Education, education, education

[essence]

This follows a bit from previous threads, but I need to rant. My daughter, aged 18, educated in UK, asked me when I was born, and we confirmed it was not long after the end of WWII. I said that the war against Japan lasted a bit longer than the war in Europe. The conversation then went something like:

She 'I never knew UK was at war against Japan'

Me ' Of course it was terrible, The Japanese soldies were trained to be inhuman, part of their training was bayoneting prisoners'.

She 'i was never taught that, I knew they were at war against US, Pearl Harbour was in US'

Me 'Pearl Habour was an island in the Pacific'

She 'I never knew that, we did WWII in history at school, we were never taught that'.

I then went on and told her about Singapore, and what the Japanese did to Uk (and US?) POW's. She ran out of the room in horror.

Is this typical of modern education? Maybe WWII is too long in the past for the current generation, like Crimean War is for me.

ps when I was about 10 I had a Latin teacher who was reputed to have survived a Japanese prisoner of war camp. He ruled with a ruler. A lot of disturbed ex soldiers became school teachers. We learnt our Latin verbs. Amo, amas, amat, amamus, amatis, amant etc.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by essence

This follows a bit from previous threads, but I need to rant. My daughter, aged 18, educated in UK, asked me when I was born, and we confirmed it was not long after the end of WWII. I said that the war against Japan lasted a bit longer than the war in Europe. The conversation then went something like:

She 'I never knew UK was at war against Japan'

Me ' Of course it was terrible, The Japanese soldies were trained to be inhuman, part of their training was bayoneting prisoners'.

She 'i was never taught that, I knew they were at war against US, Pearl Harbour was in US'

Me 'Pearl Habour was an island in the Pacific'

She 'I never knew that, we did WWII in history at school, we were never taught that'.

I then went on and told her about Singapore, and what the Japanese did to Uk (and US?) POW's. She ran out of the room in horror.

Is this typical of modern education? Unfortunately, yes. Perhaps her teacher focused more the UK vs Germany? It's easy for me to see how that could happen in the U.K., but it does discount why the British were so desperate to hold the Suez Canal and keep its MSRs open to India and Burma. ijs Maybe WWII is too long in the past for the current generation, like Crimean War is for me.

ps when I was about 10 I had a Latin teacher who was reputed to have survived a Japanese prisoner of war camp. He ruled with a ruler. A lot of disturbed ex soldiers became school teachers. We learnt our Latin verbs. Amo, amas, amat, amamus, amatis, amant etc.

Your story reminds me of 'Tehran Mary' during the Iranian hostage crisis:

Tehran Mary started berating COL Tom Schaefer, the U.S. Embassy's Defense Attaché for the U.S.' decision to drop the atomic bomb on Japan, calling it barbaric, inhumane, and racist. The colonel replied, "The Japanese started the war, and we ended it." That was obviously news to Mary, who asked in disbelief, "What do you mean, the Japanese started the war?" And the colonel replied, "The Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, and so we bombed Hiroshima." "Pearl Harbor? Where's Pearl Harbor?" asked Mary. "Hawaii," said the colonel. A long pause occurred, and then, in a small voice pregnant with incredulity, Mary said, "The Japanese bombed Hawaii?" "Yep," stated the colonel, "they started it, and we ended it." Mary's sense of astonishment was easily discernible, even through the wall. After another long pause, I heard her rush out of the colonel's room. ("Mary" was one of several vice-presidents in the government of President Mohammad Khatami.)

[Guest123018-4]

I have a relative that is teaching revisionist history to high school students.
He will tell them that the war for states rights was the Civil War and it was about slavery.
I wonder if they taught her that Russia was also our "ally" and if it had not been for them on the eastern front there is a strong possibility that we would all either be Nazis or Communists.
The fact of the matter is that there is so much history to learn that the amount that can be included in any curriculum will mainly only touch the points that those controlling the educational system want to cover and since in the US the education system is controlled by the socialists (take a look at the NEA union website for confirmation of the socialism) that our children need to be taught the rest of the story and it may be up to us to do it.

[essence]

I did a google to check what the US POW situation was, and the first link was:

http://www.history.navy.mil/library/..._japancomp.htm

40% died while in detention.

[essence]

Originally Posted by The2Dogs

I wonder if they taught her that Russia was also our "ally" and if it had not been for them on the eastern front there is a strong possibility that we would all either be Nazis or Communists.

But it was, and we might have been, Churchill was a pragmatist and realised you sometimes have to sleep with the devil. I can't remember his quote, somebody will know it. I think there were big discussions about it with ? Roosevelt ?

My history is useless.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tehran_Conference

[essence]

It was interesting times.

http://larouchepub.com/other/book_re...in_corres.html

ps I've just read this link. Fascinating. It paints a different picture. Who knows where the truth lies? (actually, the older I get, the more I realise truth is irrelevant and a myth).

