How Would you Design a School?

[Semidi]

I’ve been reading the “lies they taught you in school” avidly and found it curious that so many people were dissatisfied with high school and middle school. So I’m wondering, what would you do differently? I’m creating a hypothetical world where each of you can design the education system as you see fit, what would you do?
--
Personally, I would encourage more rigorous classes, and less fluff classes such as gym. I would get rid of sports, the money saved could go to things that actually matter, like text books. I would make school from 9:00AM – 4:00PM as studies show that the teenage mind isn’t fully awake until 9:00AM-10:00AM.

Beside that, I would make sure the concept of the western canon was enforced. This is the belief that knowledge certain arts are imperative to western culture. Along with fine arts classes, art history would be shoved down throats, and the same thing with music and creative writing classes.

Note: Avoid the P word and the G word please.

[Closet_Skeleton]

I would have a giant monolyth in the center, then around it I'd have all the faculty buildings in the shape of...

Wait... what was this thread about again?

I would give teachers uniforms. That would be fun :xykon:

[Solo]

Personally, I would encourage more rigorous classes, and less fluff classes such as gym. I would get rid of sports, the money saved could go to things that actually matter, like text books.

Being smart but fat isn't conductive to a healthy lifestyle.

[Tempest Fennac]

I'd go with Semidi's opening times as well as proritising academic resources over sports. I'd also hae an emphasis on courses which would lead to skilled occupations students who aren't interested in going to college (it seems to be a waste of time and resources for people who aren't cut out for academic studies to do things like GCSE maths or English when there could be the option for them to learn plumbing or take a practical computing course). What amuses me is that the government has decided that schools should make students have 1 hour of exercise everyday (I don't think they bothered to consider things such as how it would fit into a typical school day without taking away from useful subjects). My stance is that if people want to exercise, they should do it in their own time.

[Solo]

My stance is that if people want to exercise, they should do it in their own time.

Why don't we broaden that and say if people want to learn anything, they should do it on their own time?

Much information about physical education would not be learned if students had to teach themselves of the subject.


In China, PE class is a joke and the students are kept busy with rigorous learning. This encourages a system where the kids sit in a classroom or at home all day and just memorize stuff.

This is in accord with China's needs, as they require people who know facts and information in order to work in the current economy, but free thought and creativity is lacking.

If I had a school, I'd focus strongly on teaching students how to think for themselves, then focus on rigorous classes, and also keep physical education in the curriculum, as exercise is, in my opinion, beneficial for students.

[Trog]

Floorplan so far:

__________________
Girl's Locker Room
__________________
Peepholes
__________________
Boy's Locker Room
__________________

Other rooms and stuff

[Don Julio Anejo]

I agree with Solo - rigorous classes create people who know lots of facts but in most other aspects are robots. I like the way some classes were designed in my school, like Socials where we, for example, played as the Canadian Parliament (the class was split into 3 parties based on their views, then the PM and the cabinet ministers were elected, then it was a competition - the majority party had to pass several bills, while the opposition had to make the majority look stupid and force a vote of non-confidence). Even if it seems useless from a point of fact memorization (we could have learned more pure knowledge if those 4-5 classes were regular classes), it was probably a lot more useful in the long run and gave us a better understanding about how things work in real life.

Also, I would make PE mandatory, students do need the exercise (crap, I put on 10 pounds since graduation simply because I haven't had the time to work out regularly anymore). However exercise doesn't mean gym needs lots of funding. Fitness type stuff doesn't need lots of money, just some space to run around/do push ups/play dodgeball. I would leave team sports. Although to me they aren't important, there's people who like playing football/basketball, and if they want to do it later in life, why deny them the chance now?

I would also implement lots of hands-on shop classes. Lots of people want to go into trades (and be plumbers, carpenters, etc), and high school is for the most part useless to them in this extent. And give more money to drama. It always seems to be underfunded - somehow math can afford several class sets of $150 graphing calculators in most places, while drama can't afford $25 costumes for a play.

[Amotis]

Emphasis on arts. Emphasis on technology. Emphasis on I WANT TO BE ABLE TO SMOKE IN CLASSROOMS AGAIN! GAH! I WAS BORN LIKE 50 YEARS TOO LATE!!!!

[Tempest Fennac]

I never actually learn anything about health and fitness in PE at school (PE classes were somely concerned with sports which I had no interest in). Also, isn't a lot of health stuff just common sense as opposed to something that really needs to be taught? (Admittedly, that ties into my views that schools should offer vocational alternatives). I have to agree that teaching students how to think for themselves whoul be a good idea as well.

