The Decaying Evolution of Education...

[wireless man]

Is this the place for instructors to vent?

I teach an entry level construction course at the local college. It is downright scary how many students I get that have never used a hand tool, much less a power drill or a saw. With shop classes being pulled from grade school, we have an entire generation coming into the workforce that can't even change a flat tire. It's all very sad. It's great for my job security as I not only have this teaching job but I'm also called upon by local museums and other places to ID vintage items or repair them. Folks like myself that can fix tube radios and audio equipment can almost name their price.

I try to instill in my students the importance of learning how to fix your own or at least understand how a task is done to avoid getting taken advantage of. It's interesting how often times the women in my classes have more drive than the gents. Fine by me. Rosie the riveter was always cool in my book.

 

[LizzieMaine]

It's not just kids. I know plenty of people in their thirties or forties or even older who've never learned to drive a nail, and wouldn't know how to pry off a hub cap, let alone change a tire. Or worst of all, sew a button. Judging from past discussions we've had on here about this sort of thing, the attitude isn't so much one of not caring about such things as it is an attitude of "there are people I can hire to do that stuff, so what would be the point of me learning it? I'm too busy doing this or that to bother with that kind of thing."

That's the result of a society that gives "brain work" a higher social standing than "hand work," even though you can often make a lot more money doing the hand work. To say nothing of the brains you need to do the hand work in the first place.

 

[ChiTownScion]

It's not just kids. I know plenty of people in their thirties or forties or even older who've never learned to drive a nail, and wouldn't know how to pry off a hub cap, let alone change a tire. Or worst of all, sew a button. Judging from past discussions we've had on here about this sort of thing, the attitude isn't so much one of not caring about such things as it is an attitude of "there are people I can hire to do that stuff, so what would be the point of me learning it? I'm too busy doing this or that to bother with that kind of thing."

That's the result of a society that gives "brain work" a higher social standing than "hand work," even though you can often make a lot more money doing the hand work. To say nothing of the brains you need to do the hand work in the first place.

It boils down to the economy of one's own time, sadly or otherwise. When I was public sector, my salary (with benefits) topped out at over $50/ hour. When I retired and did cases on my own, my billable rate (actually quite low: and I tapped from the retainer at about one hour for every five that I worked, my clients being of minimal means and with little overhead on my part) was $200/ hour. For me to butcher a do it yourself project would lose money.

Dad was a cabinet maker and a finish carpenter (union man, of course) and I can drive a nail (barely)... but I'd never pretend that my work in any trade's domain could come close to what a legitimate journeyman in any of 'em could produce. Give me a mulligan at life and I would pester my dad to teach me as much as he could, and even take summer school shop classes at a local high school that my own college prep alma mater didn't offer... but that ship has sailed. (I can't shed too many tears over what might have been, though: when tradesmen needed to sell/ buy a house and wanted a lawyer to handle the closing, or their kid was accused of a crime and needed counsel, I was there for them.)

 

[Fading Fast]

It's not just kids. I know plenty of people in their thirties or forties or even older who've never learned to drive a nail, and wouldn't know how to pry off a hub cap, let alone change a tire. Or worst of all, sew a button. Judging from past discussions we've had on here about this sort of thing, the attitude isn't so much one of not caring about such things as it is an attitude of "there are people I can hire to do that stuff, so what would be the point of me learning it? I'm too busy doing this or that to bother with that kind of thing."

That's the result of a society that gives "brain work" a higher social standing than "hand work," even though you can often make a lot more money doing the hand work. To say nothing of the brains you need to do the hand work in the first place.

I think the pendulum is turning a very tiny bit as people realize that some manually focused work offers better pay and security than a lot of office or, as you said, "brain" work. Being a plumber, carpenter or electrician, for example, is starting to look attractive to college grads swimming in debt and with few "brain work" job prospects and it's looking attractive to some parents with high school aged and younger kids as they survey the economy.

