besides, I don't mind the whole girl on top thing ...

Of course, not every male has to go to college to succeed, to be a good husband, to be a good and productive man. But a dismal future lies ahead for large numbers of boys in this generation who will not go to college. Statistics show that a young man who doesn't finish school or go to college in 2005 will likely earn less than half what a college graduate earns. He'll be three times more likely to be unemployed and more likely to be homeless. He'll be more likely to get divorced, more likely to engage in violence against women and more likely to engage in crime. He'll be more likely to develop substance abuse problems and to be a greater burden on the economy, statistically, since men who don't attend college pay less in Social Security and other taxes, depend more on government welfare, are more likely to father children out of wedlock and are more likely not to pay child support.

Here is my opinion on what happened to real men:

http://www.dogicdesign.com/misc/graph.jpg

Where men once dominated, they now make up no more than 43 percent of students at American institutions of higher learning, according to 2003 statistics, and this downward trend shows every sign of continuing unabated.

Now, however, the boys who don't fit the classrooms are glaringly clear. Many families are barely involved in their children's education. Girls outperform boys in nearly every academic area. Many of the old principles of education are diminished. In a classroom of 30 kids, about five boys will begin to fail in the first few years of pre-school and elementary school. By fifth grade, they will be diagnosed as learning disabled, ADD/ADHD, behaviorally disordered or "unmotivated." They will no longer do their homework (though they may say they are doing it), they will disrupt class or withdraw from it, they will find a few islands of competence (like video games or computers) and overemphasize those.

Boys have a lot of Huck Finn in them -- they don't, on average, learn as well as girls by sitting still, concentrating, multitasking, listening to words. For 20 years, I have been taking brain research into homes and classrooms to show teachers, parents and others how differently boys and girls learn. Once a person sees a PET or SPECT scan of a boy's brain and a girl's brain, showing the different ways these brains learn, they understand. As one teacher put it to me, "Wow, no wonder we're having so many problems with boys."

We need to stop blaming, suspecting and overly medicating our boys, as if we can change this guy into the learner we want.

So basically, this guy is arguing that the traditional school system doesn't adapt to different learning styles, and this primarily disadvantages boys. This then leads to more high school drop-outs, and few college graduates. It is in the best interest of society, not just men, to correct the problem. That is, adapt to the needs of the students, and to stop trying to force each one through the square hole, when some are clearly circles and stars.

So basically, this guy is arguing that the traditional school system doesn't adapt to different learning styles, and this primarily disadvantages boys. This then leads to more high school drop-outs, and few college graduates. It is in the best interest of society, not just men, to correct the problem. That is, adapt to the needs of the students, and to stop trying to force each one through the square hole, when some are clearly circles and stars.

Males - the latest victims of a non-responsive education system. :roll:

I didn't read it all, so I may be off the mark, but this sounds like another well-developed rationalization, made to excuse poor performance.

Bottom Line - School is supposed to be hard. Part of getting a good education is learning skills/habits that help us deal with aspects of life where our natural talents may be lacking.

But if you have Michael Jordan, and Stephen Hawking, you’d be a fool for not focusing on what they have the most talent for naturally. What we should be doing is trying to maximize individual potential, and you shouldn’t focus on making Jordan into a better physicist. That in no way means that you should let Jordan ignore everything else, but basketball is where he can make the greatest contribution to society and you should promote that.
Another problem is they are judging output and not effort. If I try really hard and fail in school, I fail in school. There is no reward for giving it your best. That is unfair. No matter how hard I try, I’m never going to be as good as Jordan or Hawking in there respective fields. That is like rewarding blonde hair or height, it is totally arbitrary, a genetic lottery.

Thorne, just a guess, but you never had too many problems in school? Ever been taken to a doctor to find out what’s wrong with you? Ever been prescribed drugs to make you a better student? Ever been called a space cadet by a teacher? My problems when I was young were highlighted by the fact that my older siblings are incredibly smart (1580s on SATs), and fortunate that I came from a family where college was just a given, but I don’t think the difficulties I had were unique.

but if everyone is educated to CEO level, no one is gonna clean the floors. untill we either automate *all* manual labor tasks, some of which are very skilled work such as bricklaying, we are not going to be able to operate a capitalist society in which everyone is equally educated.

first of all, i think if you're considereing the educational system in this... you have to ask if basketball is, in fact, a "contribution to society." if you assume that atheletics are contributions to society on par with the science that gives you purer food and water and medicine, than fine.

first of all, i think if you're considereing the educational system in this... you have to ask if basketball is, in fact, a "contribution to society." if you assume that atheletics are contributions to society on par with the science that gives you purer food and water and medicine, than fine.