[Vexen]

I think there is a place in the education system for PE. Physical activity helps keep the mind active. I think, however, that more careful consideration should be given in assigning PE teachers though. PE shoud have been more like recess in elementary school. That would be better.

Personally, I believe the two major problems with the public education system, or at least my experience with it, are first; too much babysitting not enough teaching, and second; not enough parental participation.

I was shocked on arriving in college that homework had to be done. Not only did you have to do all of you homework for a good grade, but it was needed to understand the subject. In addition you couldn't do homework in class. This change of requiring responsibility on my part was immense and hard to change gears. My senior year of High School I took 5 Advanced Placement classes, passing 4 of the 5 tests, and receiving, without weighing it, a 3.9 grade point average. I averaged 1-2 hours of homework a night. everything else I did in class. Class time was spent as follows, 30 min lecture, followed by 55 minutes of homework in class, or more appropriately labeled 'babysitting'.

I think that they should provide classes with 50 min lectures with no homework time in class. This would allow students to take 4 classes a day with a 30 min lunch all in less than 4 hours. On our system we had a block class schedule so you would have 4 classes one day and 4 different ones the next. School could run for 6-8 hours a day. Students would be required to take only 4 classes each day, they could then either choose the times most convenient for them for classes, allowing for better schedules for part time jobs, or sleeping in. Or the students that want the most out of school could take up to 6 classes a day.

For all students to handle this would require some discipline on the students part plus some outside assistance for students who are not run of the mill. IE do not learn best in a lecture setting. The best method for this is parental participation as parents know their childrens abilities the best. I would suggest, and I hope I am not too political in this, that parents receive tax breaks or other incentives for children's good grades. Heck you can receive insurance discounts for the same thing. Another less political and more accurate incentive might be discounts for school costs for good students. Having worked as a tutor and with teachers at university levels it is fairly safe to say, with minor exceptions, that 'A' stuents take less time and effort for teachers and graders than 'D' students.

For students whose parents can not provide this support, whether do to economic constraints, or other reasons. An external support system should come with the school. some suggestions might be that perhaps there be some classes during the 6-8 hour block that you can go and get general assistance with homework, kind of like a homework hot line. Also, some of these extra classes could be club or other extracurricular oriented groups, to help students feel more confortable and enjoy school. A lot of students have difficulty participating in extra-curricular activities that are held outside of the standard class block.

Finally, ideally there would be an opportunity for various types of classes. whether at one school or perhaps given the opportunity to go to different schools. To clarify, i mean variety in more than just subject. There should be a variety of means in which subjects are tought. People learn in different fashions and education should adjust to them not the other way around. There should be hands on schools where you skills are taught through application. (an example learning proper grammar through reading and writing, rather than lectures). Other schools maybe should be career oriented, where you learn math and english skills as they apply to a profession. How to write memos, or perhaps just generic math skills that you will USE in everyday life. not just story problems about how many apples Bill has, things like how to balance your checkbook, how to fill out your taxes. how to calculate your interest rate. Other schools, of course, lecture would mean just that 50 min of taking notes, that is how some students learn.

[Shishnarfne]

For me, there are a few major priorities:
First of all, have teachers who enjoy teaching and can teach well.
Secondly, keep the building well-maintained so that it is an attractive place to learn.
Third, have an administration fully dedicated to making the school and productive and supportive learning environment.
Finally, have enough range of classes that students can take course work at an appropriate level, and have teachers capable of presenting the information in a manner that cultivates interest.

Most of the rest (including, hopefully, extracurriculars) should fall generally into place after these are firmly established. (Self-nitpick, maybe I should've put administration at the top...)
I think that given these attributes, other issues (e.g. having undesirable courses required by the state) should be tolerable for students.

[13_CBS]

Floorplan so far:

__________________
Girl's Locker Room
__________________
Peepholes
__________________
Boy's Locker Room
__________________

Other rooms and stuff


Once again, Trog wins the thread.

And before you say it's sexist, remember that the girls can peep back too :smalltongue: :smallamused:

[Solo]

Once again, Trog wins the thread.

And before you say it's sexist, remember that the girls can peep back too :smalltongue: :smallamused:

No, but it's still segregated.

Have them use the same locker room and showers! In the name of equality!

I HAVE A DREAM!

[Amotis]

No, but it's still segregated.

Have them use the same locker room and showers! In the name of equality!

I HAVE A DREAM!

Not...gonna...touch that one.

[thubby]

trogg's got it!

seriously, i would do away with with all the lies they teach to younger kids. i would also move the hours for high school up to 10-4, its a scientific fact that teens are more nocturnal, i don't know why they insist on fighting it. ban all homework and any related grading. maybe make the school day an hour longer to compensate. and finally, install hidden cameras in all classrooms to ensure an end to bullying, from students and teachers, and stop the he said/she said nonsense.

[Lorn]

Oh, where do I start.


Note: Spoilered, it looks pretttty long.


-PE.

Right. First off, it'd be set by actual ability - at the moment, there's a bunch of people who're really good at it, good at sports etc, and then there's people like me who are terrible at what's taught and subsequently spend the lesson standing round. In fact, I'm so bad that the teachers laugh at me... speaking of which, PE teachers should be subject to random class checks, seeing as it's the only class that isn't and is the easiest for bullying and similar to occur (well, guys definitely...)

-History, RE, Geography etc - humanities.

First off. History, no more WW2. Or at least a year of it max. At the moment you honestly can not get away from it through GCSE and A levels. bring on some more medieval stuff (more interesting/variation thus giving students something to concentrate on.)
Geography, no problems.
RE... less evangelistic RE teachers please. Perfectly fine to teach about religion, NOT perfectly fine to attempt to force religion on impressionable students. It is OK to teach some practices (eg, Buddhist meditation) as this can be done by nonreligious people as well. If it was more focussed on ethics, it'd be a lot better, IMO.

-Maths

First, make sure the board is visible everywhere. Second, a couple of teachers teaching the same thing in different lessons, meaning students may understand better (I honestly could not understand my Maths teacher, got a C at GCSE.)

-English

AFAIK, this is actually fine. Just less on poetry, please, it's mind-numbingly dull.

-Science

Basically fine, in my school at least.

-Art

Should not be compulsory in Y9 onwards, should NOT be set homework for unless it's finding something or research. Art resources can get expensive, not fair on the students/parents.



Moving on from lessons:

-Lunches

First and foremost, there should be some way to determine how long is allowed minimum for lunch.

Let's say every pupil takes 15 minutes to eat, inc. getting food.

Let's say there's 200 seats in the dining hall.

Let's say there's 1000 people to feed.

1000/200 = 5 sittings.
15 x 5 = 1 hour 15 minutes
Add an extra 15 minutes to this to allow for first people and last people.

That's one and a half hours, enough for people to eat. If not eating then they can socialise/do homework. Have a set list of groups people can eat in, say with the above example there'd be groups 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. One group goes in first on Mondays, one group Tuesdays etc.

Varies with different groups/numbers, but it'd work better than things are now, where I am at least -- 1500 people to feed, 200 or so seats, 45 minutes to eat total.

And they let packlunches in first for some reason...

Free dinners/money off - should be determined in same way as EMA, from what I remember the people on free lunches were the same people with £200 trainers and stuff.

-Other stuff

Schoolwide missing homework/lateness etc penalties, or at least year-wide. Prevents overly strict teachers giving detention for one missed homework.

IQ test for new headteachers. No joke, our new one has run the school into the ground. Completely. She even tried to get it rebuilt. Started rebuilding, then we find out she did not in fact get planning permission. Joy.


I think that's about it off the top of my head.

[Don Julio Anejo]

Cameras are probably a bad idea. They won't help with bullying. If someone is getting bullied, well they should learn to stand up for themselves (see "Begging for Advice" thread). They will, however, help pedophile staff get off.

And they will make school extremely uncomfortable for a lot of students. Big brother is watching you..

They insist fighting it and having school start early so children can go to school before their parents have to go to work.

Edit: I also don't think it's appropriate to teach any kind of ethics in school. That should be left to parents. Why? Well, because ethics are mostly a cultural thing. Some things are completely different in other cultures than what we're used to. For example, we consider it if not OK, then at least acceptable to get into arguments with parents. For someone growing up in China, it would be almost unheard of.

[Dragonrider]

you could start by not FORCING kids to go. :smalltongue: If school were voluntary, then we would have no problem. Days they wanted to, they could attend; days they didn't, they wouldn't. They would eventually learn responsibility because there would be consequences for failing, but in submitting themselves to the system, they would accept that. Kids have so little control over their own lives that I think a lot of people skip out just to prove a point.

Now, I understand that a lot of you will argue that most kids won't care, and will just goof off and play computer games. I must now tell you that I am a product of unschooling. I've never attended public school; my mom has let me learn at my own pace and in areas which I find interesting. The only thing she's forced me to learn is math, because that takes more concentrated effort than, say, history, which you can learn just by reading.

Okay, so we don't have a TV. You take away the TV, and what do kids have to do? They might just goof off for a while, but eventually they will sit down and pick up a book. When that happens, then you supply the material and they learn how to learn. You watch a toddler, and they're learning every day - my three year old brother can read short words simply because when he asked what a "T" was, we told him. He sounds out street signs, writes his name, and can add, multiply, and subtract - simply because he wanted to know. Everyone has the potential to be smart. It just needs to be nurtured in them by parents who read and don't sit them in front of a TV for six hours a day. This can naturally be extended into elementary and middle school, and by the time they reach high school age, they will be ready and interested in disciplined learning.

OK, so I'm radical. But I was unschooled (except for math) for the first twelve years of my life, and at thirteen I started taking online math courses with the community college. Now, in what would be my 11th grade year, I'm going to community college halftime (two courses) and I'm doing calculus and physics at home (since the college doesn't offer good courses). It SEEMS to have worked.

I don't know. I think that the amount of freedom I've had only works with people whose personalities work that way - but if you give people the tools, I think they will learn to love learning.

[CrazedGoblin]

i probably wouldnt change anything, school is harsh sometimes, deal with it

[preserver3]

I’ve been reading the “lies they taught you in school” avidly and found it curious that so many people were dissatisfied with high school and middle school. So I’m wondering, what would you do differently? I’m creating a hypothetical world where each of you can design the education system as you see fit, what would you do?

I just read the same book after an argument on another forum, and the best I can say about the book is that it inspires a lot of ire at something that was done with a lot more good intentions than the book would suggest.



Personally, I would encourage more rigorous classes, and less fluff classes such as gym. I would get rid of sports, the money saved could go to things that actually matter, like text books. I would make school from 9:00AM – 4:00PM as studies show that the teenage mind isn’t fully awake until 9:00AM-10:00AM.

I was one of the last kids picked in Dodge ball, but even I wouldn't take the sports away. In the book, remember how they talk about the whole competition aspect with the kids basically spending their whole lives trying to get straight A's, and not finding their path? Sports are an avenue for the kid who may never be able to make even straight C's. I think any transition would have to be gradual, and I think "taking out sports" might be a little too radical.


Beside that, I would make sure the concept of the western canon was enforced. This is the belief that knowledge certain arts are imperative to western culture. Along with fine arts classes, art history would be shoved down throats, and the same thing with music and creative writing classes.

Note: Avoid the P word and the G word please.

I think my ideal school would be attached to the community it lived in. I think apprenticeships in a host of activities can start very early on. I learned basic plumbing and brick laying in the boyscouts, I think a lot of hands on activities would make sense. Booker T. Washington started the Tuskeegee Institute and the students learned basic math by measuring for carpet and tile in the classroom. I think my perfect school would be an organic structure, built by the students and for the needs of the community. When the surveyors come out to build a new addition to the school, bring the whole school out so they can learn and understand the math and science involved in preparing the groundwork. When the architect finishes the plans make him present them to the whole school. When the builders come out and build the structure, define their jobs and the needs of each task. When the building is done, let each child design his own brick in the walkway, and place it.

I'd keep a lot of the same classes, but I'd put a great deal more stress on reading novels and books outside of class at a younger age, while focusing class exercises almost solely on practical interactions with actual skills.

As a last thing, I would absolutely destroy the age barrier between class groups. Separating kids by ages makes the smart kids learn slower and the slow kids more disadvantaged. Some of the greatest thinkers and writers of our time learned in large classes filled with students from age 5 to 18. There's a way to bring the whole practical educational experience into something more community and organically minded.

[Telonius]

The three biggest elements I'd make are organizational.

1. Parents are not allowed to sue the school unless the kid actually gets hurt.
2. Teachers are allowed to teach the students, give the kid the grade they've earned, and enforce classroom discipline (within reason and school policy), without worrying about losing their job for it.
3. Principals are allowed to fire the teachers if they aren't teaching well enough.

Other design elements:
- Staff must eat the same food that students do.
- Use of computers is encouraged.
- Art, gym, music, and (for older children) shop class are required.
- Class size is limited to 15. No matter what.
- Need for carrying heavy books to and from class should be minimized.

Stuff that's debatable, but I think would be good (some of it based on my own experience):
- Split up grade levels like Catholic schools do: one building for grades 1-8, another for 9-12. 7th and 8th graders expected to take responsibility for helping out 1st and 2nd graders (serving as patrols, big brother/sisters, etc).
- Co-ed elementary schools, single-sex high schools.
- Some amount of service hours mandatory yearly starting around 5th grade, increasing gradually.
- Dress codes, but not uniforms.

