School should teach the following things:
Well, let's take a look at this list, shall we? I teach in a middle school, so my greatest experience is with grades 6-8 (for those from other school systems, that ages 11-14)
History (local, national, global)
6th grade: History, culture, and geography of Canada, and Mexico
7th grade: World geography, including history, culture, economic systems, religions, etc.
8th grade: American History, starting with Columbus and working up through the Constitution; the rest is taught in high school
Compartive religion (not "you will be this religion" but explaing what differnit religions are like)
See above... and remember that lots of parents don't want their kids taught this - we have kids pulled from social studies/history/geography all the time during units that teach comparative religions, because their parents don't want the children "exposed", for a wide variety of reasons.
Three languages (English, Spanish, and a third)
Why 3? And why Spanish? I understand what you're saying - but this is an English-speaking country. As an English-speaking, tax-paying native, I'm tired of my money going to print everything the government produces twice. There was an initiative that made the ballot in Colorado some years ago that would have mandated that all government employees speak, read and write English to a particular standard (I believe it was about 5th grade) so that the government could quit having to publish everything in English and Spanish, with a significant savings in cost - it was voted down as "prejudicial" to native speakers of Spanish. Well, what about people who speak other languages? There are currently 17 languages spoken at my school - and most of them are Asian and Eastern European, such as Czech, although Spanish is also well represented. Should we publish all the school notices in all 17 languages?
Teach all 17 languages? It's a slippery slope to start traveling down.
That said, yes, I think that the schools need to teach foreign languages, and I think they need to start in elementary school, when kids learn languages the most easily. But that's hard to do without money, and harder still while attempting to improve reading, writing, math, and science scores on standardized tests as mandated by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (more commonly known as No Child Left Behind, a great idea that was incredibly badly implemented). Schools have been dropping untested subjects at a furious rate, because too much funding is tied to test scores. I'll get back to this one later.
How to use a comp. (it is the future after all)
Every kid in my middle school takes at least 2 computer classes in 3 years... and very few of them need those classes, given the proliferation of computers. And you still have to know
what to do with it - which brings us back to reading, writing and math; if you can't do those things, and worse, don't know
when or
which things to do, a computer isn't much help.
How to do certain things that everyone should know how to do (cook, fill out taxes, get along with people...)
I learned all these things from my parents - and I believe it is the parents' job to teach life skills. Certainly, the schools can reinforce these things - but these are things kids should learn at home. The schools are already doing too much parenting as it is.
expose students to what differnit jobs would be like
Have you heard of summer jobs? Internships? Take your child to work day? Again - the schools can reinforce these things, and offer opportunities the parents don't have - my school has Career Day every year for the 7th and 8th grade, and had over 50 careers represented this past year, and there are career planning and exploration units included in various classes - but this is a life skill, and life skills should be taught
everywhere, by
everyone kids come into contact with. It should not be limited to the schools, nor should the schools be the primary source.
And, foster creativity and a love of learning
And we do that as best we can, while still trying to meet the requirements of NCLB. Face it, when your job is on the line unless all the little kiddies (who couldn't care less about the state tests) do well on the test - you're going to teach the things that are on the test. As I said above, NCLB is a law with a great idea that was lost in a crappy implementation. To properly determine if students are making progress, students need to be tested in small bits, regularly, using data from the classroom in the same format in which learning actually takes place - not in one massive annual exam that has no effect on a student's learning, and therefore no incentive to do well. From the article:
Larry Michalec, a computer programmer in San Diego, called the testing a waste of time. "They're standardized and people aren't standardized," he said. "Children get taught to the test. They get taught to take the test. They don't get taught to learn."
And this is the other point. Children are individuals, and standardized testing is
not individualized. Colleges have been placing less and less emphasis on SAT and ACT scores for years, because school performance has turned out to be a much better predictor of college success than the college board tests. Yes, there are careers for which you must demonstrate your knowledge via a test for certification purposes (CPAs, lawyers, teachers, etc.) but for most people, once you're out of school, you'll never take another test again - but you will use the skills you were taught to perform your job, and that itself is the real test, whether or not you can do your job properly on a regular basis.
Schools now, don't do much of that.
Your school may not do much of it - at least, your perception is certainly that they don't - but not being at your school, I can't say. Mine does... to those who are paying attention, anyway.
Let's be honest, you will probably never need to know how to solve a matrix multiplcation problem unless you go into a specialized feild. So, it's pretty much pointless to teach that kind of skill in high school.
True, you may not - but the purpose of learning higher math is rarely to be able to do higher math later; the purpose of learning higher math is that it teaches logical processing in a way that nothing else can. But again, that's something that few people understand at the time they're being taught it.
