Education

It's quite obvious that many of our society's ills are the result of uneducated or poorly educated people.  For a long time now people have recognized that America's education system is in desperate need of reform.  But you know how the political game works, theres a lot of song and dance and pretty words, but no one ever really comes up with anything worthwhile, or they simply fail to make the change.  But I'm here to present the way I think education should work.

A much great focus is needed on:
+ Math (it's useful and keeps the mind sharp)
+ Science (for obvious reasons)
+ Physical health (not just some half-assed gym class, but a serious and appropriate exercise program in addition to instruction/lectures on healthy eating, hygine, sexual health)
+ Music (much like Math it helps to keep the mind sharp and can open the door to other forms of creativity)

Additionally, I think educators should teach and encourage students to value traditional virtues.  And by traditional I don't mean "zomg gays are bad! etc."  I mean things like honesty and courage.  Especially from an early age, children need to be taught the values that will make it possible for them to sucessful in life.


Less focus on:
+ History (it's good to know, but there are much more important things to focus on)
+ Composition/English (certainly it's useful, but kids should be solving Math problems and doing science experiments more often than writing book reports)
+ Optional classes (things like Home Econ. and Shop Class are fine, but schools should focus more on academics).

Also, there shouldn't be any study halls or free periods.  Any free time should be used exercising or doing something useful.  (and don't argue that study halls are useful, because most kids will just screw around or go to sleep).

LUNCH:
+ No soft drinks
+ No junk food     (if you have to ask why, GTFO)


OTHER STUFF:
+ No student should be passed along if their performance sucks.  No exceptions.  They'll be tested and retested again and again until they display a satisfactory level of comprehension.
+ Teachers need to be paid well.
+ Teachers should receive a bonus or some other incentive for every student who does well in their class.
+ Uniforms for students.  It reduces social anxiety and bullying.
+ Segregation of the sexes, at least for middle school.  Kids will be more focused if they're not staring googly-eyed at whoever their crush of the minute is.

>>1
You have a lot of rather interesting ideas, and I have a few I'd like to add myself.  I also must disagree with you sharply in at least one area.. but anyways, on with the reply..

"Less focus on:
+ History (it's good to know, but there are much more important things to focus on)"

I actually think more time should be devoted to history than currently is.  Before you scream bloody murder, I hope you'll read what I have to say about *why*. 

History is a subject of enormous importance, possibly not so much to the individual specifically, but to the society as a whole.  The reason for the great significance of history is that without history lessons, people cannot learn from mistakes of the past.  If you are going to lessen focus on history lessons, you should make a certain number a *requirement* for voting.  The people of society who make decisions about how things will be run (the voters do this indirectly in our republic), must be informed about events of the past, and the subsequent results that these events brought, for the sake of making wise decisions in the polling place about how OUR government and OUR society ought to be run. 

For example.. it is important people know what events happened as precursors to the genocides/mass murders that occurred in the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, China, etc, for the sake of not making the mistakes that lead to those genocides/mass murders here in our own countries.  (I have to take the time to recommend this great documentary on this very subject right now:  http://www.innocentsbetrayed.com/)

So anyways, this is but one example.  There are many other mistakes in history that it is important that we learn about to increase the likelyhood of the prevention of the same tradgedies in the future.

It is also important, similarly, that we learn about precursors in history to events that lead to good things so that we can repeat those as well.  It is important that Americans, for example, have a good understanding of American History.. of why our founders gave us a Bill of Rights, a constitution, why we separated from Britain, why we instituted the policies we did and when, and of course, what the results of those policies were. 

Far too often, I find people who claim dislike for history as being those who simply do not understand the reasons why it is so important, or who advocate many of what I think to be the same mistakes that were made in the past that lead to terrible events.

That said, I think it would be disastrous to remove or lower the number of history classes served to the public, unless this educational reform was accompanied with some sort of voter reform.  You should make the history lessons a requirement for voting if you are going to eliminate them from the general public curriculum.  One of the very reasons we instituted public education to begin with is for this very reason:  to educate the people to ensure they make informed/wise decisions at the polls. 

This, not to prepare children for jobs, is the primary reason why people like Thomas Jefferson advocated public education, and this should be considered before you jump to remove history and social science classes from school curriculums.

The U.S. does not need to be teaching its kids less about the outside world, given how little they already know.

>>2
Well I didn't say History class should be removed, but I don't think students need to study it as intently as other subjects.  I know everyone says "learn from the past, etc." but that really only applies to large scale events.  Knowing the details of the French Revolution isn't going to help anyone become a better accountant or dentist.  That's why I think History should take a back seat, at least until higher education.  History is very important for people who are planning a career in politics or law, but for many others it's just more info to cram in on top of knowledge that has immediate and practical applications.

Again, I'm not saying History should be removed or excluded from any school carriculums.  I just think there needs to be a greater focus on the subjects that have the most immediate and practical application for the majority of people.

Aside from that, having gone through the education system (graduating from college soon), I had to endure at least one history class every year.  And I've heard about the Holocaust, and the American Revolution, and the Civil War, and all the others a hundred times over.  And I think the education system of our country can do better than teaching students the same things over and over again ad nausium.  Rather than make a student write a new essay every year about "X" War/Event/Era, schools could be helping students gain a better understanding of physics or biology.

>>4
I agree knowing a lot of history is not likely to help someone become an accountant or a dentist.  Again, my justification for having children study lots of history is not so much for individual benefit, but for the benefit of society as a whole.  If you are going to lessen the burden of history lessons, I think you should make an increase in history studying mandatory for the ability to vote.  In order to have the right to vote and make wise decisions about how the government should be run, you simply must have a good knowledge of history, current events, other social sciences, etc.  We need more education in this area, not less.  Keep in mind how poorly educated and informed the american electorate is.  Do you *really* think reducing the number of social science courses in our schools is a good idea, keeping this in mind?

There are a lot of unnecessary other classes of far lesser importance than history that you should be focusing on.  To me, history is one of the few good classes offered by our schools right now, and history lessons should increase, not decrease, especially considering how poorly informed the american electorate is.

>>1

I'm going to homeschool my kids to keep them out of the school you want.

IMO the focus should be like this:

1. Skills: Graduates should be able to change a diaper, invest their money, read a book, write a book, design and build a working firearm, change their car's oil, fix a door, change a tire, write a simple program, defend themselves, grow a garden, design a building, sketch a person, play an instrument, kill dinner, cook dinner, give speeches, answer questions, build a fire, graph an equation, give first aid, plumb a house, build a computer, and recognize the potential utility of things most people don't.

2. Knowledge: Graduates should be able to discuss philosophy intelligently, know history and economics, draw a reasonably accurate map of the world, apply the scientific method, understand physical science, basic physics, biology, health, and other branches of science.

3. Experience: Students should graduate from a class once they demonstrate that they understand the topic so well that they can teach it. When you know it well enough that you can teach it, you're less subject to forget it as soon as you're out of the class.

Physical fitness is not a priority. Emphasis on the benefits of exercise would certainly be present, but not forcing kids to run so many laps so fast or do so many pushups. That makes them resentful if they're already inable to do so, and bored if they can do it and have to do it too much or too little.

Kids should be allowed to eat whatever they want. But they should cook it themselves.

Kids should be allowed to go to whatever class they want whenever they want, get up and go to the bathroom whenever they want, and eat lunch whenever they want. A fifth grader can walk in on a precalc class to see what he'll have to do in a few years, and look at the other math classes until he finds the one he learns in, but which doesn't rehash what he already knows too much. If they're late to class, they're not punished, they just have to catch up without the teacher's help. The teacher can also lock the student out and make them catch up the next day or the next time the class is taught.

Maybe I'm crazy, but I want kids to learn how to do a wide variety of things while they're still young. They can specialize as they grow older. I want them to leave school ready for life and almost anything it'll throw at them.

This is based on the stupidity of my experience at school, my experience now that I'm out of school, and the fact that even though I had a 3.5 GPA, I still don't know what the fuck is going on. School didn't prepare me at all for life. Fucking waste of 13 years of my life I could have taught myself everything they taught me without their help, and they didn't teach me anything useful that I couldn't learn on Wikipedia or browsing a website on the subject or just by watching the Discovery or History channels.

I think one of the best things you could do to improve the situation in schools right now would be to impliment a voucher system that allows school choice to parents/students.  If a student does not think he is getting the best education in the public school system, the money that the public schools would be spending on his education should be allowed to be used to fund his tuition to a private school, online school, or homeschool.  As is, in many (if not all) areas of the country, if you go to a private school, you get no public money to send your child there, and you still have to pay taxes for public schools.  School choice would introduce competition into schooling, and the market would likely help provide for a better education than is currently provided.  Here's a good video by a nobel-prize winning economist who talks about some options for school reform in the USA. 
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1087272971542603727&q=free+to+choose&hl=en

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1087272971542603727&q=free+to+choose&hl=en
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1087272971542603727&q=free+to+choose&hl=en
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1087272971542603727&q=free+to+choose&hl=en

^Video by a nobel-prize winning economist who discusses school-related issues & education reform.

>>4
There are still a lot of things you didn't mention that were very important.  During my high school education, we only touched on the holocaust once.  We watched a single movie about it, pretty much said 'yep, tradgedy.' and moved on.  We didn't even touch on all the mass murders committed under the soviet union or by the government of china at all.  Having graduated from high school, I haven't had a single class touching on current events, or economics.  As far as social sciences goes, my education was really sub-par, and I'm not surprised the american electorate is so fucking dumb.  I understand a lot of classes in school are a waste of time, but social studies classes are not one of them.  There are far more electives and other classes that are of far more questionable merit or importance that should be trimmed. 

>>6
So, according to your first point, you want kids to learn the things that they should be taught at home anyway.

But I do agree with your third point very much.  Students should know a subject so well that they are able to teach it.  Actually, it might be a good idea to have high school students assist in teaching younger students as a sort of 'teaching class'.  I also agree that students should be able to discuss philosophy.  I had meant to include that in my original post, but I was posting at 4am and kind of forgot about it.

And physical really should be a priority in this country.  Have you seen how fat kids are today?  Children born in 2000 have almost a 50% chance of coming down with Type-II diabetes.  If our schoool systems don't help to keep children in shape we're going to be facing a terrible health crisis later on.
Aside from that, being physically active helps to stimulate the mind (theres a reason why the greeks stressed gymnastics, you know).  And I don't suggest that kids spend all day running laps or doing pushups.  But they do need something more serious than a half-assed game of baseball/other activity on alternating days.

>>5
Our political system is so broken it doesn't really matter what voters know or how they vote.  They'll vote for one of two parties that will really only listen to lobbiest and anyone else who has a shit ton of money.
More to the point, Americans don't really vote on the actions of the country, they vote on their representatives who make all the decisions.
Really, if anything we need BETTER history classes, more oriented toward world history rather than american history, but we don't need more of them.  Just because I said there should be a greater focus on other subjects doesn't mean I want people to be ignorant of history.  Any class a student takes should be comprehensive and involving.  I'm just saying that it would be better to have one more philosophy/math/science class than another history class.

>>1
Correct. I'll blabber about this later.

>>7
Sorry, please ask any of the numerous, well qualified public school teachers and they will explain to you why vouchers are a pipedream. (Preferably the ones who teach in tough schools) And don't say they're fearful of losing their jobs, teachers are highly educated and poorly paid as it is.

>>8
I really care about what an economist thinks about education, much less an award some fucking swiss douchebags hand out for a joke of a science that economics is.  Collegiate education is different from public primary and secondary education in so many ways his opinion of public schooling is not necessarily backed up by his experience teaching 20 year old shits.

>>12
Not to mention that Friedman seems to ignore the fact that when parents are actually involved in their child's education they perform better.  Friedman sees kids in private schools (Parents paid MORE money to send them to a private school, obviously they care about their kids education, and they make them do their homework, read, etc.) and thinks that it proves that private schooling is better than public schooling, but the fact of the matter is what those kids learn from their parents, (or rather, what they don't learn)is much more significant than what that teacher tells them 6 hours a day.

Parents have more of an influence on children's desire to learn than teachers do, instituting vouchers would do little more than allow some crackpot school to lap up voucher money from poor parents who don't give a fuck about their kids, and give subpar education (Unless you think that the needed officials to inspect and make sure that the institution recieving the voucher money is actually teaching them (as opposed to paste play time) wouldn't be an exorbitant cost.) resulting in a massive market by which taxes would be siphoned without performing their function.

Frankly, public education is not a reflection of a poor education system, it is a reflection of poor national character. The fact that 30% of high school students drop out is not the teachers fault, it's not the system's fault, it's the fault of the parents for not driving their kids, and the kids themselves lacking the self-motivation to succeed. 

America is the most violent "developed" nation in the world, probably the dumbest population of a "developed" nation, and is the most wasteful "developed" nation in the world.  It shocks me to hear that in Bangladesh, microcredit loans are given on HONOR, and they have nearly a 100% repayment rate, while in the  U.S., god forbid someone fucking pay off their big screen TV, new car, new house, etc.
America has something in the range of 300,000,000 people, and has the highest murder rate in the world, with comparatively LIBERAL gun laws compared to Japan, which has virtually no way for a civilian to legally obtain a rifle or handgun and about 150,000,000 people. However, they have (contrary to the maxim that more guns = more safety) some of the lowest cases of violent crime in the world, even in densely populated areas.  Now, I'm not advocating gun control, or even police state policies, but there is something to be shown.  The Japanese (civilian and criminal) are MUCH more likely to answer questions and consent to searches from the police, and incredibly low violent crime rates.  Perhaps it isn't the policies the Japanese have regarding guns, but the character of their people in being willing to support law enforcement and be much less violently inclined. (Despite being the source of all those violent, bloody video games)

I like everything except for the history part
students can benefit alot from history, we need to, however, teach economics, governmental systems(all of them), we also need to have less "AMERICA IS THE BEST LOL" thats what we teach our kids, we teach them like it was "us" who won WWI and WWII single handedly. That the Civil War almost had nothing to do with slavery. That the American Revolution started other revolutions.

Also, if you get in a fight in school, you get suspend for a semester. Not 1 week, I'm sick of hearing of a fight every day in my school. School is not a place for fucking fighting

I agree on your diet standards, I see too many kids fucking eating their asses off.

I agree on separation not for the sake of the male, but for the sake of the female. Females dumb themselves down for men, because men tend to be intimated by smart women.
  

>>10
>So, according to your first point, you want kids to learn the things that they should be taught at home anyway.
My parents never taught me them. I still can't build a fire without a lighter or matches, and when something breaks, I just stop trying to use it, since I have no idea how to fix the damn things.

>>10
"Our political system is so broken it doesn't really matter what voters know or how they vote."

I disagree.  All we really need is to get the two party system overthrown, and get a couple 3rd parties into the fray.

"They'll vote for one of two parties that will really only listen to lobbiest and anyone else who has a shit ton of money."

So go convince people to vote for 3rd parties.  I do.

"More to the point, Americans don't really vote on the actions of the country, they vote on their representatives who make all the decisions."

Yeah.  Its what you call a 'republic'. 

"Really, if anything we need BETTER history classes, more oriented toward world history rather than american history, but we don't need more of them."

I strongly disagree with you on both counts.  We need more history, and we need a better understanding of american history.  A lot of students leave school with very little knowledge of the government our founders envisioned, why the fashioned it the way they did, etc.  A good number of students don't even know the contents of the Bill of Rights.  A lot of the problems we have with society nowadays are directly because (imo) we departed from the founders' visions of the USA and what it should be.  This is, in part, due to lack of knowledge of just what the founders advocated, and what our nation was founded upon.   

"Just because I said there should be a greater focus on other subjects doesn't mean I want people to be ignorant of history."

But if you remove the focus from history, isn't that ultimately the likely effect, is a worse understanding of history?

"Any class a student takes should be comprehensive and involving.  I'm just saying that it would be better to have one more philosophy/math/science class than another history class."

And I strongly disagree with you on this.  Again, when a large number of American kids are leaving high school with no understanding of what the fucking Bill of Rights is or what it contains, there is a definite problem, and we need them to take MORE social studies classes, not less. 

If you want to trim off some of the fat and make education more lean, I know plenty of other classes of far less importance that could be removed rather than History/social science classes. 

>>14
"I like everything except for the history part
students can benefit alot from history, we need to, however, teach economics, governmental systems(all of them), we also need to have less "AMERICA IS THE BEST LOL" thats what we teach our kids, we teach them"

I think a lot of people who hate these 'america is the best lol' people don't know how shitty the rest of the world is. 

>>17
but we need to stop treating Democracy is the best because
-All political systems are equal
-America isn't even democracy

>>12
"Sorry, please ask any of the numerous, well qualified public school teachers and they will explain to you why vouchers are a pipedream."

No, if you have an issue with vouchers, say it right now, else stfu.  Stop half-assing your argument. 

As for vouchers being a pipe dream? Baloney.  It has already been implimented in a few areas to great success.
http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/ewp_02.htm

Vermont has had a successful voucher system for over a hundred years.
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=1506

The public school system is failing.  It is consuming over twice the amount of monetary resources that it would take for a private education, and produces a product of lower value.
http://www.cato.org/pubs/briefs/bp-025.html

>>7 & 8
Nice videos. 

>>13
"Not to mention that Friedman seems to ignore the fact that when parents are actually involved in their child's education they perform better."

He doesn't ignore that fact.  He points that fact out that many of these schools in his examples are performing better for exactly that reason - because parents become involved.  That was one if his points.

"Parents have more of an influence on children's desire to learn than teachers do, instituting vouchers would do little more than allow some crackpot school to lap up voucher money from poor parents who don't give a fuck about their kids, and give subpar education"

Yeah, because given the choice, I'm sure many poor parents would like to see their children fail, right?

"(Unless you think that the needed officials to inspect and make sure that the institution recieving the voucher money is actually teaching them (as opposed to paste play time) wouldn't be an exorbitant cost.) resulting in a massive market by which taxes would be siphoned without performing their function."

The whole point of the voucher system is to give school choice to the parents and students because the parents and students have it in their interest to become better educated and do well in school.  If they don't give a fuck about their education, do you really think they are going to become successful in a public school as opposed to a private school? Considering the average per-pupil cost in a public school is over twice the cost of a private school, even if we assumed they all failed, at least we would only need to spend half the amount of money on failing as we are currently.  But of course, I don't think failure is likely.  Sure there will be some students who might fall through the cracks, but the ability to go to private schools gives those students who learn best under special circumstances (say, they have a learning issue, or disability or something) the special circumstances they may need to become successful.

"Frankly, public education is not a reflection of a poor education system, it is a reflection of poor national character. The fact that 30% of high school students drop out is not the teachers fault, it's not the system's fault, it's the fault of the parents for not driving their kids, and the kids themselves lacking the self-motivation to succeed."

I'm not denying that lack of character and responsibility are major problems.  I *am* saying that introducing competition into the equation would help things out. 

"America is the most violent "developed" nation in the world,"

There were other 'developed' nations in the world over the last centuries that, collectively, have murdered over 170,000,000 people.  When you compare that to the USA's crime statistics, america is clearly not as violent as you think.  I think a lot of this 'america is violent, lolz' attitude is hyped up.  As long as you aren't talking about urban areas, america is pretty violence free.  Urban areas are violent at least in part because of our gun control policies and because of the Drug War.  However, if you venture out into America's more rural areas, you find the violence and murder rates tend to be very reasonable, and comparible to the average violence rates of other countries of the world that offer their citizens far fewer civil liberties (such as Japan).

"America has something in the range of 300,000,000 people, and has the highest murder rate in the world, with comparatively LIBERAL gun laws compared to Japan, which has virtually no way for a civilian to legally obtain a rifle or handgun and about 150,000,000 people. However, they have (contrary to the maxim that more guns = more safety) some of the lowest cases of violent crime in the world, even in densely populated areas."

Almost every area of the United States that has a high murder rate also has stringent gun control laws.  The USA has a high average crime rate because of these few criminal 'hotspots'.  If you remove these few problem areas that have restricted their citizens 2nd amendment rights, the crime rate is actually at a very reasonable average.

If you want to address violence issues in the United States, you would do better to attack our police-statish drug laws.  A lot of the violence in cities is at least partly because of the drug war... gang violence, battles over turf for selling drugs, whoring/pimping/prostitution, etc. 

If you want to really crack down on crime, here's what you should do:

*Impliment Castle Doctrine laws everywhere, including and especially in crime-ridden areas.

*Impliment concealed carry everywhere, especially in those last areas that don't have it.  Shall-issue, at the very least.

*Laxen restrictions on the private ownership of firearms.

*End Drug Prohibition

"Now, I'm not advocating gun control, or even police state policies, but there is something to be shown."

The problem is that you bundle up the United States as a whole, while the United States as a whole doesn't have uniform laws.  If you are going to compare crime statistics, compare crime levels of areas of the USA that have less-restrictive gun laws with those of other countries, and you will see that the USA is really not as violent as you think, generally - that it is really just a few 'hotspots' as I mention above.  The problem is all the anti-gun cities with their gun control that raise the national average murder rate & make the country look bad as a whole, when it is really just a few hotspots.

"The Japanese (civilian and criminal) are MUCH more likely to answer questions and consent to searches from the police, and incredibly low violent crime rates.  Perhaps it isn't the policies the Japanese have regarding guns, but the character of their people in being willing to support law enforcement and be much less violently inclined. (Despite being the source of all those violent, bloody video games)"

I don't think being willing to bend over and let your civil rights be ass-raped by the government is a particularly admirable trait, regardless of its effect on crime.

Again, giving the problem areas concealed carry, the castle doctrine, and legalizing drugs & prostitution are what will lower the crime rate - not implimenting Orwellian police-statish style laws or destroying people's civil liberties.

as long as the far right continues to destroy a childs chance at a good education there will be no progress.

They need to stop wage a war on american culture

far right = Ethnocentric

>>14

i think most high school history teachers are smarter than "OMG LOL AMERICA #1" especially ones, with a degree in history. my US history teacher didn't have a very high opinion of the US, since he was exposed to a lot more than what you read in the textbooks  and any QUALIFIED teacher, if he was sane, would have the same opinion.

Geography is important too, there's a video on youtube of Americans pointing at Australia and calling it Iran, North Korea, and France.

4 main points need to be improved and I mean major policy change, not just cultural nit nats, where teachers can sip coffee and pretend to be making changes.

1: Literacy from ages 5 to 10. Every year a child must reach a certain level of literacy so that by the time they are 11 they can read text of the complexity found in newspapers or other mainstream sources. Less finger painting, more reading. This is tied in with point 3 since teachers will need to maticulously record the child's progress to focus on it's flaws.

2: Spoon feed children back 2 years. A student at 14 year old level education can be exposed to the same curriculum a student at 16 year old education can. There is no reason to keep students in the dark about certain things when exposing them to it is extremely easy. The base concepts and their analytical judgements of a subject should be laid out before each student so they can see clearly what they need to know. A prior briefing to a lesson which can be referred to if necessary is invaluable to prevent confusion and for future revision.

3: A teacher should be a secretary to a child's development for the amount of time they are in the same school together. They should be in contact with their parents and their investigations should be up for public review.

4: Discipline should be taken to a whole new level. I remember in high school pretty much 50% of class time involved chatting, shouting and generally messing around. I had no complaints then, but looking back it is clearly a waste of time and I always learnt more in classes where anything non-learning related was stamped out by the teacher. This may involve relaxing rules for breaktime so students can release their excess energy.

yes, because people don't need to be able to think, they just need to be able to do their trade good and react, in case some major disaster occurs, by doing the most basic things. And GOD FORBID someones interested in a non-practical subject, we just need to beat that creativity right out of their minds STRAIGHT AWAY before they write some communist gangster anarhistic around the wall gangster crime litterature.


you do have some points on the health, fitness and music issues, but the general agenda behind this is all too retarded.

gb2/china/

I've seen drop outs smarter than some graduates. "Higher education" for the most part is a fucking show.

>>27

more like getting better jobs amirite?

Diplomas represent money....and just money.

This thread is full of High School Students, Fail and AIDS.

I've met a college graduate who could not locate North Korea on a map and he was talking about how "America should go to war with them". Well if he makes that kind of comment he should know where the fuck it is.

Let me guess, "knowing a random piece of information doesn't make you smart". What isn't random?

>>31
don't worry, the world will consist of America and North Korea according to American news, just like the Iraq war.

>>13
brings up a good point.  We have a culture that really doesn't appreciate education and learning as much as it should.  Americans don't fail at History or Geography because they aren't taught enough of it, they suck at it because they just don't care.  They learn enough to pass a test and then forget about it. (or they just refuse to learn it at all)

That's why I think the education system should be responsible for instilling a great sense of the importance to education in students at as early an age as possible.  And it should always be re-enforced throughout school life, and not with just some bullshit posters with lame catch phrases like 'knowledge is power!'

School should teach practicle life lessons. Balance a check book. Write a check. Do your taxes. LIFE LESSONS THAT ARE IMPORTANT. Fuck, you need that more then trig. Most people lack the capacity to understand or to use the abilities knowing math gives you.