Poll: Feelings about High School

I went to a "good upper middle class" high school in Orange County, California. I had some fun times and some no-so-fun times. Some classes were better than others. However, based on the actual learning outcomes of four-years worth of daily (week-daily) instruction, I would have to judge it an abismally inefficent and ineffective academic experience.

Of course, all of the proper content included in the state standards was "covered" (shovelled), but very little of it was retained. In over two decades of working at colleges and universities, I see bright students for whom the content was "covered," but not learned and for whom remediation has been necessary.

A few months ago, I had the pleasure of delivering a presentation on distance learning at a statewide conference of over 1,200 homeschoolers (parents and children). These were extremely bright and talented young people, many of whom were entering college at 15-17 and who had no trouble interacting with those outside their own age. The research into homeschoolers during the past few decades as been unambiguous:

When compared to public or private schooled peers, home schooled students demonstrate...

...no evidence of decreased socialization skills
...equal or superior levels of academic achievement
...less peer dependence
...high levels of success in college

I am not aware of any body of research supporting a different conclusion (and I have looked).

As someone who oversees online programs with thousands of students, it has been my observation that homeschooled students often have an easier time dealing with the level of self-discipline, time-management and organizational skills needed to succeed online and are able to function more naturally as independent learners (those who can take charge of their own learning).

Now, homeschooling is certainly not the best choice for everyone, but it is nice that it is an option available to many. This poll and forum indicates to me that we have those who benefitted greatly from a traditional high school experience and many who did not.

 

Isn't that self-refuting?

It sounds like the home-schooling argument is that university education schools make people into worse teachers than they would have been had they received no training at all.

That doesn't exactly inspire confidence in any of the education profession's results.

 

Ha, similar experience here. Most of my schooling was at a hoity-toity upper-crust exclusive (get the picture here??) girls' school in Seattle, very small classes, maybe 10-12 girls in each. My dad was a public school teacher all his life but for some reason insisted on my going to St. Nicholas School (non-sectarian). My brother, on the other hand, went to public schools. Go figure.

Then in 11th grade I begged to attend public school. It's an "inner city" school (Garfield HS in Seattle), but back in the 60s that kind of school got the best of everything -- teacher assignments, equipment, materials, facilities, everything. Primarily black kids, then Asians and other races, and we white crackers were the minority. I truly loved it there. There were 1800 students spread among three grades, so about 600 in my graduating class vs. maybe 15 if I had stayed at the snotty school.

Much more diversity, quite the culture shock (but it was a blast!), many more interesting elective courses to choose from, plus I learned the fine art of skipping class without getting caught and snapping my gum to annoy the teachers. Among other courses, I took Russian, sociology, a class in world cultures and their literature. The entire curriculum was excellent, as were the teachers. I wouldn't trade that experience for anything.

 

I hated high school, but all the things I did outside of the classroom tended to be fun.

 

Bill,

I always appreciate your thought-provoking insights and questions.

In this case, I do not think that my previous post was self-refuting in the leastl. If you took a good trained teacher and gave that person...

--a more natural learning environment (like, say, a home)
--just a few students, thus allowing for an intimate knowledge of each student's strengths, weaknesses and needs
--opportunities for field trips every day
--a schedule that did not revolve around covering subject matter in 40 minute discreet blocks
--freedom from administrative tasks, such as class rolls and tardies
--the authority to discipline when necessary
--the ability to set up a learning environment tailored to the needs of the individual student, rather than having to slavish follow the district's mandated curriculum from the latest publisher du jour
--a teaching day that ends when the learning activity is done, not when the bell rings
--I could go on...

...the teacher in question would have a good shot at having wonderful student outcomes.

Colleges of education train teachers how to function within a school system that operates on an industrial model, how to avoid legal and other issues by adiding numerous regulations, how to try to meet the needs of a class of diverse learners as best you can, and perform classroom management and discipline of two to three dozen (or more students).

Many teachers do a phenominal job in this environment. Those who educate at home operate in a completely different type of environment. So, this is a case of apples and oranges. It is not an indictment of teachers, it is merely an acknowlegement that studies of students learning in an environment that differs from the institutional model of the past century indicate that they tend to do well.

 

Well, if it were possible to get rid of all the techers that don't want to teach and get rid of all the students that don't want to learn, high school could be a pretty good place.

 

High school et moi

I loved taking advanced French, Spanish, and of course, all my English classes. I loved French club. If I hadn't taken French, I probably would not have gone to Europe twice since then.

Math was not my friend.

I didn't understand the purpose of study halls (what a waste!) and never took them, so by senior year, I needed only two required classes. I still had many more credits than I needed to graduate. Early graduation was never presented as an option, unfortunately.

I couldn't wait to get out of high school -- everyone seemed so childish to me -- so I went to work at a major multinational company every afternoon as a clerk. I was eventually promoted several times. That often-nasty experience, over a span of seven years, taught me there were more than a few crazy people in the world. As a result, I went to night school forever and ever, all the way up to graduate school. I wish they had distance learning back then. (Then again, I did make some lifelong friends there.)

One friend told me years later she admired me because I didn't belong to any clique in high school, but I had friends in all the cliques. That was true. I never felt the overwhelming need to belong to any of them. I didn't like how some of them treated other people. I came from a large family. I guess that was enough of a clique for me.

 

Mrs School Marm: "I didn't like how some of [the cliques] treated other people.

John: Indeed! It surprises me how many of the details I remember of this, decades letter. I can still name some of the nastiest ones. And so, once in a while, i look one or two of them up on people-finding-and-describing sites.** Sometimes they turned out really well (good for them!); sometimes rather dreadfully. Hey, DW, if you hadn't shoved my cafeteria tray onto the floor that time, maybe you wouldn't have ended up in Dannemora.
_________
**www.pipl.com is the most thorough I've found

 

I remember the details, too...

I specifically remember a classmate, Gail, who came from a dirt poor family (worse off than anyone else I had ever met).

One day in science class, Gail wore a high-quality, long gray woolen vintage skirt that had an applique of a pink poodle on it. Today, that skirt would be worth something as iconic clothing of the 50's. But in the early 70's, when mini-skirts were popular, it was the worst thing a teenager could have worn in public. It clearly belonged to her mother.

Another female classmate said sweetly, "Gail, I like your skirt." Gail replied, "Thank you." Then the classmate asked in a saccharine way, "Do you rollerskate in it? And does it swirl really pretty when you do?" She was obviously making fun of her, yet Gail pretended she didn't realize she was being insulted.

Years later, well after high school, I became close friends with the "nasty" girl -- she was even in my wedding -- and I never saw her say a nasty thing again in her life. But that one day in science class will stay with me forever. At the time, I didn't want anything to do with her or her friends.

Funny how you don't forget.