"You were punished for not doing your homework, not because you spent your time learning. Just because you made these two things coincide for you does not mean that they have to."
Assuming, of course, that the volume of homework is sufficiently low to actually leave time or mental energy for anything else. I am not sure that is something that we can just assume, although I will admit that I did not really bother to find out how long my homework would have taken in middle school. Really though, the punishment for not turning in homework is handed down regardless of whether or not students spent their time on something with more educational value, and that is what I think is wrong here. Doing your homework is more important than learning; if doing homework coincides with learning, that's good, but there is no requirement of that or even any consideration of the possibility that the homework might have no educational value.
"If you don't need to go to class to learn then go take all the ACT's and SAT's you want and get yourself into college without them and stop whining. Otherwise go to school."
Of course, colleges also demand to see your high school transcript, and top schools will reject students whose high school GPA does not meet a certain threshold, so what you seem to be portraying as a student's choice is not much of a choice at all. High school grades can have consequences years later; when I was an undergrad, I went to MIT to ask about their graduate program, and they stopped answering my questions as soon as I mentioned what college I was attending. I had top marks on the SAT and SAT II exams, but without a report card to back that up I was not accepted to a top tier university. I am by no means alone in this; I met plenty of other people like myself in college, and this sort of story can be heard elsewhere.
It is not a matter of whining, it is a problem with the approach we take to education. Students who "play the game" get ahead; learning the material is secondary and on its own it gets students nowhere (on the other handing, forgetting the material at the end of the academic year or gaining the minimal understanding needed to receive a high grade is not punished or discouraged). Disobedience means closed doors, regardless of whether or not a student has mastered the curriculum they were supposed to be taught. If this sounds like the rest of life, well, that is exactly the point of school right? To prepare students for life -- both by teaching the skills needed to survive, and by teaching students to abide by the rules of the system they will be expected to live in.
"...that is exactly the point of school right? To prepare students for life -- both by teaching the skills needed to survive, and by teaching students to abide by the rules of the system they will be expected to live in."
Yes indeed. Part of school is socialization. You say it like it's a bad thing.
"if doing homework coincides with learning, that's good, but there is no requirement of that or even any consideration of the possibility that the homework might have no educational value."
Do you really believe that the teachers aren't trying to make the homework useful? That they are just trying to waste kids' time? Do you know any teachers as an adult?
"Do you really believe that the teachers aren't trying to make the homework useful? That they are just trying to waste kids' time? Do you know any teachers as an adult?"
No, teachers are not trying to waste students time with homework, at least not that I am aware. Yet that does not mean that the homework cannot be a waste of time for a student. The problem is that in a typical American school, a student whose time would be wasted on homework will be punished for failing to do that homework. Homework may have no educational value for a student who already understands the material, but such students are generally expected to complete the homework anyway. The penalty for not doing homework is given regardless of the educational value of the homework; hence a student who has top marks on every exam/written assignment, who is tutoring other students in the class, can still receive low or even failing grades.
That's true. The system has settled - after a few millennia of experience - on an all-students-gotta-do-their-homework model. What scalable, affordable system would have the best total outome, given real student populations? That's the problem for the public system to address. Note that this is not the same question as "what's best for betterunix".
I have a lot of sympathy for you, as a student who did as little homework as I could get away with or a little less. Lucky for me that exams were more important back then. I might have more trouble nowadays.
Assuming, of course, that the volume of homework is sufficiently low to actually leave time or mental energy for anything else. I am not sure that is something that we can just assume, although I will admit that I did not really bother to find out how long my homework would have taken in middle school. Really though, the punishment for not turning in homework is handed down regardless of whether or not students spent their time on something with more educational value, and that is what I think is wrong here. Doing your homework is more important than learning; if doing homework coincides with learning, that's good, but there is no requirement of that or even any consideration of the possibility that the homework might have no educational value.
"If you don't need to go to class to learn then go take all the ACT's and SAT's you want and get yourself into college without them and stop whining. Otherwise go to school."
Of course, colleges also demand to see your high school transcript, and top schools will reject students whose high school GPA does not meet a certain threshold, so what you seem to be portraying as a student's choice is not much of a choice at all. High school grades can have consequences years later; when I was an undergrad, I went to MIT to ask about their graduate program, and they stopped answering my questions as soon as I mentioned what college I was attending. I had top marks on the SAT and SAT II exams, but without a report card to back that up I was not accepted to a top tier university. I am by no means alone in this; I met plenty of other people like myself in college, and this sort of story can be heard elsewhere.
It is not a matter of whining, it is a problem with the approach we take to education. Students who "play the game" get ahead; learning the material is secondary and on its own it gets students nowhere (on the other handing, forgetting the material at the end of the academic year or gaining the minimal understanding needed to receive a high grade is not punished or discouraged). Disobedience means closed doors, regardless of whether or not a student has mastered the curriculum they were supposed to be taught. If this sounds like the rest of life, well, that is exactly the point of school right? To prepare students for life -- both by teaching the skills needed to survive, and by teaching students to abide by the rules of the system they will be expected to live in.