But here's the funny thing, the plumbers, carpenters, electricians I know - and I know a pretty good number - all will tell you that they can make a lot more money running a business that employs plumbers, carpenters or electricians than they can doing the work themselves. In the end, it is more profitable for them to effectively become small business owners with technical knowledge.

I don't think its a status thing as much as more people seem able to do carpentry than successfully run a small business that, effectively, requires you have sales, marketing, bookkeeping, P&L, human resource, inventory, supply chain, and many other skills. The guys I know are quite happy to pick up a hammer or wrench - and do so in a pinch, etc. - but with families to support, they do what pays more and those "brain work" skills pay much more. (To be sure, there are meaningful brain work activities involved in many manual labor jobs, but running a plumbing business does require a wider set of "brain work" skills than just doing the plumbing work itself.)

And I understand ChiTownScion's point, my girlfriend's dad is an accomplished carpenter with incredible wood working and furniture building skills. But he would have had to taken a huge pay cut to do that versus his senior management job in a major corporation. It had nothing to do with status - he came from nothing and I've never seen him have anything but respect for anyone who earns an honest days living working at any job - and has incredible respect for a truly skilled craftsman. All he's done since he's retired is build things - but when he was in his active earning years, "brain work" paid a lot more.

I'm hoping the wheel truly is turning on the silly status thing as it might help create a better balance for our economy and happier people.

 

[Harp]

It boils down to the economy of one's own time, sadly or otherwise. When I was public sector, my salary (with benefits) topped out at over $50/ hour. When I retired and did cases on my own, my billable rate (actually quite low: and I tapped from the retainer at about one hour for every five that I worked, my clients being of minimal means and with little overhead on my part) was $200/ hour.

"I need some legal advice."
"Sure." And the story is told...
"Take the plea deal."
"And get your teeth fixed before you go to Joliet prison."

 

[dnjan]

Today I had 3 (count 'em, 3) students email me about missing the first weeks of class. Not one week, but one student "informed" me he'd be missing classes for the first THREE WEEKS. Apparently there is nothing I can do. I can't drop him from the class and the waiting list is 10 people long.

And that represents the difference between higher education being a privilege and being a right.
Evidently, at least three of your students consider it a right.

 

[ChiTownScion]

I don't think its a status thing as much as more people seem able to do carpentry than successfully run a small business that, effectively, requires you have sales, marketing, bookkeeping, P&L, human resource, inventory, supply chain, and many other skills. The guys I know are quite happy to pick up a hammer or wrench - and do so in a pinch, etc. - but with families to support, they do what pays more and those "brain work" skills pay much more. (To be sure, there are meaningful brain work activities involved in many manual labor jobs, but running a plumbing business does require a wider set of "brain work" skills than just doing the plumbing work itself.)

And I understand ChiTownScion's point, my girlfriend's dad is an accomplished carpenter with incredible wood working and furniture building skills. But he would have had to taken a huge pay cut to do that versus his senior management job in a major corporation. It had nothing to do with status - he came from nothing and I've never seen him have anything but respect for anyone who earns an honest days living working at any job - and has incredible respect for a truly skilled craftsman. All he's done since he's retired is build things - but when he was in his active earning years, "brain work" paid a lot more.

I was proud as hell of my dad's work. At the end he partnered with an old country German, and the two of them were rehabbing mansions in Winnetka, Glencoe, Kenilworth, Wilmette, and other North Shore villages. He used to tell how the wealthy owners would watch him work for hours: they were fascinated by the skill and the problem solving that went into a carpentry job. He pushed my own higher education (up to the point where it became obvious that he'd actually have to it- another story) and tell me, "work with your mind, not your hands." But, anyone who has ever seen a curved staircase fabricated or really amazing cabinets fashioned from a pile of lumber will note that there is a lot of brain work that goes into that trade.

And he gave it all up when he married a woman who inherited a food business asked him to work in the office. His trade was "too blue collar" for her image. I suppose, though, as he was getting older, it was taking its physical toll as well.

