Education has become the foundation in which society builds upon in order to create stable career and life in America. The educational system, though, has become a repetitive process where students are expected to memorize words and formulas instead of a curriculum that educates students about current issues. John Dewey, the “father of experimental education” expresses his concerns with the previous current education system where he describes it as a system in which “Democracy cannot flourish” due to the lack of curriculum that doesn 't “acknowledge the social responsibilities of education.” Democracy, according to Dewey, is not possible because it needs people who will develop their own “social insight and interest”. Many schools only focus on memorization which doesn 't leave much room for a student to think on their own, but Dewey points out that if students develop interest and insight, then they will be able to determine their own choices in society. He establishes that if the American educational system continues as it is, democracy will essentially fail.
1.Robinson argues that education systems and society are at fault for the low amount of creativity found in students. 2. Ken Robinson suggests there is a decrease in creativity as a result of an academic inability to nurture individualism as well as a societal pressure to become academically similar. Robinson effectively brings to mind the inadequacy of the education system by addressing its failure in equalizing the importance of all subjects and developing different types of intelligence. His line of reasoning mainly built upon a logical narrative that succeeds in persuading his audience.
In conclusion the real affects of why students do bad in school isn 't because they don 't feel like doing there homework or because they think its too hard or it 'll take forever or that there teacher is just straight up mean but that some people have no choice . Which doesn 't allow them to do good in school or just to escape were crazy families and i don 't just say this just to say this but thats the truth behind the ugly doors in the world that there are bad people that don 't allow our youth to become what they need to become to insure our future. So i just wonder whats doing on in the minds of the parents who think that they don 't need to go to school and lets treat our kids the way we want to treat them and lets use them for our own benefits and not insure our great nations next coming generation. so now i leave this question unto you whats the real reason that
Rewarding students for good grades will decrease student’s self-motivation. Paying students for good grades will realize an actual decrease in academic performance. These distinct disadvantages highlight why schools should not pay students for good grades. First, paying students for good grades causes practical problems in the classroom. According to the National Education Association (NEA), “Many teachers also say paying students for grades leads to practical problems in their classrooms, including pressure to inflate grades and conflict with students and parents.” These pressures and conflicts can lead to larger problems outside of school.
Amy encourages participation from all three groups but notes that the government and parents should have limited contributions due to their lack of knowledge of the occurrences in the classroom. In the theory of democratic education, provided by Amy Gutmann, she calls upon the education system to take full responsibility for providing students with the skills and knowledge capable of enabling them to develop the level of democratic leadership. This is also valid for the improvement of democratic
For instance, John Holt in his essay “School is Bad for Children” gives a very similar definition about education and why he thinks there must be changes to make it better. Holt in his essays mentions that school is a boring, ineffective, and time-consuming place that the only thing that teaches
If a teacher has inhibitions about migrants, they are unlikely to choose them and may suggest an ordinary level class. If a student is placed in an ordinary level class at the start e.g. second year of secondary school, it is virtually impossible to navigate out of it. According to Gillborn (2010, cited in Byrne, Darmody and McGinnity 2014), ‘initial choices made in terms of grouping students by ability may translate into cumulative disadvantage; they ‘compound inequity upon inequity until success can become literally
Formal education confronts children with many demands that are not a regular or frequent characteristic of their everyday experience outside the classroom. The practice of education confronts children with meaningful and necessary discontinuities in their intellectual, social and linguistic experiences (Wood, D., 1995). But according to Bernstein children from ´the middle class´ social background find it easier to accommodate to the school system than ´the working class´ one, because of the language and social norm of the school serve better their comprehension. David Wood (1995) does not agree with Bernstein in this respect he says: “..it is a mistake to think of schooling simply a preserve of one social group. It is not, I suggest, profitably seen as a ´middle-class´ institution, for example.
His study findings concluded that there is no single best leadership style in terms of motivating teachers. Therefore, he suggested that research continue utilizing a different instrument and sampling of different levels of education such as elementary, middle or high school. Mumbe (1993) investigated the head of school leadership style and job satisfaction of teachers in primary secondary school in Busia, Sub-district of Uganda. The researcher concluded that the democratic style affected teachers’ job satisfaction positively and motivated them to work harder towards the achievement of school objectives. The autocratic leadership style found to have a negative impact on the teacher job satisfaction and the laissez faire leadership style did not affect the teachers’ job satisfaction.
Secondly, pedagogy is not aligned with current market demands thereby creating a misalignment between parents’ expectations of the benefits of sending their children to school instead of their children joining the labour force. Banerjee & Duflo (2011) comment, that when curriculum changes are implemented in response to market demand, then parents are willing to educate their children for them to obtain a higher paying job in the future. Finally, insufficient and ineffective government spending on building new schools results in insufficient schools and forces parents to pay for transporting their kids to schools in surrounding neighbourhoods. But, building more schools will not solve the problem, since government must understand what skills learners require to be prepared for the labour market. Although (Duflo, 2001) demonstrates that there is a benefit to the economy in just building schools, due to the substantial demand for education and the lack of