Why it’s broken
Firstly, it’s a fact that nobody in right mind affirms that they’ve used at least 80% from what they’ve learned in school and high school, not only on Brazil, but in most countries. So, if we don’t use it, why should we learn?! That’s the first downside of this system.
Then there is the students not caring at all about what they’re learning, sure that some themes or entire subjects are cool and hip, but, most aren’t compelling at all, maybe not even to the teachers. Also, in that same page, students usually don’t know how the school matters, in fact, to their lifes; so, they do it just for doing it and getting their parents, or whoever takes care of them, off their asses.
On top of those, there are politic and money problems. Politicians won’t invest in education to where there are the lower taxes per person, therefore crushing even more the chances of the poor changing status. So, riches get “smarter” and poor get “dumber”, a practice that is proven to not solve any of the social problems.
So, yeah, it’s pretty broken alright.
Although that’s enough reasons to assume that the system is broken, this topic may get a little deeper, maybe the problem is in fact within the scientific method, within the epistemology. Children are taught in a systematic way, as if the science works in a systematic way, no, it is chaotic, everyone has his/her own method and they just adapt it to the IS (International System). And you may think that that makes sense, but if you combine the strength of two scientific methods, it may rise a better yet way to explain the reality, one that may not promote memorizing content and even make the studying not boring! A example to that would be the breakthrough of genres with the use of the computer into music making. Since the PC entered in music making by the general public, glitch hop, mash ups, and all these new things made the categorization meaningless, just for the sake of nostalgia, and, as oppose as many think, every work of an artist enhances another artist’s creation, which works just as fine within scientific methods.
Also, Math doesn’t exist.
How we can fix it
We try to avoid all those downsides! So, how?
Since the student won’t use most of what he will learn, the student could choose the classes that he want to take, just like a university, but, once the pupil has chosen a set of subjects, he can only change every semester, if he didn’t liked that stuff. The option to choose should be given since any equivalent to the “ensino fundamental 2” from Brazil, where they already should have a shunt of which profession they want to work in. And with the power to choose, comes responsibility, meaning that they’ll have to know why they’re studying, therefore, those years from “ensino fundamental 1” they’ll have to know the job that he will apply themselves and the requirements. And this power choice doesn’t only solve the responsibility problem, but also the interest problem, since they’ll choose what they’ll learn, the student will be excited to learn the thing. But, the number of disciplines would probably fall from 13-15 to 4-6, and the school has a quota to achieve, at least 5 hours? Is that right? And what to do with the time left? Teach others thing that the youth will use in the future! Like how to teach their youth, or how to get a job. And that was already proven to work! A program developed by a NGO to be applied in school called ICE did something just like that and the students that studied within that system had improvements in grades, attendance in class and all that good stuff.
Now we talking about politics and money boyzzzz! Since that is a moral problem, there is nothing to do, maybe teach the lawmakers to plan ahead instead of not planning at all.
The last question is how to fix the scientific method, can we do it? It may sound stupid, but as dumb as it sounds, anarchy may be the smartest path! (See what I did there?) But how would anarchy fix a organized thought? Solving its problem, the organization. The cataloging of explanations may ease the finding and reading of studies, but it limits the development of knowledge, the point being: if the transmission of knowledge is limited, the knowledge will also be limited, hence limiting the passing of knowledge, on s
Do we need to fix it?
Yes, do we need to fix it? That is a hard and common question, which doesn’t have only one answer too. We prolly have to fix it, but it’s much more appealing to not do so, if all of us get good, who will do bad? Who will do the base jobs? That is a reality in countries where education is almost the same as our ( in content), but is good for all people (in appliance). In that theory, we shouldn’t fix it, otherwise doctors will be cleaning bathrooms, but we should fix it, not now, but when humans get something to do basic tasks instead of other humans.
Unless humans leave capitalism. If non monetary anarchism becomes a real thing, those who want to learn will learn, those who don’t won’t, and won’t suffer for doesn’t doing so, because they’ll do whatever they want to do if there is vacancy.
AS I MADE PRETTY CLEAR, i hate our educational system, and i said this already in this website:
Since this was a school’s project, i do have the Sources: