Is our system of education really that bad?

[FrancisZ]

Francis, your focus on corruption as the root of evil in the education system indicates to me that you have spent too much time in New York and New Jersey.

That's where I'm from. Where do you live? If I may ask.

You are forgetting the famous adage: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. Take your example of students never learning the multiplication tables...

It was said, that the community wanted to stress analytical thinking instead of rote. What it ended up being instead, however, was throwing out rote. Perhaps it was merely a miscommunication, or misinterpretation, of some big shot's perspective on the issues. I don't know. It does seem a huge oversight now.

Honestly, though, I think people use stupidity as a excuse too much. Take that whole McDonald's coffee business.

It is stupidity and a massive bureaucratic mess that scares me a whole lot more about the concept of a national education system than does corruption.

Well, the inmates should not be running the asylum. Similarly, neither the schools nor the school boards should be permitted to self-regulate. Regents in NY for example, are actually graded by the teachers who proctor them; and if a portion of their school's budget is ultimately decided upon by the outcome of these exams; THAT, to me at least, seems like a MAJOR conflict of interest.

What, specifically, do you think Japan is doing better than us?

Well for one thing, they still make better automobiles.

But here are some statistics of academic outcomes...

http://www.geographic.org/country_ranks/educational_score_performance_country_ranks_2009_oecd.htmlRespect to Korea (I'm guessing South Korea), and Canada. Still, in each case, the United States ranks significantly lower than Japan.

Say what you will about the Japanese, but their industry has consistently made superior product for most of my life. Their video game design, and robotics--these are impressive accomplishments to me.

Computers, I don't know that we in the United States ought to remain too cocky about (seeing as how many of our engineers hail from elsewhere). In the Physics Department at Seton Hall, at the time, I would say 1/2 or greater were (no disrespect to them) foreign born.

Also, it is one thing to design the components of some fantastic device; it is another to actually manufacture them. We, in the United States, have forfeited most of our industry to parts of the world where we can also conveniently forfeit any responsibility to either labor or the environment.

But I digress.

What, specifically, do you think we should we do to change that? How would a national curriculum help?

We could standardize the amount of hours per subject per week. Where I worked in New Jersey, Langauge Arts was always allotted greater time than Mathematics. And isn't it funny: the students there usually performed better in Langauge Arts.

I also don't think that sends the message that these two different subjects are equally important.

Japan envy is so last millennium. Japan now has the same kinds of problems as does the US such as declining standards and students and parents who do not value a good education.

Why do you say that?

 

[D H]

I honestly cannot give you a purely logical reason for it; except perhaps it was a miscommunication or misinterpretation, between a big shot and his underlings.

How do you know that it was not a stupid fad, like grading with purple pens or not hurting the student's precious feelings?

Honestly, though, I think people use stupidity as a excuse too much. Take that whole McDonald's coffee business.

I am not using stupidity an excuse or rationale for anything. I am using it as an explanation. How else can you explain things such as grading with purple pens or Texas books standards?

The inmates should not be running the asylum.

And a federal system will make this better?? Such an education system would be run by inmates and inmates only. At least with our system we do have some outside influence on the system. That that outside influence mostly comprises lunatics from the far right and far left is a different problem.Regarding Japan:

But here are some statistics for academics...
http://www.geographic.org/country_ranks/educational_score_performance_country_ranks_2009_oecd.html

That does not answer my question. I asked what specifically we should do differently. Japan does do better than the US in terms of standardized tests. Some of that is attributable to cultural differences, some to the fact that Japan lost World War II, some to the fact that standardized tests are in a sense stupid, and possibly some to the fact that they have a better education system. From the end of World War II to the end of the 20th century Japan strove for excellence. The US once strove for excellence too; we started giving that up in the late 1960s because it wasn't "fair". That trend picked up a full head of steam in 1970s, culminating in the formation of the Department of Education in 1979. Japan used to have a less than equitable education system. Education reforms begun in the late 1990s are fixing that problem. Now Japan is starting to see the same problems we see in the US.

At least Japan is not hobbled by the rather strong anti-intellectual fervor that has pervaded the US from day one.

Say what you will about the Japanese, but their industry has consistently made superior product for most of my life.

That's because you are young. When I grew up "Made in Japan" was synonymous with, well, cheap lousy crap. That cheap lousy crap that Japan manufactured from the late 1940s to the mid 1960s was their gateway into the world of high technology. That said, there is no doubt that Japanese products are (or were; think Toyota gas pedals) of very high quality. This is a curious combination of Japanese culture and American know-how. The US helped rebuild Japanese industry after World War II. One of the US' efforts was to bring industrial engineers such as William Deming to Japan. Japan embraced Deming's concepts much more so than did the US. His teachings fit their mindset. It does not fit ours so well; our trade unions did not and do not like Deming.

 

[FrancisZ]

How do you know that it was not a stupid fad, like grading with purple pens or not hurting the student's precious feelings?

Sorry, but I can't measure "stupid." I never agreed with the pen thing; and I don't abide by it either. You can thank a child psychologist for that, I'm guessing.

That having been said: I do always try to maintain a positive atmosphere with my students (and I do recommend that). If you're a negative person, it'll rub off on them; and vice versa.

I am not using stupidity as an excuse or rationale for anything.

And I'm not accusing you of it ; I meant in general, that I think people play dumb, when it's convenient (as in law suits).

I am using it as an explanation. How else can you explain things such as grading with purple pens or Texas books standards?

Well, in all fairness, it was an attempt at being sensitive, I suppose. Is it stupid per se, to be sensitive? We are dealing with humans after all; and children at that. Please don't make me defend this (I really wasn't in favor of it). Was it going too far? Yes, I think so. But I do think it was well intentioned, as much as it was impractical.

And a federal system will make this better??

I honestly believe it would, if the Federal Department of Education actually set the standards that all must follow; and also did not permit the States to grade their own standardized examinations--the scores from which they then use to beg for money from their State government, and the Fed.

As it is right now: working in Catholic schools, it seems like the standards go through at least two or three rewrites before they actually get to me or any of the teachers.

Fed Standards-->State Standards-->Dioceses Standards-->School Standards.

TO use a Chemistry term: there's, shall we say, a lot of "mechanical loss" in that transition.

And amazingly also, somehow, we've managed to make the NJ Math Standards "Catholic" in the bargain. Really, what one particular Diocese did was actually just followed the same numbering system from the State, only start with the numbers that the State left off with. So instead of standards 4.1-4.5; the Diocese started with 4.6 (skipped 4.11 arbitrarily for God only knows what reason) and ended at 4.15.


But beside all that shannigans: it just doesn't seem honest with ourselves, to say that we actually have an "American" system of education then. Really, as of right now, we have more likely a "New Jersey" system; which is different from a "New York" system; and which are each potentially different from say an "Alaskan" system.

We need an AUTHENTICALLY unified system of education; and not a confederacy, which is what it appears. The likes of which also, I dare to say, is no better organized than each of the States' Department of Motor Vehicles (and that place is a freak'in zoo).

Such an education system would be run by inmates and inmates only. At least with our system we do have some outside influence on the system. That that outside influence mostly comprises lunatics from the far right and far left is a different problem.

Well, what can I say, but that if I weren't just the peon I am now: it would be a risk I would be willing to take. If it had good leadership, it might just be better than it is presently. If such a department had a person that wasn't simply a friend and political appointment of the President or whomever else--if it had a competent person, who actually cares; and that person was given and could wield great authority justly--then I it would work.

Where to find such a person? Well, I wouldn't start looking at the top--because Superintendents are where they are, usually, because they stopped giving a damn long ago. There not really with it, a lot of them. They are simply there for the salary and pension.

One thing I'm NOT afraid of doing, is actually physically writing down and establishing some consistent ground rules (that requires a lot of research and consensus).

Really, I think it would be a better idea though--even if you're not willing to imitate the methods of another country--to simply get together with some brains at the university level, AND ASK THEM what they think about incoming freshmen.

"What do our kids need to know to succeed at your respective institution, through their first year? What do YOU find are their weaknesses? What would you like US--at Junior High and High School level--to do differently, in the way of our curricula and practices?"

And I say that, because, it's those deficiencies, that are ultimately keeping people out of college; or encouraging them to leave, even after they get there. That is, in addition to the expense of actually going to college.

And to be fair--getting back to my playing dumb theory--I don't imagine that idea (of communicating with people in the know) is such a difficult to conceive of, or brilliant notion; that it's somehow totally impossible for someone else to have thought of it, before I just said it. The truth is: I don't really believe that most people, in positions of authority, really want our citizenry to be well educated. Because then they might think for themselves.

It isn't compulsory, going to college, after all. So somebody has to pay for it. And very often, the government pays for an insufficient portion of tuition, in the way of grants (which I'm sure I don't have to tell anyone here about).

It's all about money really. And again, personally: I think some of us really prefer stupid people, over informed citizens, in this country; because then--rather than address something important, like the potential consequences of our own country's laws on world economics; critically, and with a truly independent mind--we can instead keep people squabbling over irrelevant and nonsensical questions like: "What color and religion is God?" or "Is the President a hard line socialist (yet somehow simultaneously) fundamentalist Muslim from Africa, who hates white people (even though he's half white, and was raised by white people)?"

Frankly, that's politics in a nutshell: keeping the average person (and less than average) regularly off balance, with distractions of stupid crap; so that other people in positions of authority, can remain in charge; and, potentially, continue to climb the ladder of authority (while making ever greater sums of money). It's better than a ponzi scheme really, because most people go through their whole lives then, never even realizing they've be had.

And why? Because--unlike the people in charge whom merely, conveniently pretend to be stupid--they have instead successfully maintained the status quo for the masses (of being actually stupid) by KEEPING them UNEDUCATED.

And how? The short answer: there is no order.

Let me tell you about myself: I've had a lot of jobs already in my mere 30 years of life. And I've also worked in lot of old, well established places with a lot of equally old, dysfunctional items lying about in plain sight, that no body does anything about. But sometimes, I have discovered: it isn't merely because someone doesn't care, or is around long enough to notice; sometimes, it's on purpose. And then when you finally take it upon yourself to fix this thing--or set something right that apparently isn't--only then do you finally realize, that it really was never meant to be anything but broken. And then you've gone and opened up a whole can of worms you wish you didn't; because who ever broken the item in question, finds out.

Regarding Japan:
That does not answer my question. I asked what specifically we should do differently.

You mean: different than Japan? If not, I honestly thought I addressed this otherwise. My initial suggestion was simply to imitate the good practices of another country. I specifically said, Japan--and I still think that is a fair and feasible idea; at least in the way of industry--but apparently Canada and Korea also have some respectable numbers, in the way of academic achievement; so maybe that's truly a better idea (to try to imitate them).

Japan does do better than the US in terms of standardized tests. Some of that is attributable to cultural differences, some to the fact that Japan lost World War II, some to the fact that standardized tests are in a sense stupid, and possibly some to the fact that they have a better education system. From the end of World War II to the end of the 20th century Japan strove for excellence...That cheap lousy crap that Japan manufactured from the late 1940s to the mid 1960s was their gateway into the world of high technology...This is a curious combination of Japanese culture and American know-how. The US helped rebuild Japanese industry after World War II. One of the US' efforts was to bring industrial engineers such as William Deming to Japan. Japan embraced Deming's concepts much more so than did the US. His teachings fit their mindset. It does not fit ours so well; our trade unions did not and do not like Deming.

That's fascinating. I truthfully wasn't aware of Deming at all.

That said, there is no doubt that Japanese products are (or were; think Toyota gas pedals) of very high quality.

In all fairness, I don't think that would have been the fault of the assembly line worker (what was it a 1/4" piece of metal they used to fix the problem). I also don't think the software issue (also a braking problem) was anyone on the line's fault either. The whole thing was unfortunate.

I also don't believe that person couldn't have stopped their runaway Prius, if they thought it through. Again, maybe that's just another example of playing dumb for a law suit.

The US once strove for excellence too; we started giving that up in the late 1960s because it wasn't "fair". That trend picked up a full head of steam in 1970s, culminating in the formation of the Department of Education in 1979. Japan used to have a less than equitable education system. Education reforms begun in the late 1990s are fixing that problem. Now Japan is starting to see the same problems we see in the US.

Do you know what I think would be truly fair? If there wasn't a disparity in the budget of one school versus another. Then maybe schools would at least be equal opportunity.

But budgets are contingent upon property taxes. So if you live in a nice area, chances are you pay higher property taxes; and the local schools are well maintained, stocked, and staffed.

Unfortunately also: most people aren't wealthy, so they tend instead to crowd into apartment buildings. Or if they do own a home, their property is less valuable; so the schools--which are over crowded--ironically do not receive a proportionate enough money to operate as efficiently, based solely on property taxes.

That in turn makes them dependent upon State aid; and also Federal aid. Which is contingent upon the Census, of course; but also (and more importantly) test scores.

Generally speaking: students that attend schools in districts, run with insufficient number of textbooks, teachers, and/or actual chairs, are less inclined to do well on standardized test.

In some instances, if test scores are low enough, school with under-performing students get more money; and in still other instances, they are simply denied a lot of money, and instead are threatened to close. Or become a charter school--which is the State's way of pawning off the responsibility of public education on private industry.

That is exactly why, I DON'T believe we should be allowing schools to ever grade their own standardized tests--because they'll potentially fudge the numbers, to work the system.

I don't trust any industry to regulate themselves.

In my opinion: the "Good Old Boys" need to answer to somebody completely outside of their realm of influence. And it isn't impossible of course, for a federal inspector to be any less corruptible; but you'd have to have an established relationship already with people in the area you are inspecting.

At least Japan is not hobbled by the rather strong anti-intellectual fervor that has pervaded the US from day one.

I agree.

That's because you are young. When I grew up "Made in Japan" was synonymous with, well, cheap lousy crap.

Not for anything, but I do actually remember that sentiment, as a little boy--especially with the 70's cars of my early childhood. Of course, eventually I grew to realize that American cars sucked equally well (albeit in a distinctly American fashion). Ford, for example, in a vain effort to increase fuel efficiency, actually started using things like plastic breaks in their cars, in order to lighten their burden. That's not really progress though, you know, as much as it is parlor tricks.

 

[mugaliens]

By the way, it's good to see another HS teacher on the forums!

I substitute teach - does that count?

I've seen much said on this subject, so I'll simply say this in answer to the OP's thread title and question:

Yes. We spend far more, and for far less results, than any nation on Earth.

Case in point: When my son began his summer visitation with me in May of this year, he'd just finished the fourth grade and was slated to enter the fifth grade in the Fall. At the time, he tested as academically being suited to the sixth grade. He's also both big and tall for his age.

We "played games" (academic) all summer long, and just before he returned, I called the school and asked that he be tested. They said he was now academically ready for the seventh grade, but they were concerned about his emotional maturity not being that advanced.

He's currently in the sixth grade, and doing very well (better than he was in the fourth grade, as the sixth grade is challenging, and he likes a challenge).

Yes, my son is bright. Still, if I can advance his test scores by an entire grade after simply engaging in playful learning over the summer, then, yes, something is wrong with our system of education.

 

[Chi Meson]

I substitute teach - does that count?

I've seen much said on this subject, so I'll simply say this in answer to the OP's thread title and question:

Yes. We spend far more, and for far less results, than any nation on Earth.

Case in point: When my son began his summer visitation with me in May of this year, he'd just finished the fourth grade and was slated to enter the fifth grade in the Fall. At the time, he tested as academically being suited to the sixth grade. He's also both big and tall for his age.

We "played games" (academic) all summer long, and just before he returned, I called the school and asked that he be tested. They said he was now academically ready for the seventh grade, but they were concerned about his emotional maturity not being that advanced.

He's currently in the sixth grade, and doing very well (better than he was in the fourth grade, as the sixth grade is challenging, and he likes a challenge).

Yes, my son is bright. Still, if I can advance his test scores by an entire grade after simply engaging in playful learning over the summer, then, yes, something is wrong with our system of education.

God bless subs! And I'm atheist!

SO, I'm a public school teacher and we homeschool our 3 kids. Does that tell you anything? "Simply engaging in playful learning" with an interested adult in a one to one setting, while progressing at the child's own speed of learning, is the most educational of all scenarios. You could carry him all the way through 9th grade like that and he would excel, with lots of free time.

The trouble is when you put 25+ disparate kids in front of one teacher, tell him/her to make sure each and every child succeeds, no exceptions, and whilst moving the goal posts, and then take away as much authority as possible...

I forgot my point.

 

[mugaliens]

God bless subs! And I'm atheist!

SO, I'm a public school teacher and we homeschool our 3 kids. Does that tell you anything?

Oh, gee! Really? Wow. God bless, you atheist, you. :) (meant as a play on words and tongue in cheek, of course - no offense intended)

"Simply engaging in playful learning" with an interested adult in a one to one setting, while progressing at the child's own speed of learning, is the most educational of all scenarios. You could carry him all the way through 9th grade like that and he would excel, with lots of free time.

That's pretty much what I thought. I got the idea from having spent one-on-one time with a music teacher (Yale graduate) who believed that an hour spent with a student at the ice-cream parlor was better than a month in class. He claimed it was his "classical education," wherein instructors directly engaged their students with occasionally intense question and answer foreys intended to get them to THINK!

It worked for me. Works for my son. Public education is REALLY missing the boat these days.

The trouble is when you put 25+ disparate kids in front of one teacher, tell him/her to make sure each and every child succeeds, no exceptions, and whilst moving the goal posts, and then take away as much authority as possible...

I forgot my point.

Ah, no worries. I remember. :)

 

[Proton Soup]

the japanese seem to have some bizarre ideas about children and how to teach them.

there is a lot more there than the title implies, but apparently, some of the kids crack under the stress

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XX30-Ez8xg

 

[Astronuc]

Calls for longer school years face budget reality
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_more_school

I think the emphasis should be on the quality of content rather than number of days.

Since I went through the US system, I know it can work - if done correctly.

I hired a the valedictorian from the local high school. He turned out to be an excellent programmer. He also ended up doing math at Harvard, where is made straight A's. He now doing a PhD.

However, the vast majority of students at the local high school seem adrift as I observed when I visited for a career day. I was with a group of professionals, mostly engineers, and most of what we saw and heard from students was rather dispiriting. Apparently the 5 or so % of top students were in class. The students who stopped and spoke to us about a career in science or engineering seemed to be headed for mediocre careers. A number wanted to go into finance and make lots of money - and party. Hopefully, some will get it.

 

[mugaliens]

A longer school year would also spell the death of my visitation with my son. We currently get half the summer together. Half of nothing, however, is nothing.

 

[Astronuc]

The teachers I had were really great!

However this article asks the question - Waiting for 'Superman' Review: Are Teachers the Problem?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20100928/us_time/08599202195100

There are good and bad in every profession.

 

[Proton Soup]

i'm not sure we need a longer school year, but I'm nearly convinced it needs a shorter gap. i always felt like i was trying to get back up to speed after a summer break. more short breaks throughout the year would be great. teachers might not like that idea, tho.

 

[Chi Meson]

i'm not sure we need a longer school year, but I'm nearly convinced it needs a shorter gap. i always felt like i was trying to get back up to speed after a summer break. more short breaks throughout the year would be great. teachers might not like that idea, tho.

I like the idea. I think the year should be cut into thirds, or quarters, with three or four weeks vacation between them. I'd rather have more time off in the spring, winter and fall, than 10 or 11 straight weeks in the summer. It's not like we have crops to bring in these days.

 

[FrancisZ]

Well, if they don't extend the school year--which personally, I think could be ironed out a little bit better, even as is (say actually from Sept 1st to Jun 30, which it never really is)--then I am in favor of extending the day from 8am-4pm (rather than to 2:30 or 3). That seems more like a normal work day, anyhow.

Teachers usually start working at 7 am though; and also usually go well passed 3 o'clock. I used to go at least until 4 or 5 on a regular basis myself. At one insane job (getting ready for re-accreditation) I literally worked from 8am to 10pm or midnight in the school building, frequently (at least once a week). There just wasn't enough people on staff. But I did it because I loved my boss, and I believe in what we were doing. She worked just as long as I did (if not longer).


I have a sort of on fence feeling about unions. I've always worked in Catholic schools. And for the most part, they aren't unionized or have crappy unions.

The union never did much for us in the way of medical benefits or retirement; but just having the union did increase my salary to something slightly more bearable.


My personal work history compensation in Catholic schools, went like this (no lie)...


Subbing (last semester of college): $50/day.

1st full year: $21,500 (NJ; no union; terrible insurance; and we did not get paid through the summer--had to look for other work).

2nd year: $22,? (NJ; no union; terrible insurance; and we did not get paid through the summer--had to look for other work).

3rd year: $23,? (NJ; no union; terrible insurance; and we did not get paid through the summer--had to look for other work).

4th year: $25,000 (NJ; no union; terrible insurance; and we did not get paid through the summer--had to look for other work).

5th year: $27,000 (NJ; no union; terrible insurance; and we did not get paid through the summer--had to look for other work).


6th year: $44,000 (NY; weak union; terrible insurance; and I did get paid through the summer, but the school actually stiffed me--I got something closer to $38k or $39k).

7th year: $52,? (NY; weak union; terrible insurance; but did not get paid through the summer, and also got stiffed--something like $39k again).

Subbing again: $75/day.


Teachers in public schools make more I'm told. Coincidence? They have a strong union. I also think people who don't really deserve it--because you can tell that they're lazy and uncaring--get paid very well in many cases.

 

[b_gardner74]

My personal opinion is that American education is quite fine. Its just that I feel most of the kids while growing up get more interested in things like music, acting, sports etc. Whereas in lot of the other countries, the kids are genuinely interested in math or science or building a career outside the entertainment industry. Just my personal opinion.

 

[Jack21222]

My main problem with school is that sitting still and quiet while being lectured to is the hardest way for me to learn. Or more accurately, it's the way that makes me least likely to WANT to learn. Yet, that's most of high school. Very few teachers at my high school really engaged the students, but this might be because very few students wanted to be engaged.

I also think a lot of the homework assigned in school is pointless busy-work. I'd rather see just a couple challenging problems in a math or science class than 30 easy problems.

I did terrible in high school because I was bored out of my mind. Memorizing facts, applying easy algorithms, and otherwise being still and silent killed my morale.

It took me 7 years after high school to recover.

 

[FrancisZ]

My main problem with school is that sitting still and quiet while being lectured to is the hardest way for me to learn. Or more accurately, it's the way that makes me least likely to WANT to learn. Yet, that's most of high school. Very few teachers at my high school really engaged the students, but this might be because very few students wanted to be engaged.

Nowadays, teachers are actually encouraged to employ student-centered activities. And while I agree that that has it's place, I haven't see it as very practical (yet).

Part of your overall effort as a teacher in the United States, unfortunately, is commonly spent just keeping students under wraps. It's very tiresome and often defeats the more noble purposes of education. In other words: what most people take for granted is normal behavior, most teachers never actually get as a class. There's always somebody that bucks what you're doing somehow. There's always somebody that hasn't grown up with basic respect for other humans. You have to fix that.

And, you as an educator, cannot simply throw them out like garbage either; because no body is garbage (even if they do piss you off). The success and failure of society truly rests in your hands; sometimes even more than in the hands of this person's family, unfortunately. You have to make up for whatever they didn't get before they came to school. It's very hard.

I also think a lot of the homework assigned in school is pointless busy-work.

Sometimes it is. A teacher that doesn't care--or is way overburdened with workload--will give busy work.

I'd rather see just a couple challenging problems in a math or science class than 30 easy problems.

I agree, especially as you grow older. You need the repetition maybe a little less. Maybe depends on the topic too.

However, when you are a little kid, the repetitiveness of certain homework is actually well intentioned. We give it to you, not simply to be a pain in rear (as so many assume), but rather as an effective form of brainwashing--albeit it for the much nobler reason of getting you to, say for example, learn to spell some word correctly.

I did terrible in high school because I was bored out of my mind. Memorizing facts, applying easy algorithms, and otherwise being still and silent killed my morale.

It took me 7 years after high school to recover.

I always tell my kids the same story, upon first meeting them; then I usually sing them a song to prove my point.

Ahem..."The world looks mighty good to me, cause Tootsie Rolls are all I see.
Whatever it is I think I see, becomes a Tootsie Roll to me.
Tootsie Roll how I love your chocolatey chew.
Tootsie Roll I think I'm in love with you.
Whatever it is I think I see, becomes a Tootsie Roll to me."Now...in my life...do you honestly think that I ever consciously memorized that song?

Well, for the record: I never did. So why do I know it? Because...it was part of a commercial that I remember seeing through all of my childhood. As a matter of fact, if you watch television even now, I bet you're liable to see it yourself. Here it is on Youtube...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaXk6PVXqJE&feature It was on the air for at least 20 years of my own life; and probably for years before that. You can tell if you analyze the style of clothing the children in the cartoon are wearing. They all have bell bottoms.

But anyway, my point is this: I know this song, because it was repeated so often growing up, that I couldn't possibly not know it. I was brainwashed in a sense. And that is what teachers do sometimes: they brainwash you, to know your multiplication tables; among other things. When you're that young, it sometimes is the easiest way to get the point across. Students may not appreciate it, but eventually, they will employ it. And it is the basis for so many other things to flow. With just that comprehended--multiplication--you can build so much in a student.

And for the record also: I know the complete dialogue between the Tootsie Pop boy and Turtle and the Owl in that commercial. Also the Klondike Bar song (geez, I spend a lot of time singing ).

 

[Proton Soup]

speaking of brainwashing, i remember sometimes when the teachers had nothing better to do, they'd show us some film. don't remember what the film was about, but there was this absolutely horrid tune at the beginning of it that made me want to wretch.

http://www.freetobefoundation.org/audio/free_to_be.mp3

feminist propaganda, i guess.

http://www.freetobefoundation.org/history.htm