My eye! Sweet Jesus, Ouch!

[Stealthbomber]

It concerns me when people talk about stuff like teaching "financial economics" in schools.

 

For example, one bank is now claiming to be "helping" kids learn about money by sending financial advisors into a heap of schools around the country.

Am I the only one who thinks this is a cynical play to gain customers rather than a genuine attempt to teach financial savvy?

 

What's next?

Computer studies sponsored by Apple?

Engineering Workshop sponsored by Nissan?

Cookery sponsored by Birdseye?

 

All seems a bit dodgy to me. Needs to be independant and objective.

[Hedganian]

Of course it's a ploy to gain customers.

 

In the same way that Tesco give out those "Computers for Schools" vouchers, and Flora give away cooking equipment.

 

All of which items should be provided by the education system's funding, rather than private companies.

[Brick]

And don't MS provide computers for schools and colleges in the USA?

some observations from my time in school

P.E (physical Education) or if your good at Football you get to play Football, if not tough buns.

Home Economics (didn't do it myself but from what I was told it was how to boil an egg)

History, a brief look at a few historical events and then how to partition a field based on the land reforms in the 15th century. (ok a bit unfair as its a HUGE subject however when I left school I found it to be a fascinating subject and much of what I was taught was biased)

RE (religious Indoctrination) covered elsewhere

Geography (or how to read a *frootcagio* map, for 3 *frootcagio* years, a few field trips and discussions on Geology or plate tectonics wouldn't have gone amiss and made it MUCH more interesting)

English (or how to parse a phrase)

Pretty much the only O-levels I bothered to work for were maths, Biology, Chemistry and Physics. oh and I did way more mathematics in Physics than in Maths lessons partly because the maths teacher was in the middle of a nervous breakdown.

[Hedganian]

When I went through, history was described as "We must only look at the bad things that our country did to other countries and its own citizens, ignoring any good things, wars (unless we started them, or lost, or did horrible things). Heaven forbid we should celebrate our past achievements or instill some kind of national pride."

 

I found it quite annoying.

[Chimpy]

Your school must have sucked.

[Hedganian]

National Curriculum, mate.

 

Not that much room for interpretation, but some ability for "biasing" presentation.

 

Module titles included such things as "Cotton Coal and Slavery" which was mostly about the slavery bit. The Industrial Revolution was happening at the same time, did we mention that? Only in passing....

[Azubi]

When I went through, history was described as "We must only look at the bad things that our country did to other countries and its own citizens, ignoring any good things, wars (unless we started them, or lost, or did horrible things). Heaven forbid we should celebrate our past achievements or instill some kind of national pride."

 

I found it quite annoying.

 

 

It was the same at our school.

[Chimpy]

Wasn't like that at mine for sure. But that's going back quite some time now! We definitely studied things like slavery and the British Empire but I don't remember there being a focus "on the bad bits". The National Curriculum itself seems pretty broad in scope, maybe you guys just had obsessed teachers.

[Azubi]

maybe you guys just had obsessed teachers.

 

My RE teacher believed that only White people could be racist.

[Chimpy]

Sounds like a moron. Post-modernism has a lot to answer for and that daft idea is one of them.

 

I only had one decent RE teacher and they were a supply teacher when the regular, goose like teacher had a breakdown.

[Hedganian]

RE. What a waste of education funding and time.

 

If you want Religious Education, go to a Church, Mosque, Synagogue, Temple or Sacred Grove.

 

Schools should be reserved for FACTS. Myths and superstitions have no place there.

[mattmanic]

When did people here last go to school? You learn about religions in RE in years 1-8 but from then on it's all about ethics and philosophy. Also, they never teach you that the religions are correct, they just explain them to give you a broader view of the world. And in the years when you learn about the religions, you do go to a Church, Synagogue and Temple, or atleast, I did.

[Hedganian]

If they want to teach Ethics and Philosophy, then an Ethics and Philophy class is needed. You don't need religion to have either.

[Misfit]

RE. What a waste of education funding and time.

 

If you want Religious Education, go to a Church, Mosque, Synagogue, Temple or Sacred Grove.

 

Schools should be reserved for FACTS. Myths and superstitions have no place there.

 

Not understanding religions and other cultures is a huge cause of wars and intolerance.

 

What did you actually do as a teacher?

 

[Hedganian]

Secondary level science.

[Misfit]

I see the issue with RE now

[Hedganian]

Merely a slice of personal philosophy.

 

I could just as easily taught maths.

 

It matters not.

[Desolation mkII]

Schools should be reserved for FACTS. Myths and superstitions have no place there.

 

Guess english literature, poetry, media studies,any unproven scientific theory, vast swathes of Greek history and much much more are off the curriculum then.

 

Like it or not to correctly understand society and indeed the histories of our and other societies, people need to understand religion. How do you teach someone about the rise of the Caliphate, the Crusades, the Great Schism, the 30 years war, the Reformation, the Reconquista or the Israel conflicts without first teaching them about Christianity, Islam and Judaism? It doesn't mean to teach people to believe in them, just to understand them.

 

After all, especially in a world where we have regressed hundreds of years in three decades and now live in an incredibly fragile religious ballance in a society where a cartoon can trigger world wide riots. How can we possibly justify sending the next generation of leaders out into a world where they have no understanding of what motivates major elements of this ballance.

[Hedganian]

Perhaps if we educate people properly, they wouldn't feel the need to cling to the comfort-blanket of religious doctrine and instead actually think for themselves.

 

How do you figure society has "regressed" to this fragile religious balance you refer to? When exactly did that happen in the past? Last time I checked, there wasn't a whole lot of religious tolerance in the past, just plenty of religious idiots persecuting the idiots who followed a different religion.

[GuzziHero]

Churches and religious books should have an age restriction... 18+ only. Theyre bad for your health.

 

I happily boycotted RE all through high school and I do just fine. I was never taught all those things that Desolation listed.

 

I do see what he means though. The quran, bible and torah have changed history so they deserve a place in the curriculum, but under history and not RE. Just like Mein Kampf, to some degree, they need to be read and understood to prevent a repeat of the horrors they have caused previously.

[Hedganian]

Not at all. I don't need to read Hitler's book to know that his ideas were crazy wrong and generally bad.

[Desolation mkII]

How do you figure society has "regressed" to this fragile religious balance you refer to? When exactly did that happen in the past? Last time I checked, there wasn't a whole lot of religious tolerance in the past, just plenty of religious idiots persecuting the idiots who followed a different religion.

 

Well, it's really all to do with the failure of arab nationalism and it's transformation into islamic extremism, something that is very much a product of the last half a century. So effectively we have seen a revivial of a religious conflict that, while having some more minor endorsements, usually a couple every hundred years has blown up to the extent that we have Jihads being called and actually taken up by the latest wave of extremists at least once a decade. While not the mass human waves of the Crusades, the very nature of that conflict has indeed sprung up to a degree that was never present before. Add into this a liberal mix of immigration and home grown extremism and we do indeed have an incredible level of potential and existing Islamic-'Christian' violence even within our own cities that previously we havn't seen for a long long time. I mean for example, when one of our regiments deployed to Iraq, when driving through Harehills, a group of extremists turned up and stoned all their vehicles as they were passing.

 

And the point is, this is one of those rare occurances where it is a religious conflict that, at least for once side, really is only motivated by religion. As such sending people out with an understanding of the books and beliefs that motivate the sides is nessecery if we want to keep the moderates of both sides (the majority) moderate and stop the moderates hemoraging support to the extremes of the situation.

 

The thing is also, contrary to what Guzzi suggested, teaching people that a certain belief is wrong is not better. Certainly Russia is a prime example of what happens when you try and force people to think differently, it tends to backfire and the Russian Orthodox church is just a respected and indeed it's position as a Russian symbol reinforced by the 70 years of suppression by the reds.

[Hedganian]

What we need to do is educate these ignorant people so that they stop following the obsolete mysticism of their defunct religions and grow up along with the rest of mankind.

 

In its infancy, humanity needed superstitions and religions to explain things. But now that need is gone and the childish fears need to be left behind with it, just as adults no longer cling to the comfort blankets of their childhoods.

 

Remember it, by all means, but its time is past.

 

If everyone would just realise this, then there wouldn't be any religious extremists to worry about.

[Desolation mkII]

Again, we see a very idealistic view of humanity. the vast majority of wars and conflicts that are blamed on religion (with a few notable exceptions) are simply excuses for a particular nation, social group, ethnic group to try and grab power/land/wealth and so religion is used as an excuse.

 

All that will change if you eliminate religion is the justifications thought up for wars, people will switch from religion to ideology, as we have seen. (interesting how quickly the Soviet Union pulled out of Afghanistan and abandoned their spread of communism once they realised the gas was about to run out).

 

People are allways going to believe in gods, spirits and miracles, certain people are genetically more likely to, just like you are clearly wired to not believe in them. Trying to force or brainwash someone into believing something else will be counter productive, just like in the USSR or in Afghanistan for example, wehre they arrested all the priests/Imams and closed down all the churches/mosques and look at them for the shining beacons of tollerance that they have become now.

 

As much as religious people should accept that you don't believe there is a god, you also need to accept that there are allways going to be people that believe in the paranormal.

[Habakure]

Poor old religion, every persons favourite punch bag. I always see it as an escape goat for nutters; I am religious to an extent and would happily say that I am more leaning towards agnostic, than an out and out catholic. And also, being called ignorant, or did I miss-read your post, is also ignorance.

 

Yes people have used it, and continue to use the trust people put into the church etc, but that doesn't give people the right to say every person who follows a religious belief, are ignorant. Also can you not see that no matter if religion was about or not, there would still be people who would exploit or even use there position of power to bend and twist law/religion for there own needs?

 

Also, I would like to say, that I do recognise many attrocities have been carried out in the name of religion. But also, many crimes and atrocities are cared out by people that are not religious or use it as shield for thier actions.

 

Don't agree with religion, think its wrong, thats all good. But please, don't be offence towards it, or I'll stone you (Last part was a joke, or an attempt at one, seeing as I don't like to get serious with my posts).

 

Edit:- oohh paranormal, forgot to mention that. Yes I do believe in life after death, in some form or another. Maybe am crazy for thinking this, but so be it, science just hasn't found a way of proving it yet, thats my own person view, not religion or any of its associates.

 

Edit No2:- I think religion shouldn't be forced on you, I do have a problem with that.