Microsoft High School

[Alex]

The high school I went to tried similar changes (not so much focused on technology but on the self-directed, free-form aspects of it) and put about half the students into the program.

For students with a strong personal drive to learn it was great. For students without one it made it even easier to mask minimal effort and defer what should be done now to what will be done later. My youngest sister made it through two years of high school with just 1.5 credits (as opposed to the 18 she should have had) before just dropping out. The program only lasted three years before parents pretty much stopped allowing their children to participate and it died on the vine.

I'm not saying that is necessarily the case in all such systems but I do start out with a bit of a raised brow. The problem as I see it is that most teenagers don't really have any interest in their education and if they aren't ridden pretty hard would happily sidestep it for all the things that seem more important when you're 15. The people who thrive under this approach tend, in my view, to be people who would have done pretty well anyway under strongly structured systems.

Also, the final sentence of that story highlights something I don't like about how we've come to view K-12. I think all public education should be, at core, vocational and for a lot of people that means it should have a different focus than simply being college preparedness. By forcing everybody into that box I think a lot of people don't see any purpose in what they are doing in high school.

[katiesue]

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

Also, the final sentence of that story highlights something I don't like about how we've come to view K-12. I think all public education should be, at core, vocational and for a lot of people that means it should have a different focus than simply being college preparedness. By forcing everybody into that box I think a lot of people don't see any purpose in what they are doing in high school.

I totally agree with this. College isn't for everyone. My 10 year old is already tellling me which college she wants to go to, Cambridge is high on her list. I think it sets very un-realistic expectations for a lot of kids causing them to crash and burn later.

Employers aren't helping either. Do you really need a four year degree to be a receptionist? No but at least in LA all the ads required one. I'm an Executive Assistant, all the job listings will say four year degree required and some even want graduate work. Umm for what? Unless college will teach you to make coffee, travel arrangements, be polite on the phone, put up with unreasonable bosses and so on experience is really the key.

There are many careers that pay well but don't require a college education. Specialized training yes, but college no. My cousin puts up sheet rock and makes more than I do.

Other countries have vocational programs instead of college so there are many more options for people. It seems to me here in the US the attitude is if you don't go to college (and you should go to an well known college as well) you're a complete looser.

[Strangler Lewis]

Originally Posted by katiesue

Employers aren't helping either. Do you really need a four year degree to be a receptionist? No but at least in LA all the ads required one. I'm an Executive Assistant, all the job listings will say four year degree required and some even want graduate work. Umm for what? Unless college will teach you to make coffee, travel arrangements, be polite on the phone, put up with unreasonable bosses and so on experience is really the key.


It seems to me here in the US the attitude is if you don't go to college (and you should go to an well known college as well) you're a complete looser.

I would suspect that "college degree required" in LA is code for "No Mexicans need apply."

I think the only people who think that the working class are losers are people who go to college with a "liberal arts ideal" and come out unable to earn a living--as I did. I remember having a work study job at the career services office at Berkely and watching all the kids line up to interview with, e.g., Big 8 (at the time) accounting firms. Resumes? How did they get those? However, college was a "track," and even after four years of temping and collecting short story rejection slips, I was still able to get into a top 20 (at the time) law school.

I would be very leery if a kid of mine didn't want to go to college unless he had garnered some significant work experience in a trade during high school. Even then, I would probably insist because education is valuable, and you can always decide to do what you want to do later. In high school, there were definitely the smoking area and auto shop types that we felt inhabited a different world from us, but I was never convinced that it was because they were not cut out for academics, college, etc. or simply were not encouraged to try.

[tracilicious]

Originally Posted by Strangler Lewis

I would be very leery if a kid of mine didn't want to go to college unless he had garnered some significant work experience in a trade during high school. Even then, I would probably insist because education is valuable, and you can always decide to do what you want to do later. In high school, there were definitely the smoking area and auto shop types that we felt inhabited a different world from us, but I was never convinced that it was because they were not cut out for academics, college, etc. or simply were not encouraged to try.

I agree. It's cool with me if my kids want to be artists, or garbage men, or construction workers, or gymnastics coaches, or any number of jobs that don't have a degree. Yet I will still strongly encourage them to go to college. Extra knowledge and education can only benefit you. It will be much easier for them to acquire it early in life, rather than after they are already bogged down with careers.

[tracilicious]

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

I'm not saying that is necessarily the case in all such systems but I do start out with a bit of a raised brow. The problem as I see it is that most teenagers don't really have any interest in their education and if they aren't ridden pretty hard would happily sidestep it for all the things that seem more important when you're 15. The people who thrive under this approach tend, in my view, to be people who would have done pretty well anyway under strongly structured systems.

Then perhaps we should start focusing more on elementary schools, where the desire to learn is first driven out of kids.

I liked that they had a software keeping track of what they are learning. Perhaps this is the first step towards getting rid of ridiculous grades and standardized tests.

I think there are some improvements made with a school like this, but it is far from ideal. They didn't mention anything about arts programs and the like. I wonder if those are included?

[Strangler Lewis]

A pseudo-scientific corporate experiment using poor black people? Oh computers are involved, so it's okay.

And ya gotta love Philly. Usually you hear about companies donating equipment to schools as advertising under color of improving learning, which it doesn't. But Philly's paying $63 million for the privilege. Good thing they didn't spend that money on things like teaching poor kids to read.