<p>POSTING at CC Cafe!!!</p>
<p>I have not been here much...</p>
<p>Ok here is my intro.</p>
<p>Name: Ajay Chahar (yeah weird name :D cos its Indian)
Country: India
Interests : I love boxing. You can call me a computer geek too with so many of my linux projects. Ermm... girls consider me a sweet talker. If anyone interested to see my pic find me on facebook ^^ </p>
<p>I don't know many people except a few on CC. Lets see if I can have me friends ^_^</p>
<p>well you certainly know the amazing me :cool:</p>
<p>and the unforgettable me! :)</p>
<p>I don't think you know me yet...</p>
<p>maybe we need to partayy</p>
<p>ok, then collegeguy. meet you in the prime number thread.</p>
<p>l0l, is that a challenge???</p>
<p>well since you just left a prime open for an hour, I'm not sure about you anymore...</p>
<p>I know you TheVeganActress :D</p>
<p>Otherwise I wouldnt waste my time mentioning your name in my 1000th post!</p>
<p>but you didn't mention mine :(</p>
<p>'cause he doesn't know you silly :p</p>
<p>you can debate the ideal educational system with me. ;)</p>
<p>^I know you're being sarcastic, but here it goes: one where hw is optional, you take the classes you want to take (though you still have to get a certain amount of creds to graduate), you still have classes based on difficutly levels, you must take three standardized tests on three different subjects (a maximum of three so that people don't feel obligated to take more just to be recognized), you can come to class whenever you want except you must come on test days, and that's about all I can think of. I know, it's really "laissez-faire-ish," but it allows the best of the best to excel to the greatest extent, and it allows people to actually find interests early on so that they are more focused when they go to college.</p>
<p>Oh, and there should be a nationalized grade weighting system. And no SATs and APs (only the standardized testing that I described earlier.)</p>
<p>it's an interesting idea - the problem is that the "ideal educational system" for one will be different from that of another. i'm more in favor of unschooling. the main issue with that is that there needs to be a mechanism to motivate students (this is probably the main good complaint against unschooling). i'm still thinking of such a mechanism - most likely it should be based on economics and incentive-giving - and it should utilize the power of the Internet.</p>
<p>I think that the most important skill of the information age is that of (a) finding information that is (a) reliable and (b) relevant to your needs. </p>
<p>i'm actually in favor of free response question exams for more subjects - and having them be given more frequently (to accommodate the homeschoolers). but i think one of the main problems is classes themselves. some people might do better doing nothing but thinking/writing/debating/receiving feedback on online forums for a year (that can be surprisingly beneficial when compared to writing essays you won't remember in class - again, a motivational mechanism is needed - social motivation even among Internet peers can be very powerful, but that depends on the person himself and how he cares about people he knows online), and then spending the next year doing mostly math, whereas others might do better doing a number of subjects simultaneously at once. ideally, the best system is one that will accommodate all types of learners</p>
<p>"discovering your interests and your abilities/strengths" is perhaps one of the most important skills - and this is where unstructured learning is best - since the real world is a lot less structured than school is. and a mentality that the individual is wholly responsible for his own education (a lot of people blame their educational problems on the school they go to - and consequently restrict their educational opportunities due to it - when in reality they can self-educate themselves. Of course, blaming school for all the time one wasted is understandable - but blaming a poor teacher for one's poor skills in math just shows an inability to be accountable for one's own education)</p>
<p>on the other hand though, some students do need regular feedback from a professional - especially those with uneducated parents -and this is where weekly evaluation may be important. Certainly though, grades and their relation to college admissions aren't the only things that motivate students (they're not given out to elementary students, who are still motivated enough to learn).</p>
<p>i'm definitely in favor of eliminating aptitude tests though - especially since knowledge-based tests make it unnecessary to really develop yet another aptitude test (seeing that the students who really are the smartest will tend to do better on those tests anyways).</p>
<p>Incidentally, here is an interesting post I read:
<a href="http://mattrognlie.blogspot.com/2006/07/my-ramble-about-standardized-testing.html%5B/url%5D">http://mattrognlie.blogspot.com/2006/07/my-ramble-about-standardized-testing.html</a></p>
<p>SAT IIs exert more predictive power than even grades do (in the University of California system). This is so interesting. The problem is that both APs and SAT IIs are flawed - the AP lumps A LOT of students into the same category, and this probably weakens variation. The SAT IIs are purely multiple choice and can easily be mastered with a superficial understanding of the material. Speed is often important in both tests (okay, is someone who takes longer to think through a problem really demonstrating less mastery than someone who doesn't? An average of 25-30% longer is not going to be particularly significant in affecting student performance). And even despite all that, SAT IIs are still more reliable than HS grades and SAT scores.</p>
<p>Sigh, and there just isn't a reliable mechanism to distinguish between students at the top levels of the score distribution. I peaked out my Calc BC, SAT II Math IIC, and PSAT math scores in 10th grade, and there's no way to differentiate me from others beyond that point (other than the AMC/AIME exams - which are not reliable because a lot of students don't try to study for them - which means that mediocre students who study a lot for them may still end up doing better than strong students who don't study for them - even if the strong students will on average do better in college classes where all people are motivated to study as much as it's still beneficial to do so).</p>
<p>So in essence, there could be a subject based test that exerts a lot more predictive power on future level performance than either SAT IIs or APs. The problem is that only the CollegeBoard has the power to make such a test - and it isn't motivated to do so.</p>
<p>I doubt that there is one single test that can predict college preparedness... there can never be a reliable to judge a student's capability -- consistent results and the desire to ameliorate is often the best way to decipher the abilities of a student</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Anyways, I have a weird thinking style that tends to conflate similar words with each other. Anyways, I meant to say "So in essence, there could be subject based test*s* that exert a lot more predictive power". In that, multiple levels of subject based tests depending on the level of the course - this is already done - it just needs to be done on a national level</p>
<p>My recommendations on how our education system should be organized are defined to support individualism and to terminate the pressures related to doing well in the conformist sense, such as taking as many APs as possible even though you don't like many of your classes since apparently Harvard will like the kid who took 8 AP's better than the kid who took 7. I also support a homeschooling type philosophy; however, as you mentioned, motivation is a problem. So until we can devise a better method for homeschooling, I feel we should have a public education system that is as "loose" as possible to allow for all students with any potential whatsoever to thrive in the fields of THEIR choice, not of society's conformist values.</p>
<p>So the more freedom, the better. This will of course be most beneficial to the naturally intelligent, since they will finally be able to nurture their minds rather than be put down by today's education system. But those who are less intelligent will need special attention, and this is where I feel parents/legal guardians have to get involved, because they know their children best. Otherwise, if teachers start getting involved too much, it would become a rigid system again where students who at first appear to be struggling since they have messy habits will be inhibited even though they are just geniuses focusing on a narrowed vision.</p>
<p>
[quote]
such as taking as many APs as possible even though you don't like many of your classes since apparently Harvard will like the kid who took 8 AP's better than the kid who took 7.
[/quote]
Actually though, as long as you take a decent number of APs and have other activities on top of that, Harvard would take students with fewer APs over those with more. I know someone who was ranked #1 in his school and who was self-studying APs got rejected from Harvard, even though others in the same school who had fewer APs got in. That could be due to legacy/etc, but Harvard's one of those schools that cares more about the individual as a person than about grades/test scores - as long as they reach some sort of minimum standard.</p>
<p>But yes, I think the #1 problem with homeschooling (aside from motivational issues) is that students will then be too heavily influenced by their parents. Some parents will be very liberal in letting their kids pursue the topics of the kid's choice - but others not so. The types of parents who homeschool in the current environment are also the types of parents who tend to be more devoted to their children than other types of parents.</p>