Growing up behind the Iron Curtain, I find this in poor taste to be honest. I've seen enough of these propaganda posters as a kid - don't need them again. But poor taste is common, as I saw a recent article where people were auctioning communist paintings for the rich to put on their walls..

Alexb,

Why poor taste?

I will admit that I chuckled at the first one. Taking an archetype like this and using it in a very different context is a pretty standard way of injecting humor. It's also a way of puncturing the pious seriousness of this form of propaganda art. When I was growing up over here (not behind the Iron Curtain) I used to laugh at this kind of poster even without the cute rewriting. The utter inability of Stalinist art to recognize its own pomposity was a joke in and of itself.

People are just way too easily offended these days. ;-)
Talking about being offended: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybi64lRvzDk

Aren't they all, but the product, well, that's another issue!

Why poor taste? Seriously, please explain?

If I do something you find offensive, be as offended as you like and then walk away. If I do you harm, that's another matter.

All propaganda is poor taste. Let's not forget the US has its own - fish never notice the water they swim in (until maybe you catch 'em). There's something to be said for the not-so-subtle eastern block variety.

If I have to explain it, then the point is lost I think. But I'll try: Because it's propaganda that has nothing humorous in it. Am I offended? Not at all. It's not personal, but I find it poor taste. Just as I said people buying Communist art pieces and putting hanging them on their walls. Same with Che T-Shirts, etc. To a large degree it shows a lack of understanding. But that's mankind I suppose. Not a big deal at all, just an observation I made. I bet nobody is going to put a Nazi poster up (besides wacko extremists). Why's that? Think about it. To me they are the same in many ways. Anyway, we had enough controversy with Lang Lang this week - I just made an observation. Not offended - no biggie!

I think German posters from the 30's and 40's would be fun too. I think one would have to stay away from swasticas, that's all. Demonising the whole period, when hopefully there was quite a bit of innocence around, takes it too far. Still, maybe I'm wrong.

One can virtually always find some "research" to suuport one's opinions. As a teacher of 33 years I completely disagree with this statement and the other more specific points in your post beneath it.

There are certainly many more types of homework than the two you mention. It's not a case of one or the other.

My child is in 8th grade and never gets much homework. Maybe it will change once he is in high school.

But with the district's goal of "closing the gap" I wonder if they decreased homework knowing that some kids will excel by doing homework, while others fall farther behind.

I'm always suspicious about "closing the gap" goals. Since the only ways to do this is to bring up performance of low achievers and/or bring down performance of top achievers. But this is another topic.

I'm bemused by the implication that my opinion was that homework is useless right from the start, and that I then found research to support it.

It's entirely possible to note research findings that do not coincide with one's opinions. It's also entirely possible to assess research and change one's opinion based on the evidence presented.

Research linking smoking to lung cancer coincides with my opinion, but I can assure you that my opinions were formed by the emergence of the research and not vice versa.

When it comes to research by academics or people sending out surveys, I prefer to talk in depth to people in the field who understand their profession and with a long enough period of experience. It also helps if you have practiced that profession within a variety of scenarios. I am not at all impressed by what was quoted before.

Just take the one statement that "homework" (which was not defined) is useless. Take algebra or physics at the high school level. Can anyone reasonably propose that a student attend algebra classes, does NOT work on equations (homework) yet manages to absorb it? Or what is the alternative - do enough questions in the class? How long will the classes be? Does a teacher still have time to teach? Can it be done with enough quietness? The statement that homework is useless is nonsensical. It does not seem well thought through at all.

It's just too general for my liking.

I not only went to school I've taught in one for a few decades! As I've said there's nothing simple about this issue.

I agree with you. My response was in regards to the studies that were cited with their simple and generalized conclusions, as though all teaching everywhere in all subjects was done the same everywhere by everyone, and as though all subjects required the same treatment. Homework for the sake of homework and because it is "good for you" is asinine. But the generalities made by those studies seem simplistic when - as you say - there's nothing simple about this issue.

What I really meant was that on a subject as complex/hot button as the value of homework, I'm sure there are research articles supporting both sides. But I'd guess by the tone of your posts that you agree with the research you mentioned.

Based on my 33 years of teaching I strongly think that homework is very important, and that the huge majority of teachers at the schools I've worked at don't assign "busy work" (which I'd define as work requiring no thinking).

Music teacher?

Wow, my third grader has had more than an hour's worth each night this week. It's not always that much, part of it is that the standardized tests are coming up.

