Coming from very little advantages will not determine ones success in life. Very little advantages means not always having the best education or resources. Also meaning the environment may not be the best or the safest to live in at times. Coming from a low class does not determine whether you will fail or be successful in anything that a child does coming from very little. Children coming from little advantage miss out on an amount of things.
Every student goes through some good and bad teachers. A few select teachers have the power to engage students on a completely new level. This gives the student an automatic confidence boost and the wanting to succeed in the subject. I have had the opportunity to experience one of the best. Pete Tarnish was an outstanding teacher who was able to communicate well with his students, care deeply about them, and be a great family man.
This bought on Marketisation where schools try to attract other students by raising standards to show they are most successful. On the other hand, sociologists disagree as most educational reforms have not helped all students, only some or wasn’t very effective enough to help improve educational experiences. For example, the Foster Act wasn’t very helpful as the teaching was dire and students were less successful therefore resulted them in having weak qualifications and bad experiences. The Butler Act system with the 11+ exam was mostly based on middle class children therefore they had a better chance than working class. This was unequal as they had an advantage even though the test was the same.
It appears that testing is a waste of time, but in reality, it prepares students for future success. Another question that occurs is: What are students gaining from these different tests each year? Many people debate whether the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) is considered to be pointless. Maybe these tests are teaching students accountability and responsibility, two vital tools for success in life. Within in the article, “No Child Left Behind: Test-Obsessed Education Won’t Move Us Ahead” the author, David Marshak, slashes the No Child Left Behind Act.
Morgan Smith Teacher Cadet 3/11/11 Teacher Cadet We all experience people who have had a positive influence on us in our life. Whether it’s a parent, grandparent, boss, or teacher we all have someone who has helped us. Most people are very thankful for those who have made an impact in their lives. Although I have many in my life, I have one who made me a better student today and taught me an important lesson. My sixth grade teacher, Mrs. Williams had a positive influence on me.
I always received good grades in elementary school. I had admirable teachers and the work was easy. My teachers were also flexible when it came to turning in work. I thought that middle school would be exactly the same. I was in for a big surprise.
The book indicates that a single-parent “has been demonstrated not to affect children’s cognitive and emotional functioning (Foster & Kalil, 2007). However, I believe that conflicts found in a single-parent household may not be linked to the parent who has raised their children, but they can be associated with other things related to single parenting. Normally when there is only one parent, the family is often less financially stable which is the main reason for many family problems. Also, lower education levels and lower economic achievements have been associated with effects of coming from a low income family. It is also true that these children are less supervised because they don’t receive the time and communication from their parents.
Yet without school rules being constantly pushed onto the children, there is no clear concept of punishment of any kind for an action. At such young ages, children do not have a full understanding of what is acceptable in society but still know that there is punishment in the world around them. With no one to direct the children about what decisions are acceptable in society, choices are made by free will. This degree of freedom is tremendous, and can be even more burdening than a society with a strict structure. While the common conception is that free will is glorious and without error or care, the opposite is true.
Parents who are authoritarian do not expect their children to question why they say the things they say. They are very into social status, and obedience in their children. They like for their children to have a structured environment, providing minimal emotional support towards their offspring. Children who come from a house with authoritarian parents tend to be average in school and show no signs of problem behaviors. These children, however, have poor social skills, and show signs of low self-esteem, while having high levels of depression (Partner, 2009).
With students not having to worry about their looks, fitting in not longer becomes the main worry in kid's lives. School uniforms may also provide a way out for poor children who otherwise couldn't keep up with the trends and would face ridicule or pressure from other children. * On the same note, while the initial investment to get school uniforms may be high, children can then wear the same outfit without having to worry about owning a large change of clothes. Uniforms are usually made out of durable, easy-to-care for materials that do not require frequent replacement. CONS * School uniforms may hinder self expression through clothing, forcing children to find other ways to put across who they are.