He used to joke that all a plumber had to know was, "hot on the left, cold on the right, and s*** flows downhill," but as I have seen a former coworker who went into that trade install a hot water toilet, I know enough about it that if things can go wrong, there has to be skill in doing it right. As far as the electricians: one of my buddies who became a carpenter noted that their workday seemed to be a series of coffee breaks interspersed with work spurts. Not saying that is true: obviously it takes a lot of skill to avoid potentially lethal consequences of shoddy electrical work.

 

[HudsonHawk]

...Not saying that is true: obviously it takes a lot of skill to avoid potentially lethal consequences of shoddy electrical work.

There's something to be said in that vein of "brain power" skill as well. When I worked in the refinery a boss once told me "work stress is knowing that if you make a mistake today, a thousand people will die."

 

[sheeplady]

Outrageous. I'd flunk him, unless his attendance for the remaining class sessions was perfect and his academic performance was nothing short of stellar, in which case he might get a C. Maybe.

Unfortunately, that's not in my advance syllabus, so there's nothing I can do except deduct points for attendance and missed work. I've learned a lesson though to put that stuff in.

 

[HudsonHawk]

Unfortunately, that's not in my advance syllabus, so there's nothing I can do except deduct points for attendance and missed work. I've learned a lesson though to put that stuff in.

Are you somehow obligated to follow what you present in the syllabus? Perhaps only on the attendance requirement? When I was in school back in the day, a professor with a reputation of following the syllabus had a reputation of one you wanted to avoid. Maybe things change.

 

[dnjan]

I would suggest a major exam on day one of week four, covering the first three weeks.
No make-ups.

 

[tonyb]

Maybe it's my own egocentrism talking here, but if that class were my show, I'd feel slighted by audience members (students) who thought it acceptable to miss the entire first act.

What such behavior says, effectively, is that from that student's perspective what is presented in the class sessions isn't important. And if that's how he feels about it, I'd rather he not enroll.

 

[sheeplady]

Are you somehow obligated to follow what you present in the syllabus? Perhaps only on the attendance requirement? When I was in school back in the day, a professor with a reputation of following the syllabus had a reputation of one you wanted to avoid. Maybe things change.

As far as attendance, yes. In other words, I have a policy that after the first unexcused absence, each additional one results in a five point grade loss. (You'll note that's "unexcused" not "excused.") If I had no attendance policy, if a student challenged me on their participation grade, I wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

While I can deduct 10 points from missing 3 classes (per the syllabus) and people who miss the first 3 weeks are not likely to do the first assignment (10 points), I have no power to have anyone dropped, which is the power I want. I don't imagine anyone missing the first 3 weeks is doing better than a B- or a C+ (and that means they are "perfect" in everything else), but that does little to help the 9 students who want in to the class.

I have been told if I put information about forcing a drop after the first missed class in a "advanced" syllabus (posted before enrollment begins), then I could drop anyone not attending the first week.

 

[sheeplady]

Maybe it's my own egocentrism talking here, but if that class were my show, I'd feel slighted by audience members (students) who thought it acceptable to miss the entire first act.

What such behavior says, effectively, is that from that student's perspective what is presented in the class sessions isn't important. And if that's how he feels about it, I'd rather he not enroll.

I'll admit it, I am personally irritated. I'm a pushover, but you have to play nice. If you haven't met me and aren't going to be there the first three weeks, at least *pretend* you are: (1) asking my permission (rather than informing me), (2) use some sort of title if you haven't met me (rather than my first name) and (3) and be apologetic. None of these I need in every day life, but you're missing the *first three weeks* of my course that I grade. You want me on your side. And for all you know, I'm one of those sticklers that breathes fire if you don't call me "Doctor..." because you haven't met me yet!

People always complain about undergrads (who I find a joy to teach)... but this is a *graduate* course that I'm having students tell me they won't be attending. It's incredibly disrespectful to their fellow students. I do activity based teaching, so when students don't show up, the rest of the students suffer from the lack of input from their peers. Also, I start with content on the first day, students have an assignment due the next week, and we move fast.

 

[LizzieMaine]

An article this week in the Boston Globe raises some interesting thoughts.