It can be a chore to get a nine year old back to the table to do her homework when she wants to run around.

Just as an aside, my 4th grader is homeschooled. He is literally doing high school algebra right now. He spends 30-45 minutes on it 4-5 days a week. And he's on track to finish the course/text by summer break. I pulled my kid after 1st grade from school because he was ahead academically (and he was miserable). But honestly, I'm stunned at what little time it takes us to get through material. He schools 2-3 hours a day typically. And as a side benefit, he has an hour to practice piano! And then he has plenty of hours to be a kid, do other extracurricular activities, and read.

So, I'm quite opposed to sending home more than 10 minutes of work for kids in elementary to do after they've been at it and sitting in a desk for 6 hours. There were some real time management issues at our previous school. And yes, I do think it's possible to do targeted work on a subject like algebra and not need to work on it for extra hours every week. I think high school is a time to bridge to the work load of college. I'm not sure the current model is the best one for that.

In algebra you either understand it or you don't. My experience is many don't, which means they spend loads of time rote learning formulas and procedures. It's rather hard on those with an immediate grasp. With those that don't it's a life problem - unless they're allowed to retrace quite a bit they'll never really be secure at Piaget's formal operations stage. There's an obvious parallel in music - students who understand what they're doing vs those who just do what they're told.

Algebra codifies basic concepts. If those concepts were taught properly in earlier grades, rather than going for rote memorization and workbook-filling without understanding, then algebra isn't a big deal. It isn't a matter of some kids not naturally getting it, or not having the ability. It is a matter of teaching what is missing in a way that it can be grasped. You get student after student who "has had a problem" with something, and regular teachers accepting that he "has" that problem - get at what isn't understood or what is missing - and voila, he no longer "has" that problem. Of course there are kids who are just slow learners, but often that isn't the case.


Agreed! And that is what teaching should aim for.

Our educational system in most parts of the world is messed up. You have people wanting to get elected creating illusions for the electorate which prevents teachers from teaching effectively. Tests stop being a tool that is part of the teaching process, and they become the actual goal. Teaching becomes a matter of passing the tests, when tests themselves are severely limited. Attendance and school hours are a matter of keeping the kids off the street. Pressure for homework as homework's sake in order to keep that same electorate happy that we are "educating" kids also prevents real learning from taking place.

It is no coincidence that a disproportionate number of homeschooling parents are teachers, who sometimes put their own careers on hold in order to give their children a proper base. We are taught how to plan and design homework and other learning activities, and also how to teach. But can teachers effectively do it? The first thing I was told by the veterans when I began teaching was "Play lip service to the directives, and do what works in reality." That was a few decades ago.

I did kinda say that - some kids need to retrace their steps to where the material was (probably) poorly delivered in the first place. And yes, when the evil eye of politics got cast in education's direction it was the kiss of death to childrens' potential.

Having taught Algebra for 33 years and in over 50 classes, I'm not really sure what you mean here. There are all kinds of intermediate levels of understanding in every subject including any kind of math. The teacher's job is to try and get the most number of students understanding the material at the highest level they can. Although students often phrase things as "I didn't know the formulas", the actual formulas used are maybe 1% of what's involved and are sometimes even given to students during a test because they're not part of understanding the material.

Yes, I guess we are saying the same thing.

I would absolutely agree with this (and the rest of your post for that matter). I have a math degree and have taught/tutored math as well. If math were addressed at more conceptual level earlier, it would serve kids better later. Part of the problem I have with the system right now for my kids is some kids have mastery after doing 10 practice problems, some kids need 20, some kids need 100. I do not think it serves kids well to make them to rote work instead of letting kids move at more their own pace. Anyway, completely off topic, but this led to us homeschooling our kids. Both my husband and I were engineers and have higher degrees (and are not homeschooling for religious reasons).

Though I'm having great respect here for your knowledge and experience etc. I can't help asking what do you know of Piaget and abstract thinking? As far as I'm aware that particular boat is easily missed (not by nice middle-class Swiss children though).

Exactly! I had to explain this to one of the smartest kids in the school the other week. I said to him don't get taken advantage of - ask for different work if you've got what everyone's doing under your belt.

I think there is a difference between rote work and doing more than enough problems required to master a topic. The only way to have an instuction personalized for every student so each gets just the right amount of practice is to have the entire course taught via computer. In a practical classroom setting a teacher should be teaching and assigning homework for somewhere near the middle ability level of the class.