an asthmatic geezer cackling, then a strange warm yellow rain descended upon me.

So it was also kind of a surreal day.

Mind if I pounce?

Yes, the need for food & clean water will trump the need for a rousing performance of the HMS Pinafore 99% of the time but don't undervalue the importance of "art" to third world sustenance farmers and their kind. The songs sung in the field, the stories passed along to each generation, the folk dances, etc, etc, these may not be Moby Dick but they are almost as nourishing as bread to many people of small means.

Art can help heal children scarred by war, encourage a sense of community in impoverished areas, give people a healthy outlet for anger and grief, bring light to the dark corners of the world. Art alone cannot solve the world's problems, no, but I cannot call it a luxury.

I'm thinking now of that documentary, "Born Into Brothels" about the American (?) photographer who goes to India to teach young children about photography in the hopes of getting them out of the cycle of poverty and prostitution. Some made it! Hooray for art. Brilliant film.

BTW, I am stuck on a deserted island and I wish I had a couple dozen Lit grads kicking around so I didn't have to inflict myself on everyone here every day in the hopes of some intelligent conversation!

But again, I'm not taking an absolutist viewpoint. I'm well aware of the value of song, dance, and oral tradition. Moral is to physical as three is to one and so on.

But survival is the priority, and then on from there. Furthermore, that same song/dance/oral tradition you're referring to is typically a spontaneous creation. There's a vast difference between that and years of studying the minutiae involved and attributing meaning to it.

I'm all for study of anything and everything. I think it's spiffy keen that people spend time doing that sort of thing, both because it increases the general fund of knowledge and because they're pursuing something they like/love, and it's a great thing that we have the capacity for such luxury in our culture.

But putting food on the table and roofs over everybody's heads is more important.

Setting aside the American-influenced bit of that - I can safely say I've never once heard anybody discuss which schools were the best party places or had the best girl/boy ratio - it's really not, especially not if the family in question is anything like mine (not to go into details, but suffice it to say that me doing well means rather a lot to my parents). If they don't already understand that those who've banged on about learning to manage one's time and developing self-discipline know what they're talking about, college does a nice job of hammering that lesson in.

At this point let me say that my views of the educational system are strictly concerning the American system. I've got absolutely zero experience with any other nation's institutions of higher education and wouldn't even begin to try to speak on them.

NB: Also, returning to the original point, being told that something I've spent three years in pursuit of is meaningless? Not particularly pleasant.

And it can be even rougher when you get out in the world and find out that it doesn't qualify you for any sort of decent employment, either. No disrespect, but life often sucks that way. I've known plenty of people who pursued majors in fields they loved, only to come out with a mountain of debt and no decent career avenues to pay it off.

By all means I want everyone to pursue the fields that they love in terms of education, but I really want them to consider their end-product as well. If you're getting a degree with no great demand, be prepared to be satisfied with 'lesser' career potential than in-demand degrees. Too many people seem to go into the whole thing expecting that a college degree is a magic piece of paper that will set their course for a lifetime of martinis and high society.

It'll increase earning power for sure, but an engineer is probably going to make a lot more money off their degree than a history major.

Just to be clear on my point, I'm not arguing that these fields shouldn't be studied, but that they should be approached with clear vision of the potential outcome.

Now, we can debate the merits of assigning value to degrees, but that'll take us afield from the college debate and into debating economics, which is a whole 'nother can o' worms.

This depends entirely on the experience in question. Simply existing only teaches you if you let it and know how to let it. A lot of people in the US enjoy sheltered existences that leave their heads as lodged up their butts at 45 as they were at 15.

A seven year old cancer pt knows more about *the reality of his being sick* than a 60 year old who's always had stellar checkups, and even one who has MD after his name.

Entirely agreed. But those are outliers. I was referring to the general population of younger vs. older.

See, I was thinking about something I was explaining to a younger person the a while back- he was bummed because he lost a friend over fundamental differences in their maturation, he'd grown up and the friend hadn't.

I was telling him that one of the things that happens in life is that the older you get, the more people you lose along the way. Law of averages, people you know die. You outgrow some friendships. People move on. People get married and suddenly you don't fit in their lives anymore.

That's something that most people don't really comprehend until they start getting those casualties of relationships in their lives. I once mentioned to my father that I was going to miss somebody who'd moved out of the area, and he told me 'You're going to miss a lot of people in your life.'

There are young people who've already experienced losses like that. There are upbringings that pretty much ensure that. But a lot don't until they've aged a bit and started watching people drift away and drop out. Hence there's a generational difference in comprehending that.

As for the uselessness of college, I don't think that the value in reading Milton or the Iliad is necessarily that a higher pay grade ensues. If that's your value system, then of course a lot of what passes as culture is a joke to you.

Because you're the latest person to accuse me of thinking that college is worthless, I'm going to talk about your fluffy bunnies, Netz. The ones that circle around you. The ones that tell us how warm and cuddly and utterly wubbable you are.

THEY'RE SO DAMN CUTE.

I'm down with the Odyssey and Chaucer and all that. My only real contention with artistic analysis is that it's pretty much impossible to put a value on because it's entirely subjective and can lead to a lot of circle-jerking.

One can discuss the technical details of form and aesthetic and so on, but even that doesn't conform to any true ground rules because one of the functions of art is to push the envelope and break the 'rules'.

 

[Keroin]

Thanks for explaining, I get you now.

With regard to useful math classes - I believe that every high school in the country should make successful completion of a Fundamentals of Personal Finance course a graduation requirement.

Boy I wish someone had taught me that stuff. Honestly, something as simple as "Here's how credit cards work and if you get in trouble at least make sure you pay something every month to show you're making an effort."

I'm spot on with finances now, and my credit rating is fantastic, but I learned it all the very hard way. Sigh.