[SDF]

Classical education all the way.

If you can't read sheet music you don't graduate high school.

[Closet_Skeleton]

3. Principals are allowed to fire the teachers if they aren't teaching well enough.

What if the Principle deserves to be fired?

[Dragonrider]

You know, I was just thinking about all the geniuses we had in the early history of the United States: Thomas Jefferson, and Benjamin Franklin, and all those guys...they did amazing stuff! Jefferson and Franklin were both inventors, and prolific writers, and scientists, and politicians, and ambassadors, and spoke a bazillion languages, and they did all this stuff! We don't really have many people like that anymore. I mean, we have people that do one or two of those things, but they don't have the...I don't know the word...diversity of interests, I guess.

Then I realized that the reason behind it is that there is so much more to know, now. It's hard to get good at something if you're dabbling in six others at the same time. I mean, fifth graders know enough today to be considered "learned" in those times. So I guess it's all relative. Routine knowledge for us would be unthinkable for them - knowledge of dinosaurs, sciences, foreign peoples - heck, equality of men and women. Plus the fact that every generation has to know more history, because there's more history to know.

Anyway, that all sounded better in my head - but my point is, the average American now is a thousand times better educated than the average American in 1774. Sometimes it's easy to forget that.

[/rant]

[Trog]

okay, more serious reply this time.

School design:
Each student is given a laptop "desk" which has in access to all the textbooks needed. This way it can be customized by the teacher and be kept up to date. Assignments can be typed and submitted (blind drop box). No internet access without the teacher's permission (password protected, encrypted with an automatic notification system). No e-mail, either. Any breakage of the "desk" will be paid for by the parents (and at their discretion by their son/daughter who broke it)

That takes care of textbooks, handouts, assignments and creates a paperless school. Bells, announcements, the clock, etc. will all be on the "desk". Any multimedia presentations (TV, Films, Audio, etc. can be done through the desk as well. So basically you'd just need a simple media browser program, a word processing program, and likely a testing only program of some sort.

As for the environment of the classroom, best to start with simple, ergonomic chairs for the students. The classroom will be equipped with an electronic white board such as they have at some businesses, which will save the board as a file which can be distributed to the students via their desk and can be added to their "textbooks". So no more copying from the board. Otherwise the design should be as energy efficient and utilize as much post-consumer recyclable content as possible. Solar energy on top of those big, flat roofs should definitely be utilized. Linoleum floors seem to have proven effective so keep those. Minimalistic interior design. Lockers could be (gasp) smaller as there will be no need for books, just room to store coats, "desks" and such. Walls can be kept a light color and artwork projects used to create large, more colorful decorations for the hallways each year (behind glass and such, of course). Indirect adjustable/task lighting would be nice.

Student ID cards for door activation/permission would replace hall passes, lunch tickets, library cards, etc.

As for the curriculum...
Well it needs to cover the basics. Make SURE kids know how to read and write, do math, have the basics of the Sciences and the arts. Understand contemporary society and its roots in history. Give them plenty of exercise, challenges and opportunity to find their best niche and the ability to PURSUE it. Encourage intelligence and competition, acknowledge excellence and talent. :smallsmile:

[Darken Rahl]

PE is a joke.

It helps nobody do anything. I took it every year. I didn't learn game rules, I didn't get strong, coordinated, etc. It isn't structured enough to help kids stay fit, that argument for PE is a joke, especially in the school I went to. Basically it's a way to ensure that college football players who couldn't go pro had a major and a job after their ball playing days were over.

Yes, I am bitter and yes, I am over-simplifying.

[Darken Rahl]

okay, more serious reply this time.

School design:
Each student is given a laptop "desk" which has in access to all the textbooks needed. This way it can be customized by the teacher and be kept up to date. Assignments can be typed and submitted (blind drop box). No internet access without the teacher's permission (password protected, encrypted with an automatic notification system). No e-mail, either. Any breakage of the "desk" will be paid for by the parents (and at their discretion by their son/daughter who broke it)

That takes care of textbooks, handouts, assignments and creates a paperless school. Bells, announcements, the clock, etc. will all be on the "desk". Any multimedia presentations (TV, Films, Audio, etc. can be done through the desk as well. So basically you'd just need a simple media browser program, a word processing program, and likely a testing only program of some sort.