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by essence

But it was, and we might have been, Churchill was a pragmatist and realised you sometimes have to sleep with the devil. I can't remember his quote, somebody will know it. I think there were big discussions about it with ? Roosevelt ?

My history is useless.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tehran_Conference

Why do you say your history is useless?

BTW, most historians believe FDR was too naive about Stalin; that is one of the reasons Americans have so much respect for Churchill: he understood what Stalin was all about.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by essence

It was interesting times.

http://larouchepub.com/other/book_re...in_corres.html

ps I've just read this link. Fascinating. It paints a different picture. Who knows where the truth lies? (actually, the older I get, the more I realise truth is irrelevant and a myth).

Too often, perception does outweigh truth.

[essence]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Why do you say your history is useless?

I scraped what was, in those days, an O-level - one area was Tudor England, and I never could remember the dates and names of the kings/queens. Every time I tried to learn I would fall asleep. So when I had to write an essay on Henry VII's economic policies, I was a little lost. I have a vague recollection there was a king between Henry VIII and Mary (ghastly times, 300 leaders burnt) and Elizabeth I. Was it an Edward or something?

In all my 8 years of history lessons we never covered the 18th or 19th century.

In those days you took O-levels at about 15, and had to write a couple of essays in two hours. Proper structured essays with lots of facts.

We tended to be taught by Oxford recent graduates who would lecture to the class for 45 minutes like undergraduates, and was lapped up by all the future Oxford historians in the class, but less good for scientists like me.

On the other hand, formulae for organic chemistry were my forte. Knew them backwards. So it's all about attitude and interest, not brain cells.

LiBeBCNOFNe and NaMgAlSiPSClAr

Still know them - my two favourite russian authors.

[essence]

ps. the thread title education, education, education is, I think, a quote from Tony Blair when asked what the three most important things are for a modern society.

We have the saying also about property - what are the three most important things, location, location and location. You probably have the same in US.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by essence

I scraped what was, in those days, an O-level - one area was Tudor England, and I never could remember the dates and names of the kings/queens. Every time I tried to learn I would fall asleep. So when I had to write an essay on Henry VII's economic policies, I was a little lost. I have a vague recollection there was a king between Henry VIII and Mary (ghastly times, 300 leaders burnt) and Elizabeth I. Was it an Edward or something?

In all my 8 years of history lessons we never covered the 18th or 19th century.

In those days you took O-levels at about 15, and had to write a couple of essays in two hours. Proper structured essays with lots of facts.

We tended to be taught by Oxford recent graduates who would lecture to the class for 45 minutes like undergraduates, and was lapped up by all the future Oxford historians in the class, but less good for scientists like me.

On the other hand, formulae for organic chemistry were my forte. Knew them backwards. So it's all about attitude and interest, not brain cells.

LiBeBCNOFNe and NaMgAlSiPSClAr

Still know them - my two favourite russian authors.

Yes, Edward VI and Lady Jane Grey: 'Bloody' Mary made short work of Lady Jane -- the nine day queen -- and her family. ('Bloody' Mary actually wasn't as bad as her father -- but the Protestants won out in the long run, and as the saying goes, "the winners write the history books.")

History and anthropology (to a lesser degree) are my forte. I didn't like chemistry in high school, so I took astronomy, botany and dendrology in college and loved it.

Originally Posted by essence

ps. the thread title education, education, education is, I think, a quote from Tony Blair when asked what the three most important things are for a modern society.

We have the saying also about property - what are the three most important things, location, location and location. You probably have the same in US.

Yes - it applies to all of the important cities in the U.S.: Chicago, New York, New Orleans, San Francisco, Kansas City, etc., are all about 'location, location, location'.

[Sexyeccentric1]

*As a percentage of our GDP, we spend the second most of any developed country (only Iceland spends more) but when it comes to high school graduation rates, we’re nineteenth in the world. For college graduates, we’re fifteenth.

...in 1960 Americans were the best-educated people in the world. The average adult had two more years of education than the average in any other country. Now many other regions have equaled or surpassed us. Some of the leaders in reading, science, and math are in Shanghai, Korea, and Finland, according to scores from the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), a series of academic tests administered to fifteen-year-olds from around the world every three years through the multinational Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). The United States comes in seventeenth in reading, twenty-third in science, and thirty-first in math. David Banks, founder of the Eagle Academy for Young Men, an all-boys public high school in New York City, likes to say that the only measure on which American students are still number one is self-esteem. Even as we fall further behind, we still believe we’re winning. This gap is a sign that all of our investment in prestige over learning is having the desired effect— just not the one we all want.