*Have a good week everyone, starting tomorrow I'll be chopping off testicles every day so I won't be here* (I'm volunteering with the annual Vet Trek that spays and neuters cats on the island ).

 

[ZRT]

Disclaimer: I have taught the following grade levels: fourth through twelfth, community college (both for standard-issue students in their late teens and early twenties and for working older adults), university undergraduate, and some graduate school. My experience includes mostly public schools, though the youngest students I taught were in a private school and my university teaching was all at a well-respected technical university in Chicago. My experience is in no way universal nor should it be taken to be representative of public school teachers in general.

In my experience, people become teachers for one of three reasons.

A few, mostly men but not exclusively so, go into teaching because they want to be a coach. So they learn some rudimentary Spanish and teach Spanish 1 all day so that they can coach football in the fall and track in the spring. Some of these folks end up in the administration, usually as disciplinarians. These people are in it to be life-long jocks.

Some go into teaching because they love their subject matter. In my experience, many of this type of teacher have not quite enough intellectual horsepower to teach at the college level but they have all of the intellectual snobbery that one associates with stereotypical college profs. They also seem to universally dislike high school students, looking down on them as inadequate. I advised my children to avoid such teachers like the plague. These people are in teaching because it gives them the opportunity to be the prize A student every day, lecturing to his or her less-skilled former classmates.

A small number of people go into teaching because they love the nurturing, guiding, and development that is the chief role of the teacher. Many of these people love the process of teaching far more than their subject matter. Some of these teachers may confuse Queequeg with Captain Queeg on occasion, but their students learn to love learning. These people are in it for little more than the satisfaction of of doing good for youngsters. Perhaps, maybe, someday they'll be getting a random email message from a former student reminding them of the impact they had had on a few good young minds.

The rarest public school teacher is the one who loves her (or his) subject matter deeply and is also a lover of teaching for the sake of developing young minds. Schools should identify these people early and do everything short of high-salaried bondage to keep them happy. These people are in teaching for the right reasons as well, and they also bring with them the ability to inspire love of their subject matter.

YMMV, of course.

Excellent post. There's one other category I'd suggest, and the category I really abjectly loathe- the ones who go into it because they love children.

I cringe every time I hear that. Children are not some faceless mass of cute and precocious minds stumbling about waiting for guidance. People who say they love children don't love children, they love the idea of children.

Children are people, albeit largely undeveloped, but still people. There are going to be kids you really like, kids you're indifferent on, and kids you really don't like.

The people I've seen who do the love children routine tend to end up being embittered because their imagery doesn't match the reality, and ultimately they end up hating children.

The reason I keep italicizing 'love children' is because the very absolute best teacher I ever had once stopped to talk to us about why she was a teacher. She was a very crisp, professional woman, and when she talked about it, she talked about the teachers who love children with a very uncharacteristically sarcastic mocking tone. She went on to talk about how proclaiming to 'love children' dehumanized us as students, and she couldn't stand that at all. She never claimed to love us all, but she was dedicated to seeing that every one of us that passed through her classroom got the very best educational experience she could provide.

She was brilliant at it. You knew in her class that she would take any amount of time to explain things, would never, ever make any student feel dumb or unworthy, and did not play favorites at all. She approached her job with a zeal and dedication to her professionalism that one sees so rarely in life, and to this day I mark her as one of the best people I've ever met. It was an honor to be in her classroom, and Mrs. L, wherever you are, godspeed.

 

[YourCaptor]

starting tomorrow I'll be chopping off testicles every day so I won't be here

and you're wondering where all the men went.

 

[YourCaptor]

I checked the current theory on date rape.

Social sex script in America lays out that the women is supose to be reluctant and the guy is supose to seduce her. Works great in the movies when Bogart forces a "kiss", but in reality?

---

On a related note, when I was little I was playing barbies with my sister.

Yes I was playing barbies and I am a man hear me roar and pound my chest, etc.

Anyway, I was ken, she was barbie, and we got married, had the first kiss in a chariot, and then went home to have sex. Problem was we couldn't agree on who was supose to initiate the sex. I said the girl was supose to seduce, she said its the guy that starts stuff. So we got in a fight.

 

[Netzach]

Thanks for explaining, I get you now.

With regard to useful math classes - I believe that every high school in the country should make successful completion of a Fundamentals of Personal Finance course a graduation requirement.

Oh my God, yes. Of all the things we learned to rock at, you'd think they'd want us to rock our Daddy's money (the majority of us anyway) but I guess they thought we just wouldn't have to think about it at all. The more money the student body in question is likely to have, the less discussion. Which really hurts if you're one of the twenty percent of the school that has no money.

 

[Netzach]

Boy I wish someone had taught me that stuff. Honestly, something as simple as "Here's how credit cards work and if you get in trouble at least make sure you pay something every month to show you're making an effort."

I'm spot on with finances now, and my credit rating is fantastic, but I learned it all the very hard way. Sigh.


*Have a good week everyone, starting tomorrow I'll be chopping off testicles every day so I won't be here* (I'm volunteering with the annual Vet Trek that spays and neuters cats on the island ).

Oooo, do you get to play with an elastrator? Details, details!

*sizes up a jack fluffy bunny in my orbit.*

 

[00Syd]

and in all seriousness, how adept are you at (pick as you like along the spectrum from basic math to geometry and beyond) word problems?

Not at all, if it gets much more complex than "If Bobby has 6 apples and Susan gives him 3 more apples, how many apples does Bobby have?"

 

[00Syd]

Thanks for explaining, I get you now.

With regard to useful math classes - I believe that every high school in the country should make successful completion of a Fundamentals of Personal Finance course a graduation requirement.

I very, very, very strongly agree with this.