As for the environment of the classroom, best to start with simple, ergonomic chairs for the students. The classroom will be equipped with an electronic white board such as they have at some businesses, which will save the board as a file which can be distributed to the students via their desk and can be added to their "textbooks". So no more copying from the board. Otherwise the design should be as energy efficient and utilize as much post-consumer recyclable content as possible. Solar energy on top of those big, flat roofs should definitely be utilized. Linoleum floors seem to have proven effective so keep those. Minimalistic interior design. Lockers could be (gasp) smaller as there will be no need for books, just room to store coats, "desks" and such. Walls can be kept a light color and artwork projects used to create large, more colorful decorations for the hallways each year (behind glass and such, of course). Indirect adjustable/task lighting would be nice.

Student ID cards for door activation/permission would replace hall passes, lunch tickets, library cards, etc.

As for the curriculum...
Well it needs to cover the basics. Make SURE kids know how to read and write, do math, have the basics of the Sciences and the arts. Understand contemporary society and its roots in history. Give them plenty of exercise, challenges and opportunity to find their best niche and the ability to PURSUE it. Encourage intelligence and competition, acknowledge excellence and talent. :smallsmile:

Interesting ideas, but I doubt you'd ever have that until we get past the 'Mac vs. PC' crap. A book is pretty much a book, but an electronic curriculum would take serious design, software, development, resources, and everyone in the nation would have to be onboard simply to make a viable reason for such expenditures. And that might never happen.

[Trog]

Interesting ideas, but I doubt you'd ever have that until we get past the 'Mac vs. PC' crap.
Who said it had to be either one of these choices? Who said every school had to be the same? We have this "problem" right now in every scool and yet we HAVE computers in every school. It is not a problem.


A book is pretty much a book, but an electronic curriculum would take serious design, software, development, resources, and everyone in the nation would have to be onboard simply to make a viable reason for such expenditures. And that might never happen.

You'll note the title of the thread is not "design the nation's school system." It's "design a school." National support not needed. Local support or barring that make it a private school.

PDF readers exist for viewing/text book creation. PDF is the de facto standard in the print industry so chances are the textbooks already exist in this format. PDFs can also be created to include forms for testing and multiple choice tests, or any other for that matter. PDFs are also platform independent. As are a great many file types. Including video and audio. Parental permissions and log-in exist now to restrict the web. Unless you are approved to go to a page you need a password. I have this at home now with my kids. Blind drop boxes on FTP sites exist now for file submission. Not much development necessary on any of this, actually. Just the will to combine them.

[Rama_Lei]

Corparal Punishment.
"Wahh! I have math homework!"'
*flailed with a mace*

[BlackStaticWolf]

Once again, Trog wins the thread.

I second the motion.




Seriousness...

First thing I'd change... starting in middle school: uniforms. Doesn't have to suit-and-tie level, but the kids need to learn what appropriate business attire is... and get used to wearing it.

Second... longer classes with fewer of them per day. I'd say, minimum 80 minute classes with maybe four of them each day. The class lengths I was subjected to (40 to 50 minutes) is not long enough to go into ANYTHING in depth.

Third... require foreign languages starting in elementary school.

Fourth... physical fitness should be required throughout all of schooling. Making the kids go for a twenty minute jog and lift some weights every day is a good thing.

Fifth... uh... Corporal punishment? Some brats just need to be smacked with a ruler. Or a brick.

[Don Julio Anejo]

When it comes to PE, you could do it this way: there are two classes. You have to take at least one. First class - "team sports" and the like, kinda like PE in most places now. You play a bit of soccer, a bit of basketball, etc. Then there's the other class: fitness. It's about working out, running, doing treadmills/skipping rope, etc.

The first class would probably involve less actual physical effort (since even in soccer you don't spend the whole class running), but it would require more athletic ability to get a good mark. The fitness class, on the other hand, doesn't have to be competitive. Everyone's fitness levels are different anyway (same as with their coordination, balance, etc - stuff required for team sports). But kids would have to show improvement throughout the year to get a good mark. For example, someone might start with benching 45 pounds (the bar) and end with 120 pounds. That's pretty good, and pretty easy to achieve if you have the class at least twice a week...

[Exeson]

Right. First off, PE is scrapped.

wait for it....

And instead replaced with games. At my school PE and games are two different subjects, with PE done in classes and games done on ability (if their are enough people of same ability) And it really works wells. Basically in Games school teams practice and prepare for inter school matches where as PE teaches more obscure sports such as badminton or basketball, so pE is useless but Games is very enjoyable. So we have, I would say, three hours of sport a week. Now, the kids have a choice of what they wish to do during games.

