s/o competitive education. For what purpose?

[athomeontheprairie]

My dh and I ultimately have very different views on education. I loved and excelled in school. I love the maths and sciences and found history and literature to be a fascinating escape. He on the other hand, hated school, felt stupid and saw most of it as a waste. However, he works outside the home (happily and ironically as a teacher. And I stay home and raise our dc)

I plan to put our children through a much more rigorous education than my dh received. And he will be happy if they are able to find work and support themselves upon graduation. Ideally, we want them to be prepared for the work they want upon graduation. Whether it be University, trade school, or something else. We certainly don't want to be the ones that hold them back, but we'd like to be practical as well.

I would hate, and would feel as though we failed our children , if upon leaving our homeschool they are not adequately prepared for the life they want. BUT in our region most of the people here are from here. We have normal jobs, and live normal lives. No one here is competing on a national scale, let alone internationally. So, what is the purpose of pursuing a degree that has "international competitiveness" when most people are just going to have regular jobs?

Am I just rambling? I'm not entirely sure how to phrase this question.

[regentrude]

I would hate, and would feel as though we failed our children , if upon leaving our homeschool they are not adequately prepared for the life they want. BUT in our region most of the people here are from here. We have normal jobs, and live normal lives. No one here is competing on a national scale, let alone internationally. So, what is the purpose of pursuing a degree that has "international competitiveness" when most people are just going to have regular jobs?

 

What if you children want to go to graduate school? Obtain a postdoctoral position? Work at a college, or for an international company? Each step along the way they will be in competition with people from all over the world. Companies and universities want to hire the best applicants, irrespective of country of origin. 

The competition does not even have to be direct, person on person - it could be that the employer prefers graduates from program X in contry Z to graduates from local programs because the quality of the program is better.

 

I want my children to be able to do the work they want, and our education should open doors, not close them.

For example, my DD is interested in physics. Science is completely international. Every single person our department has hired in the last 15 years has been a foreigner, because every time, the best of the 100 applicants for the job was from another country (and in many cases, the entire top five short list did not contain a single American candidate). 

If DD does not want to go into academia, she would be interested in scientific publishing. Same deal, there will be highly qualified candidates from all over the world applying for those positions.

 

Of course, there are sectors of local economies that are, well, local. There is probably not much international competition to be a school teacher, because the licensing procedure is so complicated and a person with a teaching degree would not be allowed to do work as a teacher here without jumping through hoops. Same is probably true for law enforcement. Local car mechanics, construction workers, waitresses - no international competition.

 

But there are definitely fields where global competition is strong and where a student's education has to be competetive or the door is closed.

 

ETA: But as a completely different thought: even if my child will never be in direct competition with a foreigner for a specific job, I want to give them an education that makes them an educated person by global standards. I would not want their education to be lacking and inferior to other countries- because I value education for education's sake. So, even if they never need to speak the foreign language or apply calculus, they will study both, to appreciate the other culture, to broaden their minds, to marvel at the intricacies of calculus as a crowing achievement of the human mind. Just because it is cool to be educated. And unfortunate to be ignorant.

 

[CrunchyGirl]

For us 'internationally competitive' means preserving options for our children. Society is increasingly globalized with country boarders becoming less daunting barriers to cross. Even 10 years ago I competed for grad school slots with mostly kids from other countries, many of whom were drastically better educated than I. I got in by the skin of my teeth and this wasn't even a STEM field.

 

So it's about spots in degree programs which leads to competing for good jobs. It's also about the option to pursue opportunities outside the US if they desire.

 

It's possible our children will choose to stay local and just get a "normal" job but the trend seems to be towards higher levels of education and competitiveness to obtain a job that does actually pay a good wage, has security, etc. I guess you could say we are hedging our bets.

 

The other issue for us is that the US standard of education is woefully lacking and leaves us ill prepared to participate as global citizens. We find that concerning and feel that a higher quality education such as those offered in many other countries is worth it for that reason alone.

 

Please forgive any errors. Typing on my phone.

[Heartsjoy]

I think your question "for what purpose," although asked in relation why pursue rigor, is actually the right question to be asking.

 

What is the purpose of this child's education given who they are, who this family is, and available resources?

 

 

 

Personally my purpose and goals have changed for each child as I have learned and changed.

 

I've learned more about what each child's strengths and weaknesses are.

I've learned more about what this family takes to have healthy physical, emotional, and spiritual well-being.

I've learned more what I'm capable of teaching and what others can teach better.

I've learned to get more out of available resources by supplementing, reteaching, and learning teaching tips from others.

 

I also think though you are asking why a strong education.

• options- as a previous poster mentioned
• a strong work ethic/ perseverance with difficult subjects
• higher order thinking/ problem solving skills. My 8th grader asked if other students locally were evaluating the justness of past wars based on Aquinas's principles for a just war.
• understanding why the world works the way it does rather than that's just the way it is
• an eye for beauty (art/ literature) and its role in mental health

[a27mom]

I know lots of people who have gone, are going to graduate schools. I also know many PhD's etc... I haven't seen that the competitiveness of their elementary, secondary, or even undergrad education have mattered significantly. It is important that they don't have a bad education but... The whole internationally competitive concern is foreign to me.

 

Of course it is important that a STEM major study science and math all years of high school etc...but I went to a mediocre public school district and I have several friends from high school with PHd's, who are gainfully employed. I live near three "not top tier" universities and many of my friends/acquaintances have gone to those universities and then gone on to graduate school etc...

 

I do think there are lots of regional values issues that play into this. Even though I live near universities, nobody around here really cares if you went to a "top tier school". People are pretty practical and pragmatic and top tier schools seem like a waste of money for undergrad. Of course there is little urban influence in our area. Life around here is pretty family/land centered. There are lots of smart educated people, but most prefer not to be involved in a high pressure/high stress competitive world. So most aren't pushing our kids that way. Of course we also have relatively low unemployment low cost of living so our average standard of living is pretty high. (Not many super rich, but not a lot of severe poverty either.)

 

I imagine it is different in urban/suburban areas.

[NASDAQ]

I believe that a bright enough kid can overcome doing virtually nothing in school up before university, and we probably know people like that.

 

But they're here and I'm here and I feel keenly that I should not waste their time, and so when I'm giving them formal education it ought to be the best education possible.

 

This is a fairly competitive area.

[kubiac]

Average Is Over and Average Is Over, Part II
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/25/opinion/friedman-average-is-over.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/08/opinion/friedman-average-is-over-part-ii-.html
 
Edit to add:

 

"The math results of top-performer Shanghai are now two-and-a-half school years ahead even of those in Massachusetts — itself a leader within the U.S."
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/08/opinion/sunday/friedman-cant-we-do-better.html
 
Sorry to point you to what we jokingly call "the anxiety section of the NYT" but Friedman explains my worldview fairly well, i.e. that my "not-terrible, sorta-OK, kinda-nice" neighborhood school might have sufficed X years ago, but today, not so much. World is "hot, flat and crowded" and I can't afford to think parochially when it comes to education standards for my child.

 

Edit 2: Per Salman Khan's One World Schoolhouse, "Among the world's children starting grade school this year [2012], 65 percent will end up doing jobs that haven't even been invented yet."

 

 

[Laura Corin]

My children have dual US/UK citizenship (including the right to live anywhere in the EU) plus right to land (and apply for residence) in Hong Kong.  It would be wrong for me to limit their options.

 

L

[athomeontheprairie]

I do think there are lots of regional values issues that play into this. Even though I live near universities, nobody around here really cares if you went to a "top tier school". People are pretty practical and pragmatic and top tier schools seem like a waste of money for undergrad. Of course there is little urban influence in our area. Life around here is pretty family/land centered. There are lots of smart educated people, but most prefer not to be involved in a high pressure/high stress competitive world. So most aren't pushing our kids that way. Of course we also have relatively low unemployment low cost of living so our average standard of living is pretty high. (Not many super rich, but not a lot of severe poverty either.)

 

I imagine it is different in urban/suburban areas.

 

Perhaps this. 90% of everything here is tied to the land and family. And I don't believe I'm over exaggerating that number. The cows and the crops supply the jobs. The jobs supply the people and the people use the local businesses. When the crops failed a couple years ago, people left by the dozens and honestly if you didn't have STRONG ties to the land, you moved. Or you stayed unemployed for a long time.

I love our home. And I love the people. And I certainly don't want to limit my children's options, and I want them to have the best education I can give them (whether hs or ps). I also want to be practical and prepare them for life.

Again with the rambling. Please excuse my musings.

 

ETA: There is only one university within a 2.5 hour drive from here. And while we need agriculturists and veterinarians (these are vital to our crops and livestock) even they aren't competing on an international level. (That I know of. Maybe we produce more wheat for the world than I am aware of...)

[Heartsjoy]

Average Is Over and Average Is Over, Part II

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/25/opinion/friedman-average-is-over.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/08/opinion/friedman-average-is-over-part-ii-.html

 

Wow! I knew the job market was shrinking, but ....

This is a good kick to keep school moving and umm get off the internet for me too and back to schooling.

[In The Great White North]

In the choice between "Be all that you can be" and laziness, I will encourage "Be all that you can be" every time.  

 

I also see learning to love learning as the most important part of an education.  Your school managed that and your dh's school failed him.

 No one here is competing on a national scale, let alone internationally.

 

i wouldn't be so quick to assume that.  Ever bought anything from amazon that you could have bought at a local store?  Does your state offer "virtual charter schools", with teachers on the other end of an internet connection?  Maybe not every career can be outsourced, but a surprising number can.

[regentrude]

ETA: There is only one university within a 2.5 hour drive from here. And while we need agriculturists and veterinarians (these are vital to our crops and livestock) even they aren't competing on an international level. (That I know of. Maybe we produce more wheat for the world than I am aware of...)

 

50% of the wheat produced in the US is exported.

 

And while your local agriculturists and veterinarians may be locals, the seeds, chemicals and veterinarian medications and vaccines are all developed by international companies staffed with agriculturists and veterinarians from all over the world.

[athomeontheprairie]

i wouldn't be so quick to assume that.  Ever bought anything from amazon that you could have bought at a local store?  Does your state offer "virtual charter schools", with teachers on the other end of an internet connection?  Maybe not every career can be outsourced, but a surprising number can.

 

 

50% of the wheat produced in the US is exported.

 

And while your local agriculturists and veterinarians may be locals, the seeds, chemicals and veterinarian medications and vaccines are all developed by international companies staffed with agriculturists and veterinarians from all over the world.

 

Yes, and I have thought of both these things among others. However since we don't "see" them... maybe out of sight, out of mind? Perhaps because I know of No one IRL that does this type of work. The possibility exists for my dc to pursue these careers, but given that no one around here does is it a probability? I'm not this naive, I promise. I do realize we live in a global world. I realize there are things I love that I can't get locally and must order through online providers that use suppliers, developers, marketeers, and a plethora of others from all corners of the world. And as we continue to search for a diagnosis on one of our dc I am thankful for the international medical community that has trained the doctors and manufactured the medications. It simply seems like it is such a small market that no one locally is involved in. How do you teach your children about what jobs are available around the world (let alone so that they can compete for them) when you can't "see" the jobs or the people who do them IRL?

[regentrude]

 Perhaps because I know of No one IRL that does this type of work. The possibility exists for my dc to pursue these careers, but given that no one around here does is it a probability? .....

 

Growing up, I did not know any physics professor or any IRL physicist. I picked the subject because it fascinated me. None of my family members had been a scientist - my parents are an opera singer and an architect.

Even going to university behind The Wall, I could not dream that I would some day end up with a very global life story: as an immigrant to the US.

 

We can not know what life has in store for our kids. We can not know what they might fascinating. I think one of the worst things we can do is limit them to what we are familiar with.

How do you teach your children about what jobs are available around the world (let alone so that they can compete for them) when you can't "see" the jobs or the people who do them IRL?

 

By being interested in what goes on in the world. Reading magazines and books, watching documentaries and news casts and movies. Even a kid living in an agricultural rural community knows that there is NASA, astronauts, programmers and mission control technicians after watching Apollo 13. I would go so far as to claim that most people encounter vastly more careers in the virtual world - they may not know any in person, but they see journalists, lawyers, forensic anthropologists, behavioral psychologists, gorilla researchers and deep sea explorers in TV shows or read about them in books. Those are certainly not always realistic portrayals, but definitely enough to spark an interest and let a kid notice "Hey, these are cool things some people do. I wonder whether I could do something like this, too", and that's the stepping stone to finding out more.

 

In the time of global communication, the internet, cable TV and widespread print media, your kids are not limited to the IRL role models they observe in their small town. They can seek out what happens elsewhere.

Just as a test, I am picking up the first magazine on the table in front of me, this week's Economist. Just flipping through the science and technology  section, I encounter a cancer researcher, engineers who design shipping containers, a wind farm designer, an entomologist who researches bees. Other articles alert me to the existence of economists, financial analysts, foreign correspondents. I don't know how exactly their lives look - but from flipping through one single magazine I know they exist, there are people out there doing these things as jobs.

[Hunter]

Wow, your mother is an opera singer! That is so cool!

I decided Dad was the opera singer and Mom was the architect. That's cooler!

 

Or maybe that she had 2 moms or 2 dads, which is cooler, yet. :lol:

[athomeontheprairie]

How cool is that story!

