Does school kill creativity?

[Keanumoreira]

Many may be surprised at my views on this topic, but here goes.

 

I think my friend Keanu, our OP is missing the point a tiny bit when he complains of creativity being underrated in comparison to academics in our school systems.

 

Secondly, I very much enjoyed the post #8 of Saadus. I'm not sure how old you are Saadus. I see on your profile that you are about to become a dad, so congratulations are in order. I'm guessing from that that you may be anywhere from late teens to 40's or higher. My point is that your post while somewhat berating the educational system in this country shows that you seem to at least have learned your language skills well enough. You also show a certain flair, which hints of a creative side as well. If you were educated in the U.S.,(and I have no idea if you were), you have managed to overcome the obsticles presented by the poor system and the cultural decline in which we find ourselves, and you communicate with ease to your fellow man.

 

The point at which I am getting is that if we are creative and really have a need to express it, we express it. The elementary and high school system is only a vehicle to help us get a very basic start in life. It is belabored by poor financing a huge lack of concern by the powers that be, and by the students and parents alike. When I hear people whining and/or whinging about what it does not do for them it tends to set my teeth on edge.

 

The schools and teachers do what the can with what they are given. Some do it better than others. But too many of us seem to forget that we have a role to play as well. We the students and we the parents and we the taxpayers. If we want education to improve, we need to stand up and say so.

 

Saadus mentioned the wearing of uniforms. My understanding of this decision is that it had to do with kids fighting over and or stealing each others "cool" threads, or stealing from local merchants in order to be dressed in the latest at school. The schools determined that one way to avoid this was to go the uniform route. I personally would have hated it as a kid, but I understand it as an adult. And I would not be whining about it.

 

I would be happy to see kids thinking period. Outside the box would be even better; and I agree that some schools do discourage this. They did in my day too. But it did not stop me and many others who were just built that way. Kids are people too, and they still each have a brain to the best of my knowledge. Using it would be a good idea, rather than expecting someone else to do it for them.

 

I just have way to much more to say on this subject so will have to stop for now. In any event, our educational system is dying, and we need to stop complaining because it doesn't give us everything we want. We need to start injecting some life into it through better and more efficient funding and better teacher salaries for starters... :confused:

 

 

I understand that it's our duty as a Democratic-Republic to change the problems we observe in our school system (especially since its so deplorable), but what about the government? Is it not their jobs to represent our nation? Is it not their duty to encourage us to be the best we can? Of course, they're not concerned about us in the least bit, but that doesn't mean that they don't have responsibilities of their own, just as we, the people, have some as well. I still hold firm to my belief that this country is giving serious neglect to artistic individuals. I'm not saying that academics be brought down a level. I'm just looking for a little more confidence from our representatives.

[saadus]

I am also aware of the reasoning behind the school uniforms. However, it would still discourage creativity as no one is allowed to express themselves visually.

We're talking about grade-school students here. How many of them use clothing to "express themselves visually," beyond saying I have X money and I belong to X clique?

 

How many grade school children know how much their parents make? More to the point, almost every child I know that goes to grade school wears it because it 'looks cool' which is a form of them expressing themselves as they like it as an extension of their personality. Psychology classes really pay off.

 

Of course, you have those students (usually teenagers and young adults, sometimes not) that believe that just because they paid more makes them better then everyone else. However, where I live, these types of students are nonexistent and generally ignored if one happens to show up.

 

Now I got to make myself feel old, when I was in grade school, we didn't bother with such nonsense about "Oh, my daddy is rich." or "Hey, I belong to that group over there." We wore what we liked and didn't care.

 

However, this isn't a debate about school uniforms, it is a debate about whether school discourages creativity. :thumbsup: Let's keep it on track shall we?

 

@Keanumoreira

I lost faith in how the system works and who is in charge of it. The system does work, but the people in charge are now corrupt and has forgotten why they were elected to begin with. Those running against them are no better either.

[HeyYou]

I am also aware of the reasoning behind the school uniforms. However, it would still discourage creativity as no one is allowed to express themselves visually.

We're talking about grade-school students here. How many of them use clothing to "express themselves visually," beyond saying I have X money and I belong to X clique?

 

That is exactly what they are trying to avoid.

 

@Granny:

 

We the willing, led by the unknowing, have done so much, for so long, with so little, that we are now qualified to do anything, with nothing.

[Deleted472477User]

Don't think funding is the answer because it isn't, on this side of the pond the last government threw billions at the schools, the result? employers are now complaining that an alarming number of todays school leavers are completely unemployable because they can't read or write properly.

 

 

That's a problem here too, to the point where many employers have begun listing "Bachelor's/Associate's Degree Required/Preferred" for jobs that don't even remotely require one. they're so worried (some of them) that high school didn't do the job right that they think a degree is going to fix that.

 

I used to work in call centers, and before I stopped due to burnout I had 4+ years experience and did my job very well. Sometimes I'd see ads for call center work that said "No experience required, but you need a degree" and I'd laugh. Imagine calling tech support or customer care and hearing this:

 

You: My widget isn't working/I need to return something/there's an error on my bill. Can you help me?

 

Them: No, but I can tell you all about my totally relevant degree in medieval literature and culture!

 

Seriously. I'm almost 50 years old, and getting lumped in with the last 10 years' worth of high school grads (as employers view them) is annoying as hell.

 

Back on topic, yes, school does kill creativity. So most jobs in the workforce.

[grannywils]

I am also aware of the reasoning behind the school uniforms. However, it would still discourage creativity as no one is allowed to express themselves visually.

We're talking about grade-school students here. How many of them use clothing to "express themselves visually," beyond saying I have X money and I belong to X clique?

 

That is exactly what they are trying to avoid.

 

@Granny:

 

We the willing, led by the unknowing, have done so much, for so long, with so little, that we are now qualified to do anything, with nothing.

 

@HeyYou, I'm pretty sure MB is with us on this one..

 

I might just reverse a couple of words in your quote at the end to the following: qualified to do nothing with anything... :biggrin:

[HeyYou]

I am also aware of the reasoning behind the school uniforms. However, it would still discourage creativity as no one is allowed to express themselves visually.

We're talking about grade-school students here. How many of them use clothing to "express themselves visually," beyond saying I have X money and I belong to X clique?

 

That is exactly what they are trying to avoid.

 

@Granny:

 

We the willing, led by the unknowing, have done so much, for so long, with so little, that we are now qualified to do anything, with nothing.

 

@HeyYou, I'm pretty sure MB is with us on this one..

 

I might just reverse a couple of words in your quote at the end to the following: qualified to do nothing with anything... :biggrin:

 

Referring to politicians no doubt. :D

[bben46]

Don't let school interfere with your education

Sam Clemens - AKA Mark Twain

 

Sam has a quote for almost anything :thumbsup:

[Marxist ßastard]

Don't think funding is the answer because it isn't, on this side of the pond the last government threw billions at the schools, the result? employers are now complaining that an alarming number of todays school leavers are completely unemployable because they can't read or write properly.

That's a problem here too, to the point where many employers have begun listing "Bachelor's/Associate's Degree Required/Preferred" for jobs that don't even remotely require one. they're so worried (some of them) that high school didn't do the job right that they think a degree is going to fix that.

Companies are just hiring based on what the market will bear. They get so many applications for so few jobs that they can demand applicants have a bachelor's. If they could, they'd demand a doctorate. It doesn't mean they think you need a bachelor's or doctorate to take phone calls. It reflects nothing on the quality of schooling. This is just a way of culling the herd which is just slightly less arbitrary than saying "REQUIREMENTS: Last name must begin with letters 'A' through 'G'" or "REQUIREMENTS: Candidate must have perfect kindergarten attendance record and blood type O-negative."

Edited May 24, 2012 by Marxist ßastard

[HeyYou]

Don't think funding is the answer because it isn't, on this side of the pond the last government threw billions at the schools, the result? employers are now complaining that an alarming number of todays school leavers are completely unemployable because they can't read or write properly.

That's a problem here too, to the point where many employers have begun listing "Bachelor's/Associate's Degree Required/Preferred" for jobs that don't even remotely require one. they're so worried (some of them) that high school didn't do the job right that they think a degree is going to fix that.

Companies are just hiring based on what the market will bear. They get so many applications for so few jobs that they can demand applicants have a bachelor's. If they could, they'd demand a doctorate. It doesn't mean they think you need a bachelor's or doctorate to take phone calls. It reflects nothing on the quality of schooling. This is just a way of culling the herd which is just slightly less arbitrary than saying "REQUIREMENTS: Last name must begin with letters 'A' through 'G'" or "REQUIREMENTS: Candidate must have perfect kindergarten attendance record and blood type O-negative."

 

Not to mention it gives them the ability to whine about "Not enough qualified candidates" to make it appear as though they WANT to hire, but, there is no one TO hire........

[Marxist ßastard]

Oh, absolutely. But STEM fields take the brunt of that particular kind of sadism. "Entry-level" positions routinely require five years' experience. Internships are now asking for two years' experience. On the extreme end, I've seen apprenticeship programs (EIT) where it's "not asked for, but encouraged" that applicants have six years' experience in that industry. HR acts surprised that they can't get a PE to sign onto their apprenticeship, then grudgingly accepts a fresh grad (at greatly reduced pay), all the while bemoaning how they can't find qualified applicants. And every few months, like clockwork, the media responds with a special report on the US's "critical shortage of scientists, engineers, and skilled workers."