The options would be as follows (and these are viable as they are almost the same options we have at my school, If there is nothing on these lists that the kids enjoy they are just going to have to suck it.)

Winter:
Rugby
Football
Hockey
Fencing
Shooting
Judo
Sailing

Summer:
Cricket
Athletics
Tennis
Fencing
Shooting
Judo
Sailing

other sports would also be available during Lunch or after school. important School teams (A,B,C teams) would also have training after school.

Normal lessons would stay relatively the same except for a few changes.

English and History will also have to teach culture. Latin will be compulsory up till GCSE.

Religious Education will be scrapped. In its place will be Religious Studies and Philosophy (as separate subjects)

Subjects tought.

Up to GCSE

English
Maths
French
Biology
Chemistry
Physics
Geography
Latin
Art
RS
Philosophy
Drama
DT

Children will also chose one other subject from:
Ancient Greek
German
Spanish
Russian

GCSE

Compulsary

English Language
English Litriture
IGCSE Maths
IGCSE Science Double Award
French

Optional: Children pick 3 from this list

History
RS
Art
DT
Geography
German
Spanish
Latin
Ancient Greek
Russian


Right, I will finish this later, I need to sleep now.

[Exeson]

When it comes to PE, you could do it this way: there are two classes. You have to take at least one. First class - "team sports" and the like, kinda like PE in most places now. You play a bit of soccer, a bit of basketball, etc. Then there's the other class: fitness. It's about working out, running, doing treadmills/skipping rope, etc.

The first class would probably involve less actual physical effort (since even in soccer you don't spend the whole class running), but it would require more athletic ability to get a good mark. The fitness class, on the other hand, doesn't have to be competitive. Everyone's fitness levels are different anyway (same as with their coordination, balance, etc - stuff required for team sports). But kids would have to show improvement throughout the year to get a good mark. For example, someone might start with benching 45 pounds (the bar) and end with 120 pounds. That's pretty good, and pretty easy to achieve if you have the class at least twice a week...

But the problem there is The school, in the eyes of the people who don't want to spend lots of time doing fitness work the school becomes a sort of fitness Nazi regime.

I myself, and in my schools U16 A rugby team, yet I hate doing fitness work, my fitness work is my rugby training, I get more exercise from that than from doing boring stuff in a gym because i do not try as hard in the gym, where as on the field, I could keep fish alive in the sweat I give off.

[adanedhel9]

First, a bit of commentary on Trog's all-digital school:

Personally, I've found the process of note-taking an essential part of lectures. Taking down notes, in my own handwriting, has always helped me analyse and internalize the instruction. I think the same is true of a lot of people, but they spend so much time taking notes verbatim, skipping over the anaylsis and internalization components, that they don't realize it. In addition, it helps keep me focused on the class - If I knew that I could have all the details of the lecture available to me later anyway, I'd stop paying attention.

((This argument, of course, involves generalizing my experiences over the masses, which I don't know that I can do with any sense of certainty. Of course, that's what this entire thread is about.))

I would keep the electronic board, but I would put a caveat on its use: it should only be used for homework instructions, for examples, as an aid to those who've missed lectures, and (maybe) for things that need explicit memorization (I say maybe since those things should be in the books anyways). Anything theoretical, anything that requires analysis, any general rules, should be left up to the student.

Oh, and I hope those computer-desks of yours have digitizers, so thsoe who prefer to write instead of type have that option.

My more general thoughts:

Like many of you, I would've prefered that PE be more fitness-focused. But don't get rid of the games completely. I'd say that each day, students should have the option to do one or the other. Some of each would be required (maybe one day a week on each), but beyond that each student would be in charge of their own games-to-fitness ratio.

I'm ambivalent about sports as funded by the schools. I can see why they're there, but at the same time it seems like an awful lot of money gets spent on something that doesn't really fall under the umbrella of education. I say keep the sports, but make sure the administration keeps its priorities straight - don't cut music or art or drama or whatever while sports still gets full funding.

Teachers should have reasonable control of their classrooms - the administration shouldn't be afraid of lawsuits because Billy got a C- or of budget cuts because X number of students didn't pass arbitrary level Y.

Those students capable of it should be allowed - even encouraged - to take higher-level classes, as them taking regular-level classes won't do anyone one any good. But if they choose to do so, they must accept the consequences of a more difficult class. (I knew several people in college who skirted some of the core requirements by taking college-level classes while in high school. Except these "college-level" courses were taught in the high school, by high school teachers, and weren't any different than regular high school classes.)