Growing up, I did not know any physics professor or any IRL physicist. I picked the subject because it fascinated me. None of my family members had been a scientist - my parents are an opera singer and an architect.

Even going to university behind The Wall, I could not dream that I would some day end up with a very global life story: as an immigrant to the US.

 

We can not know what life has in store for our kids. We can not know what they might fascinating. I think one of the worst things we can do is limit them to what we are familiar with.

I certainly wouldn't want to limit my kids, and I sincerely hope that isn't what you are taking away from this conversation. I most certainly didn't envision myself in my current role a decade ago. This life that I'm living was completely foreign to my-young-self. I hope that all the doors that could be open to my kids are by the time they finish school....

[Hunter]

I think limiting the education of ALL American children to an education that is competitive with the non-Americans coming HERE and CHOOSING to compete with us in the areas of THEIR choosing, is the most limiting type of education of all.

[regentrude]

I decided Dad was the opera singer and Mom was the architect. That's cooler!

 

  Mom was the singer, dad the architect.

 

Or maybe that she had 2 moms or 2 dads, which is cooler, yet. :lol:

 

Sorry to disappoint.

I come from a very traditional family with one female mother and one male dad, who are both my biological parents as well as the biological parents of both my siblings,  and who have been married to each other for 47 years. That's pretty cool, too.

[athomeontheprairie]

 

By being interested in what goes on in the world. Reading magazines and books, watching documentaries and news casts and movies. Even a kid living in an agricultural rural community knows that there is NASA, astronauts, programmers and mission control technicians after watching Apollo 13. I would go so far as to claim that most people encounter vastly more careers in the virtual world - they may not know any in person, but they see journalists, lawyers, forensic anthropologists, behavioral psychologists, gorilla researchers and deep sea explorers in TV shows or read about them in books. Those are certainly not always realistic portrayals, but definitely enough to spark an interest and let a kid notice "Hey, these are cool things some people do. I wonder whether I could do something like this, too", and that's the stepping stone to finding out more.

 

In the time of global communication, the internet, cable TV and widespread print media, your kids are not limited to the IRL role models they observe in their small town. They can seek out what happens elsewhere.

Just as a test, I am picking up the first magazine on the table in front of me, this week's Economist. Just flipping through the science and technology  section, I encounter a cancer researcher, engineers who design shipping containers, a wind farm designer, an entomologist who researches bees. Other articles alert me to the existence of economists, financial analysts, foreign correspondents. I don't know how exactly their lives look - but from flipping through one single magazine I know they exist, there are people out there doing these things as jobs.

 

When we go on Field trips and tours I do try and make a point of these things, BTW. An example: when we toured the veterinarians' office we looked at the wide varieties of feed offered. We discussed the need for people who love animals who are nutritionists. The people who develop the food that is perfect for all types of animals, whether they are big or small, or work, or run, or sick or healthy. Same thing when we see the wide assortment of medications. I try to draw attention to these jobs my kiddos don't see so they are at least aware that they exist.

 

 

[Hunter]

Mom was the singer, dad the architect.

 

 

Sorry to disappoint.

I come from a very traditional family with one female mother and one male dad, who are both my biological parents as well as the biological parents of both my siblings, and who have been married to each other for 47 years. That's pretty cool, too.

Just playing with you! :)

[Crimson Wife]

No one here is competing on a national scale, let alone internationally. So, what is the purpose of pursuing a degree that has "international competitiveness" when most people are just going to have regular jobs?

76% of Americans are also living paycheck-to-paycheck and 50% of all FT wage earners in the U.S. earn <$20/hr. I hate to sound like a snob, but I want better for my kids than either of those two things. They don't necessarily have to be rich, but I want them to be comfortably middle-class.

[Crimson Wife]

What scares the heebie-jeebies out of me is that it seems like the U.S. is more and more headed towards a 3rd world-like future where we have a tiny elite with access to modern amenities and good private-pay services and a massive proletariat living in squalor outside the gates. I know which side of the divide I want my kids and grandkids to end up on, and that is why I worry so much about trying to get them competitive for a top college.

[Desert Strawberry]

This is an enlightening thread.

 

 

 

 

I think limiting the education of ALL American children to an education that is competitive with the non-Americans coming HERE and CHOOSING to compete with us in the areas of THEIR choosing, is the most limiting type of education of all.

 

Could you explain this? I don't understand at all.

 

I would think the most limiting education would be none at all or an extremely basic or inaccurate one. But perhaps that is assumed.

