I think we should focus more on "showing" rather than "telling." For example, mathematics. The majority of that is taught by a boring lecture and bookwork. How often have you heard kids whine, "When am I ever going to use algebra in real life?!" Well, if you actually get them up and SHOW them how it pertains to real life then I think they can catch on. Take them out and measure the square footage of the school football field instead of drawing on a piece of paper. Do you teach art and music by standing up and lecturing and expecting the kids to do it on their own? No, you get them a paintbrush or an instrument and they learn as they go, by DOING. We each first graders their numbers by counting on their fingers and adding/subtracting with actual building blocks or something. It shouldn't stop there. It should go all the way to fractions, decimals, algebra, calculus, etc....
Also, I've noticed that schools in my city have a curriculum for Gifted and Talented kids, and in every one they boast how the program is very "hands-on." As in, the kids go outisde and do experiments, get out of their desks and use their knowledge for real-life activities. I mean, really? You give the fun stuff to smart kids who probably wouldn't mind learning from a book in the first place but you can't do the same for the "regular" kids? It doesn't have to be as rigorous as you would for a G&T kid, but I think every student deserves to apply learning to the real world. And people are wondering why the schools' scores are low.
all religions are taught. ethics is a manditory lesson. people can be put into detention for saying stupid comments, so to teach them to only speak when they have something intelligent to say. economics is the main core of maths. music is removed from the manditory lessons, so is drama. school goes on from 11 until 5.
How does removing drama do any good? Students need to be able to speak confidentially in front of people, work in groups, and improvise regularly, for most jobs.
Speaking as an ultra shy person who did drama from grade 1 - 12, it improved my confidence in front of people and helped me complete my other assignments. I never had done drama, I would have never been able to complete my 15 minute oral in modern history.
intelligence is subjective. As they say, 'if you judge a fish by it's ability to climb a tree, it will spend it's life believing itself to be stupid'. People have differing views about things, for one thing, so what may sound smart to one person, will not sound smart to another. For example, if the teacher is a holocaust denier, they'll punish the kids for talking about the truth.
id rather they were being taught something important, if they wish to take drama during their later years of education that is fine. You can fined confidence in other lessons anyway, as i did in oral speaking in english. maybe a drama club would be a good middle ground, yes?
intelligence is subjective, but wisdom is not.
if we had a holocaust denier as a teacher in england, they would be removed. what godforsaken nation would let that go on anyway? like i say wisdom is not subjective, and neither is common sense.
In my case, I would like to see more rhetoric in our curriculum as opposed to simply memorization. I know the tests are more difficult that way but for me, topics leave a more lasting impression because the mind is being made to work and figure things out as opposed to simply just soaking up information that may be forgotten after the test has passed.
That and teachers who work in public schools ought to be paid more (i.e. given more value). That can partially ensure quality education for all socio-economic levels