Every class should have some level of student-directed learning. Whether it's simply a matter of what the paper-of-the-week will be on, or as extensive as what the student will be focusing on for the entire semester would be according to subject and level. If the student has some control (but plenty of guidance), the material tends to be much more engaging on a personal level.

There should always be a focus on interdisciplinarianism. Show me the history behind the math. Show me how the industrial revolution lead to advances in science. Show me how this novel references the changes of that era. These sorts of connections are what make people really learn to think.

Put older students in mentoring positions for younger students. This might not be appropriate at all levels, in all courses, or for all students, but I think it can help reinforce the basics on both sides, as well as break down the "classism" that's occasionally seen.

[Trog]

First, a bit of commentary on Trog's all-digital school:

Personally, I've found the process of note-taking an essential part of lectures. Taking down notes, in my own handwriting, has always helped me analyse and internalize the instruction. I think the same is true of a lot of people, but they spend so much time taking notes verbatim, skipping over the anaylsis and internalization components, that they don't realize it. In addition, it helps keep me focused on the class - If I knew that I could have all the details of the lecture available to me later anyway, I'd stop paying attention.

((This argument, of course, involves generalizing my experiences over the masses, which I don't know that I can do with any sense of certainty. Of course, that's what this entire thread is about.))

I would keep the electronic board, but I would put a caveat on its use: it should only be used for homework instructions, for examples, as an aid to those who've missed lectures, and (maybe) for things that need explicit memorization (I say maybe since those things should be in the books anyways). Anything theoretical, anything that requires analysis, any general rules, should be left up to the student.

Well there is nothing stopping any student from taking notes on their own. But this saves having to have to copy down what the instructor writes. You'll get this automatically. Even in modern classrooms without an electronic whiteboard the copying down of the board is up to you. So no different, really.

Incidentally, Thes just informed me that most of these things are in place in one way or another at medical colleges. Less restrictions to electronic systems, of course, because there is no need to worry about childish antics/hacking and such. One thing she reminded me of was that lectures are recorded and can be downloaded later in case you miss a class or need to review. So capturing everything you can so the student has every available resource open to them. Nifty, eh?

[Brickwall]

Just remember that the things I mention are adjusted for grade.

First, there is a quiz. It tests you on what you learned yesterday. Get enough right answers, and you proceed. Miss enough, and you are dismissed (there are cameras). This will substitute for in-class quizzes, allowing more time for real learning. There will be wireless so students (who will be allowed portable computers, which will be provided with the school's tuition, since there's no way the government would fo for this) can all take the quiz without holding up other students.

Next is the obstacle course. It can't be walked through, and entrance is only allowed some 5 minutes before class (there'd have to be somewhat small classes). There will be a certain number of late times allowed before penalties kick in. This will substitute for phys ed, as students will build both the intuition and conditioning to move through it efficiently (it will change every day). Extracurricular sports will still be supported by the school. It's okay to be an athelete, as long as your academics don't suffer. However, sports will not substitute for proper phys ed. Coaches will be there at obstacle courses to help out (instruct, give tips, etc) if necessary, but will be encouraged to be more "hands-off" later in the year, and in later grades.

As usual, middle school and up, classes will be taught by specific teachers. Each will be 48 minutes long. There will be at least one elective every year, more for 9-12, and they will all be beneficial to life skills or academics (programming, personal financial skills, unarmed self-defense, etc). These electives will not be year-specific, so you can start on one at any time, or test out of one if you are already skilled somewhat in the subject. You can't repeat one that you passed, though. Younger children will have a fairly standard curriculum, but with slightly more advanced math.

Classes that qualify for college credit, such as AP classes or possibly classes at a local university (depending on how well we can arrange it), will be allowed starting in the 9th grade. They will be encouraged, though not mandatory. Some more advanced classes will only be offered as AP.

Probably a couple kinks to work out, and it'd need funding, and as stated, probably need to charge tuition (sorry, but it's expensive to keep this good stuff running). I'd try to avoid it, but everything costs money nowadays.

Counselors, tutors, and coaches, both professional and older volunteer students, would be available to help out with courses and phys-ed. In fact, seeing these people is encouraged, as it is a rigorous curriculum.

And, of course, the school will back many clubs, including extracurricular acting, visual arts, music, etc. (electives might be offered for some of these, of course).

Obviously, students who make it through the program will find themselves with the following qualities and advantages:
Prepared for adult life
Given a head-start in college
In fair physical shape

I wish I had been put through this.