We may still think of education as beginning on the first day of kindergarten, but by then our children have already been learning for roughly five years. Our country’s educational policies, programs, and practices typically don’t take this learning seriously. As Daniel Pedersen, founding president of the Buffett Early Childhood Fund, remarked to me, “We would never have designed the public education system we have now in the way it now works if we [knew] what we know now about how the brain grows and develops.”

Specifically, we now know that in children under three, seven hundred brain synapses are formed each second, creating the ability to process their senses, use language, and develop their vocabulary as well as their reasoning skills. The architecture of the brain— the way these synapses are connected— is determined by what Hirokazu Yoshikawa, professor of education at Harvard, calls “serve and return” interaction. When a toddler does or says something, it’s like a tennis player serving a ball over the net. If someone else responds meaningfully, hitting the ball back, the game continues, and the brain connections are made as the toddler develops knowledge and skills. But if no one returns the serve, the synapses keep forming, but they are not organized for communicating and learning— a prerequisite for effective problem solving. As a result,
by the age of only eighteen months, there is an observable difference in learning between those who get the chance to use those developing synapses early on, especially with adults who talk and read and explore the world with them, and those who don’t.

Quotes from Greedy Bastards.

[essence]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

and as the saying goes, "the winners write the history books.")

That was, at least, Churchill, and he went ahead and wrote the books.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Sexyeccentric1

*As a percentage of our GDP, we spend the second most of any developed country (only Iceland spends more) but when it comes to high school graduation rates, we’re nineteenth in the world. For college graduates, we’re fifteenth.

...in 1960 Americans were the best-educated people in the world. The average adult had two more years of education than the average in any other country. Now many other regions have equaled or surpassed us. Some of the leaders in reading, science, and math are in Shanghai, Korea, and Finland, according to scores from the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), a series of academic tests administered to fifteen-year-olds from around the world every three years through the multinational Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Korea and Japan are still using the early American approach to education: instill the student with a sense of personal responsibility to achieve. The Finnish maintain a low student teacher ratio throughout in the public school system, and, if necessary, employees one-on-one personal instruction for students not making the mark. Professional administrators -- 'student counselors' -- also decide who is going on to college and who isn't based on each student's academic performance.

The United States comes in seventeenth in reading, twenty-third in science, and thirty-first in math. David Banks, founder of the Eagle Academy for Young Men, an all-boys public high school in New York City, likes to say that the only measure on which American students are still number one is self-esteem. Even as we fall further behind, we still believe we’re winning. This gap is a sign that all of our investment in prestige over learning is having the desired effect— just not the one we all want. Are you endorsing this 'self-esteem' mantra BS, or are you being sarcastic?

We may still think of education as beginning on the first day of kindergarten, but by then our children have already been learning for roughly five years. Our country’s educational policies, programs, and practices typically don’t take this learning seriously. As Daniel Pedersen, founding president of the Buffett Early Childhood Fund, remarked to me, “We would never have designed the public education system we have now in the way it now works if we [knew] what we know now about how the brain grows and develops.” This is not 'new' information; it's been around for years. Yes, the U.S. is ignoring education at this level. It's an 'idea' to do something that might make a positive change. It would certainly serve to level socio-economic factors that retards learning at lower levels. Plus, public education at that level would free up family resources for expenses other than day care. But is it practicable to require parents to congregate their infants at such an early age? It could be a new form of child endangerment.

Specifically, we now know that in children under three, seven hundred brain synapses are formed each second, creating the ability to process their senses, use language, and develop their vocabulary as well as their reasoning skills. The architecture of the brain— the way these synapses are connected— is determined by what Hirokazu Yoshikawa, professor of education at Harvard, calls “serve and return” interaction. When a toddler does or says something, it’s like a tennis player serving a ball over the net. If someone else responds meaningfully, hitting the ball back, the game continues, and the brain connections are made as the toddler develops knowledge and skills. But if no one returns the serve, the synapses keep forming, but they are not organized for communicating and learning— a prerequisite for effective problem solving. As a result,
by the age of only eighteen months, there is an observable difference in learning between those who get the chance to use those developing synapses early on, especially with adults who talk and read and explore the world with them, and those who don’t.

Quotes from Greedy Bastards.

.

[gnadfly]

Originally Posted by essence

It was interesting times.

http://larouchepub.com/other/book_re...in_corres.html

ps I've just read this link. Fascinating. It paints a different picture. Who knows where the truth lies? (actually, the older I get, the more I realise truth is irrelevant and a myth).

This is a Lyndon LaRouche site. LaRouche is considered a quack by many in this country. "Even worse than Ron Paul. "

As far as history, when I went to school, American history stopped in 1940. Even if it was in the textbooks, we never were taught about events past that date, even in college.

My father had a business associate who survived the Bataan death march. He said that he promised himself he'd never miss a meal. Japan was especially cruel to the Chinese and they also performed Mengele styled human experiments on US POWs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes