TED Conversations

Casen Askew

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Would US schools be better off adopting the educational systems of our contenders?

A sound educational system will, in most cases, augment a superior and thriving nation. With each country racing to claim that title of being superior, every developed nation has implemented their own unique form of public education. Being an American junior in high school, I am greatly perturbed at the statistics, and being a Texas junior in high school whose state lags behind almost every other state in the academic fields of science and math, I would go as far as to say I am disturbed. With that being said, the topic I offer up for debate is simple. Should the United States integrate the educational systems of places like Singapore and Taiwan in order to address one of the many problems our nation is facing right now, an inferior academic program?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/15/world/americas/15iht-14students.8345918.html
http://www.realonlinedegrees.com/education-rankings-by-country/

+1
Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Apr 5 2011: Re-opening trade schools is a great idea in theory. However, economically it would kill Universities and change the global marketplace. Universities make thousands of dollars off students each year. With this money, they pay thousands of faculty members and employees. Losing thousands of kids to trade schools each year would not only kill Universities revenue (which is used to pay not only faculty and employees, but also to fund athletic teams) but would also destroy test evaluation and tutoring businesses who make millions of dollars off apprehensive High School students. The College Board would be put out of business and test preparation centers would be abolished. Teachers who oversee or proctor these tests would lose money and Universities would lose not only tuition money, but also application money. Universities, would miss the 50-100 dollars they charge to read applications. Trade schools would allow more kids to go straight into the workforce. However, at least in America, the work force is really diminished. Most jobs have been moved overseas. Cheap labor overseas is much more economically affordable for entrepreneurs looking to grow their business. Why pay an American minimum wage when you can pay someone overseas a dollar a day. As a result, re-opening more trade schools is not the answer. The future job market for Americans is going to be based around the Technological Revolution and social media boom. Many Americans will be working for companies such as Apple and Facebook. The positions they will need to fill will include marketing, design, filming, and broadcasting. Basically, kids will be either engineers or social media junkies. That is why I believe we need to offer classes that revolve around social media. Many High School students will end up working for sites such as TED as bloggers and organizers. What do you want to do in the future? Medicine and engineering will always be lucrative careers. However, careers in social media are booming.
    • thumb
      Apr 6 2011: I understand your argument and agree with the part concerning cheap labor and Americans losing job opportunities due to this trend of companies using foreign workers. The University issue is what I disagree with. The trade schools would just be intended for the portion of high school students who have no aspirations of college anyway. The ones that want to just live off of welfare. The trade schools would not be a detriment to universities. If anything, the same students that would have gone to college will, except they'd know quite a bit more because the educational system would become noticeably better with the introduction of these trade schools. Take out all the bad apples, and the fruit salad will undoubtedly taste better. But like I said, I completely understand your point of there being a shortfall of available jobs. That's the problem with our country. In order to fix issue A, you have to fix issue B. And issue B can't be resolved unless issue C, which unfortunately is solely dependent on the improvement of issue A, is dealt with. The government can't look to fixing one problem at a time. You can't focus on education, fix it, and move on to the next problem. The fact that each problem fits hand-in-hand with the next makes them inseparable. Which, for lack of a euphemism, sucks.
      • thumb
        Apr 6 2011: I understand your point. The problem with our capitalistic society is that it is very cyclical. Improving issue A affects issue B which affects issue C. I don't know how America should improve upon making sure everyone is satisfied in this money-making process. The problem is that the government can't be to active or to passive. I think everyone needs to come together and think about an option where everyone is going to successful. As you said in your response, many of your high school friends would be satisfied living on welfare. Who's pocket is welfare coming out of? The government can only tax hard-working individuals so much (and I consider myself more liberal on most issues). Taking money away from taxpayers is only going to hurt the American people more. I am not advocating the abolishment of welfare. However, capitalism relies on a perfect balance that allows company A, B, and C to flourish ( as well as the government). In our system the government is basically just a major company that acts as the middleman. Opening up more trade schools would hurt the middleman which would hurt companies fighting for business.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.