A second grade teacher in Texas started the controversy by sending home a memo this week announcing that she will be assigning no homework this year -- pointing out that there is no hard research proving that homework improves student performance, and encouraging parents to spend time with their kids doing things that actually *have* been proven to improve student performance, like eating together as a family, reading together, playing outside, and going to bed early. The result has been the usual outpouring of OMG THEY'RE TURNING KIDS INTO STUPID LITTLE PAMPERED WUSSIES IN MY DAY WE DID EIGHT HOURS OF HOMEWORK EVERY NIGHT OMG OMG OMG!!!!1! on Facebook and Twitter and online comment sections.

Yawn.

When I read this article my reaction was "My god, what kind of idiot would assign homework to a second grader in the first place?" I attended public school from 1968 to 1981, and I was not assigned homework of any kind -- ever -- until I was in the seventh grade. My mother attended the same schools I did, with some of the same teachers I had, from 1944 to 1957, and she doesn't remember being given any homework of any kind until she was in the seventh grade. Homework for young grade-school kids seems more like an "innovation" of the standards-and-figures-crazed teach-to-the-test modern era than any kind of "back to traditional basics" movement.

The Globe article offers some interesting quotes from Alfie Kohn, a prominent critic of modern education methods, and author of "The Homework Myth." He calls elementary-school homework a product of a "toxically competitive culture" in which kids "have to defeat people as if education were an Olympic sport," a "top down, corporate-style test-driven approach" which has not been shown in any verifiable study to actually help kids learn. Kohn adds that many teachers are well aware of this -- but they acquiesce to demands from *parents* that homework be assigned even though the teachers themselves know it's pointless.

How about you folks? Did you get loaded down with homework in the second grade? If you were born before the mid-1970s, I would be very surprised if you did.

 

[kaiser]

No, I was in public school from 1965 to 1977, first had homework in the 7th grade as well, not much of it either. In high school we had a free period each day that could be used to cover any work handed out. Really the only time I worked on anything at home was to prepare for a test that was given the next day.

 

[tonyb]

This brings to mind conversations I've had with contemporaries who have apparently crafted versions of their own histories entirely from scratch.

I think we all know the type: "Kids these days aren't learning the basics! They're mollycoddled by liberal PC teachers and they got no respect for authority. If we did that **** we'd have been sleeping on our bellies for a week!"

To which I respond: "I've known you for nearly half a century, since we met in school. We used to smoke good old American cigarettes -- and Mexican marijuana -- out behind the portable classrooms. When we were in high school, they gave us diplomas if we attended half the time and didn't burn the place down. We didn't know what a term paper was. You had to try to get suspended, let alone expelled. And when even that slack atmosphere proved too daunting, we had the early versions of 'alternative' schools, which (let's face it) existed as much to keep us off the street and out of the criminal justice system as to impart much by way of book learnin'."

 

[ChiTownScion]

How about you folks? Did you get loaded down with homework in the second grade? If you were born before the mid-1970s, I would be very surprised if you did.

First grade (1960- 1961) homework was brutal. Catholic parochial grade school, and the only known teaching method was mere rote. Homework on a typical school night started about 3:30 and ended at bedtime: 9:00. Half an hour for dinner, of course. I did, however, learn to read. As I have said elsewhere, I didn't have that heavy of a homework load until I got to law school.

 

[ChrisB]

In the second grade (1965), I did have homework, but not a lot. Even in high school, it rarely took as much as an hour to dispose of my homework assignments. There is something between inhumane amounts of homework and none at all.

 

[LizzieMaine]

First grade (1960- 1961) homework was brutal. Catholic parochial grade school, and the only known teaching method was mere rote. Homework on a typical school night started about 3:30 and ended at bedtime: 9:00. Half an hour for dinner, of course. I did, however, learn to read. As I have said elsewhere, I didn't have that heavy of a homework load until I got to law school.

Jeez. I learned to read from road signs and billboards when I was three, and actually *enjoyed* the experience. My bed time in grade school was 7:30pm, and I couldn't fudge it, either -- there was no door on the bedroom.