Public Schools Are Archaic by M. R. Ussery, EdD

Reviewed by Cy Hilterman

Public Schools Are Archaic by M.R. Ussery EdDNot being an educator myself, my thinking on our public schools might not mean much in this review. However, I thoroughly agree with Dr. Ussery that our schools definably need improving in the way students are taught. His suggestions, in general, sound very feasible if they could be implemented in several larger school systems. A small school district such as the one I live in here in rural west-central Pennsylvania would have a difficult task due to smaller enrollment.

To test the intellect of students and assign them accordingly has always made more sense to me than throwing them all in a class where learning levels vary so much. Teaching thirty-five students that have such far reaching aptitudes only creates a longer learning experience for the top “brains” while a teacher has to bring the lower students to a mid-level of learning at best. Testing and grouping by diagnostic skills should separate the math “whiz” from someone ably suited to carpentry; the top English or writing student from the electrical wizard, etc.

In my own schooling as I went through elementary and high school in the 1940’s through 1952, I often wished I was in a class where my strong subjects paired me with others of the same strengths. But it never occurred nor was even thought of as far as I know.

Yes Dr. Ussery, your method makes so much sense that it should be expanded from any school systems now using it to several others that have a different makeup of strengths and weaknesses. I feel it would not leave students behind that excelled in manual capacities and would expand the learning curve for those that have the ability in other fields.

Disclosure in Accordance with FTC Guidelines 16 CFR Part 255


Leave a Reply