[Mama Geek]

What scares the heebie-jeebies out of me is that it seems like the U.S. is more and more headed towards a 3rd world-like future where we have a tiny elite with access to modern amenities and good private-pay services and a massive proletariat living in squalor outside the gates. I know which side of the divide I want my kids and grandkids to end up on, and that is why I worry so much about trying to get them competitive for a top college.

To go along with this I want my dd to have the confidence to go to another country to follow where the work is.

[Hunter]

This is an enlightening thread.

 

Could you explain this? I don't understand at all.

 

I would think the most limiting education would be none at all or an extremely basic or inaccurate one. But perhaps that is assumed.

Education is about more than schooling. According to the Amish, schooling is book learning, and education is the inculcation of values.

 

This is a huge country with a lot of sub-societies with different values. Narrowing the education of all these special and unique populations into something that competes with the people who have chosen to come here from another culture, is a sad thought. What about their uniqueness? What about their VALUES. No amount of book learning replaces the loss of values and culture. Of general American culture and the culture of the unique sub-cultures that have formed here.

 

The polarization of our society has nothing to do with other countries. It is caused by our own lack of belief in basic human rights. From the start we have been a country that talks what they don't walk.

 

The elite are more than happy to let all the poor kids push for STEM. STEM kids don't compete with them. STEM are not leaders, they are the replacement for factory workers.

 

If you want to end out on the side of the elite, you need to focus on language arts not STEM. All throughout history it's been language arts that the elite use to stay in power.

 

And competition means there were be a MINORITY of winners. MOST people will NOT win. So to narrow their education to something they WILL fail at, is cruel.

[Desert Strawberry]

I wonder the same thing Strawberry.  But my husband's situation is proof that this happens.  He works in a company with other foreign nationals making a product only used here.  I mean a disproportionate number of foreigners.  And no they don't get paid less.  So what does that say?  Dumb luck?  I think it might say that for whatever reason we don't have enough people with the needed skills here.  And believe me what he does is not THAT highly specialized.

I would think that the skill set needed for his position are not provided by US educational institutions.

[regentrude]

The elite are more than happy to let all the poor kids push for STEM. STEM kids don't compete with them. STEM are not leaders, they are the replacement for factory workers.

 

If you want to end out on the side of the elite, you need to focus on language arts not STEM. All throughout history it's been language arts that the elite use to stay in power.

 

And competition means there were be a MINORITY of winners. MOST people will NOT win. So to narrow their education to something they WILL fail at, is cruel.

 

Huh? You have me scratching my head.

 

Poor Bill Gates. Poor Steve Jobs. Losers, not elite because STEM. I guess most of us would be quite fine with that.

If a country wants to succeed in the global economy, either you have massive natural resources you are willing to sell - or you have technological innovations.

 

I also fail to see where anybody advocated narrowing down an education to solely STEM. A large part of the discussion has been about languages and humanities. Now, of course, today's political elites are sorely lacking in the foreign language department.. our founding fathers were much better educated in this respect.

 

My personal opinion is that with more education, there are more winners. Many of the jobs our kids will do have not even been invented. Education opens door. More education opens more doors. Simple.

 

ETA: if economic success is to be your measure of who is a winner: the graduates of our university which are in the majority STEM have an average starting salary right out of college of 59k. If that's the "replacement for factory worker", then that does not look too shabby to me.

[regentrude]

I would think that the skill set needed for his position are not provided by US educational institutions.

 

or rather that not enough people choose that educational path and get this kind of degree

 

[Desert Strawberry]

or rather that not enough people choose that educational path and get this kind of degree

 

Excellent point. 

Wendy, what does he do?

[regentrude]

But my husband did have an advantage that a lot of people in this country really do not have.  He didn't have to go broke to go to school.  His parents didn't have to go broke.  That is a HUGE advantage.  He could basically pick what he wanted to study and was only limited by abilities and how hard he was willing to work.  Here you either have to have the money, go broke, or be exceptional in some way.

 

Not necessarily. Your DH is an engineer, right? If I look at my students who are graduating with a 60k starting salary out of college (no masters)- at that rate they have paid off their student loans in a year or two, if they keep living frugally.

 

[Soror]

I live in a very rural area, I grew up in a town of 600. The entire county I live in is less than 50,000. I would guess that my area is very similar to the OPs. It is hard to think about the need for a globally competitive education when in your own area who you know has such a great influence on success. However, I want my own kids to have the options that I didn't even know existed. I don't them to be at the mercy of knowing the right person or being in the right place. I want to educate them to the level of their ability and challenge them. I'm not so much looking to beat out everyone else but to make sure that my kids are living up to their own potential. I also think there is value in being educated no matter the level of success one attains, however you define success. I think that an educated population is in everyone's best interest. 

[regentrude]

Education is about more than schooling. According to the Amish, schooling is book learning, and education is the inculcation of values.

 

This is a huge country with a lot of sub-societies with different values. Narrowing the education of all these special and unique populations into something that competes with the people who have chosen to come here from another culture, is a sad thought. What about their uniqueness? What about their VALUES. No amount of book learning replaces the loss of values and culture. Of general American culture and the culture of the unique sub-cultures that have formed here.

 

I forgot to comment on this. Why a dichotomy between book learning and values as if one excluded the other? Why should educated people be lacking values and culture? Or for that matter, why should immigrants from elsewhere have lost their values and culture, simply because they also possess a competetive education?

 

It is entirely possible to receive a comprehensive book education in math, science, foreign languages and humanities, be familiar with the cultural tradition of one's heritage and of the country one lives in, have strong values, morals, principles however you wish to call it, be a kind and generous person, a good citizen and family member and a productive member of society in whatever capacity one functions.

You can have both. Book learning and culture are not mutually exclusive.

[Rachel TX]

I never feel like I'm competing with others, so I don't think about my kids competing. The path we've chosen doesn't have that many people on it, so it feels like there's room enough for everyone.

 

Being internationally competitive is not about having an advantage over others, but about reaching our full potential when that's higher than local standards.

[Hunter]

Huh? You have me scratching my head.

 

Poor Bill Gates. Poor Steve Jobs. Losers, not elite because STEM. I guess most of us would be quite fine with that.

If a country wants to succeed in the global economy, either you have massive natural resources you are willing to sell - or you have technological innovations.

 

I also fail to see where anybody advocated narrowing down an education to solely STEM. A large part of the discussion has been about languages and humanities. Now, of course, today's political elites are sorely lacking in the foreign language department.. our founding fathers were much better educated in this respect.

 

My personal opinion is that with more education, there are more winners. Many of the jobs our kids will do have not even been invented. Education opens door. More education opens more doors. Simple.

 

ETA: if economic success is to be your measure of who is a winner: the graduates of our university which are in the majority STEM have an average starting salary right out of college of 59k. If that's the "replacement for factory worker", then that does not look too shabby to me.

In general STEM careers produce a solid paycheck, but how many elite families do you see pushing their kids to a STEM career? We are able to list the names of SOME very rich STEM people, but they are not the norm. The huge number of people working for those people are making solid paychecks, but not elite ones.

 

In other counties where we see an abundance of people trained for the STEM jobs, what kind of paychecks do you see? If we have more people to fill the positions, these solid paychecks will drop to less than will pay back the tuition required to prepare for them.

 

Factory workers used to have good health insurance and be able to afford a 3 bedroom house. As soon as we have more STEM kids and the pay drops and the tuitions go up even more, they won't be able to afford what a factory worker used to afford.

 

There are people talking about humanities and more languages for competition, but it's STEM subjects people are most stressed over.

 

I'm watching the news and it's talking about how it's more expensive to have a baby in the USA than anywhere else in the world and that the cost tripled since 2004. There is no keeping up with this. No expensive and unwieldy and time consuming math curriculum is going to fix this.

[regentrude]

In general STEM careers produce a solid paycheck, but how many elite families do you see pushing their kids to a STEM career? We are able to list the names of SOME very rich STEM people, but they are not the norm. The huge number of people working for those people are making solid paychecks, but not elite ones.

 

So a solid paycheck is not sufficient?

I am puzzled by what you consider sensible goals.

I do not need my kids to be global leaders and billionaires. I want them to have a job where they are looking forward to going to work, and support their family. Solid paycheck would do fine.

 

I am also not quite sure what your definition of elite is. The scientific community for example has its elite, and their understanding is very different from billionaire and global leader.

 

In other counties where we see an abundance of people trained for the STEM jobs, what kind of paychecks do you see? If we have more people to fill the positions, these solid paychecks will drop to less than will pay back the tuition required to prepare for them.

 

So what country do you have in mind? Because I do not know what that country might be.

[Hunter]

I forgot to comment on this. Why a dichotomy between book learning and values as if one excluded the other? Why should educated people be lacking values and culture? Or for that matter, why should immigrants from elsewhere have lost their values and culture, simply because they also possess a competetive education?

 

It is entirely possible to receive a comprehensive book education in math, science, foreign languages and humanities, be familiar with the cultural tradition of one's heritage and of the country one lives in, have strong values, morals, principles however you wish to call it, be a kind and generous person, a good citizen and family member and a productive member of society in whatever capacity one functions.

You can have both. Book learning and culture are not mutually exclusive.

It doesn't need to be either or for some well prepared families. But too many families are directing a disproportionate amount of their limited resources towards STEM subjects, or worse yet sending kids back to PS just to get more STEM.

[Hunter]

All the STEM people coming over here, are not coming here, for the culture. Many are coming because they can make more money here than at home, because there is less competition for the STEM jobs.

[Hunter]

Yes, many American just want the American Dream. A solid paycheck that provides the basics. But the polarization of the classes is ruining all that, and STEM isn't going to fix it.

[quark]

All the STEM people coming over here, are not coming here, for the culture. Many are coming because they can make more money here than at home, because there is less competition for the STEM jobs.

 

I agree that not everyone is coming here for culture but I don't agree that there is less competition here for STEM jobs. I'm not sure where that info is from? In our particular situation, we could be making more money (based on standard of living) in our country of origin but chose to come here for exposure to the wealth of technical expertise and opportunities for learning. If it was just for money, then no. We would have stayed put in our native country.

 

ETA: there is also freedom of thought and action in the US that is not available everywhere. So maybe, a good margin of people are coming for cultural advancement? There's only so much thinking and growing you can do if your country of origin stifles creative thought or governs oppressively, no?

[a27mom]

I hope this makes sense...but I am wondering if everyone is talking about the same thing when they say competitive education. I just kind of accept as a matter of course that people would have the equivalent of 4 years of math, science, lit, foreign language, and history at at least high school level before "graduating". I wouldn't have thought of this as a internationally competitive education. But on further reflection, I guess that wasn't actually required at my high school, just by my dad. ;)

 

When I hear "internationally competitive" I haven't been thinking about depth and knowledge, but pushing high achievement, as in competing. But maybe that isn't what others mean.

[regentrude]

It doesn't need to be either or for some well prepared families. But too many families are directing a disproportionate amount of their limited resources towards STEM subjects, or worse yet sending kids back to PS just to get more STEM.

 

well, the job market and economy have shifted due to technology, and where basic arithmetic may have sufficed before, with modern

equipment my HVAC installer needs trigonometry to do his job (not to. There simply are fewer jobs that can be done without math, so the family is wise to invest in math education. Computer literacy is required for many jobs, also a very new requirement our parents did not have.

So the family would be closing doors if they were not aware that the same job that required less education in these fields is no longer doable (not just not getting hired, but the skill is actually needed for the job) without more math.

[regentrude]

All the STEM people coming over here, are not coming here, for the culture. Many are coming because they can make more money here than at home, because there is less competition for the STEM jobs.

 

You would be surprised how many people want to come to the US because they love the country, the nature, the civil liberties, the tradition of freedom.

When I first moved to the US, it was solely because I wanted to live in this country for at least a few years. I could have gotten a postdoc position with comparable salary back home, but I wanted to see the America. It was a dream and had absolutely nothing to do with money. Many of my friends who came here from Europe did primarily come for that.

 

Other people come here because they are oppressed in their country of origin, because they are lacking civil rights, because they are unable to grow to their full potential, because they can not do the work they want to do back home. Not everybody comes because they can make "more money".

The one reason there are a lot of STEM people among immigrants is that they need a sought after qualification to be allowed to come here. If you can't offer a skill that is in demand, they don't let you in. At my citizenship ceremony, we were 50 new citizens, and everybody had to get up and introduce himself, with name, country and occupation. Every single one was highly educated, many in STEM areas, and everybody had a job.

[regentrude]

I hope this makes sense...but I am wondering if everyone is talking about the same thing when they say competitive education. I just kind of accept as a matter of course that people would have the equivalent of 4 years of math, science, lit, foreign language, and history at at least high school level before "graduating". I wouldn't have thought of this as a internationally competitive education. But on further reflection, I guess that wasn't actually required at my high school, just by my dad. ;)

 

When I hear "internationally competitive" I haven't been thinking about depth and knowledge, but pushing high achievement, as in competing. But maybe that isn't what others mean.

 

I do not think of this as actual competing, I think of it as having educational standards that are comparable to educational standards in other developed countries. So, for example, if in my home country every college bound student is required to take calculus and two foreign languages for 10 and 7 years respectively,  this is something to which I am comparing the education I offer to my children and strive to measure up.

 

None of this means pushing super high achievement, but simply looking how much is expected from students elsewhere, looking beyond the narrow horizon of one country, and making sure that we do not hold our kids to standards that are far below what students elsewhere routinely accomplish.

That does not mean I have to be a slave to somebody else's standards. But it is  helpful to critically examine education, and for every area in which I make the conscious choice not to compare and measure up, I am seriously thinking what alternative value I am bringing to their education. (So, if I had a gifted student in one area, I could see cutting elsewhere to free up time and resources - but there has to be something. I might lower my math expectations to give a gifted musician more time for music, but not if there is no substitute value, if that makes sense)

 

[Crimson Wife]

I think that an educated population is in everyone's best interest.

I do as well. I don't think a 3rd world-style country is good even for the elites. Look at the businessmen in Latin America who have to drive bulletproof cars surrounded by bodyguards because of the high crime rate & threat of kidnapping for ransom. That's not the kind of life I want for my grandkids.

[Crimson Wife]

In general STEM careers produce a solid paycheck, but how many elite families do you see pushing their kids to a STEM career?

Whom do you imagine will be paying $30+k per year per child for Proof School? http://proofschool.org/

 

My DH had a boss whose 6 y.o. was doing a math circle at Stanford. He was trying to get DH to sign DS up for it as well, but Stanford is just too far from where we live to do a weekly math circle there.

[Hunter]

My point is that it is a LIMITING idea to require ALL American students to make it a FIRST priority of their education to be internationally competitive, by looking primarily at just the people who have been allowed to enter the USA. I think that is more limiting in general, as some students not being internationally competitive who would benefit by being so.

 

There is SO much more to life than being internationally competitive, especially internationally competitive for STEM jobs.

 

Some farm boys need to study agriculture in their teen years, and spend time working among men, and lifting heavy things.

 

Some girls need to prepare for running their own homestead, by working along side her elders, and learning the old ways.

 

Some students need to spend long hours dreaming and drawing and reading and writing.

 

Some need to spend their days, tumbling, skating, jumping, running, and throwing.

 

Some students need to focus on the Classical languages, the Progym, and debating.

 

Some need to focus on playing the spoons, and learning folk music.

 

Some students need to pray and pursue spiritual paths.

 

I could go on and on and on.

 

America is BIG and America has all sort of SPECIAL pockets. To define and bind American education by STEM competition is such a sad idea.

[regentrude]

To define and bind American education by STEM competition is such a sad idea

 

???

I have not seen anybody define American education as only STEM.

 

Fact is merely that more students will need math in their jobs than can make a living playing spoons.

 

And I also fail to comprehend why a student can not pursue a rigorous school education for a few hours each day AND work or homestead AND be an artist or athlete.  I think most students would benefit from a well rounded education that incorporates all these aspects. Most students do not have a single isolated gift they need to spend 15 hour a day nurturing - most kids can do all kinds of things and should do all kinds of things to develop all sides of their personalities.

My future physicist hangs out with friends discussion poetry, sings in choir, rides a horse, works a job she loves, and is an accomplished pastry baker.

A good "book" education does not exclude experiencing other facets of life as well.

 

[Crimson Wife]

I actually share your fear for the future. I just hope my kids are leading the prole revolution from the inside.

 

I would feel I had failed if my children were comfortable and doing nothing for the 99% outside their gates.

 

I would like to see all children having access to quality education. This idea that you get your kids through and shut the gate behind them in relief ? Foreign.

I didn't say I *LIKED* the idea- far from it. An America with a strong middle class would be a MUCH preferable place in which to live. I'm just pessimistic about the chances of a dramatic improvement in our economy that would allow for that. I recently read that forecasters predict 70% of today's jobs are vulnerable to replacement by robots. Yikes!

[hepatica]

I'm not sure what the meaning of a "rigorous" education is. It's one thing to say plumbers need trig, and quite another to say that all students should take calculus, be fluent in multiple languages, take 4 years of rigorous science, read all the great books, learn coding, take multiple AP courses etc.... For students who are academically gifted this kind of education may be an exciting challenge, but it would destroy other kids. 

 

In countries that require this of all college bound students, what percentage of students attend college? I am genuinely curious about this. What is considered "college bound?" Are students in other professional programs required to maintain the same level of academic rigor?

 

There are so many skills outside the narrow academic skills required to succeed at traditional school. What about musicians and artists who help us to see the world? What about the farmer who has nerves of steel and can pull a breech calf out in the middle of a storm. What about therapists and counselors who can really listen and connect with others. None of these skills are required of our "top" students. Yet, the students who have these skills, must struggle desperately to do calculus, or write pithy 30 minute essays, or learn multiple languages.