What are wrong with my views in this paper and how can I change it.

[Zanters]

I recently had to write about the Scandinavian education system compared to the American education system.

With a Marxist perspective, how can I change this paper? What am I missing or plain being a liberal about. All are welcome to criticize it.

TL;DR how can I make this paper more Marxist, and is it liberal tripe.


Remove the spaces, I cannot submit links yet.
Link: docs. g o o g l e . com/document/d/1yyPyMNbDkBDDdzNgxZyGcB4GapfOE6LvkwZpXV1XiRY/edit?usp=docslist_api


Feel free to move this if it is not in the right area. I just saw it as learning to be more Marxist through criticism.

[Creative Destruction]

It fetishizes the liberal systems in Scandinavia.

[Zanters]

It fetishizes the liberal systems in Scandinavia.

Yes and no. Reading it completely is recommended.

I explain how the Scandinavian system is better than the american education, but does not hit the nail on the head. How reform can bring America towards the Scandinavian model, but revolution is needed for true emancipation. It is discussed in the last paragraphs.

Also, this is for school, so any deep Marxist theory and thought will not be understood by those who are not communist.

But please feel welcome to point them out so I can correct myself, comrade.

[consuming negativity]

Yes and no. Reading it completely is recommended.

I explain how the Scandinavian system is better than the american education, but does not hit the nail on the head. How reform can bring America towards the Scandinavian model, but revolution is needed for true emancipation. It is discussed in the last paragraphs.

Also, this is for school, so any deep Marxist theory and thought will not be understood by those who are not communist.

But please feel welcome to point them out so I can correct myself, comrade.

Yeah dude, you come across as a Marxist and that's not a good thing unless your professor is sympathetic to socialism or already knows you're coming from that perspective. Get rid of the unnecessary shit about proletarian revolution and violence and shit. You can say it but you can't SAY it like that. Say "sweeping reforms from the ground up", or if you really just have to name drop, "socialism". But I wouldn't even go that far. Avoid buzz words at all cost. If you don't, quite frankly, they're going to dismiss you as an idiot. Sorry but that's just reality and it isn't worth losing points and getting a worse grade just because your professor is a liberal.

[Zanters]

He is pretty liberal, so his sympathy is there. It may be a shock to him, but it is an opinion essay.

But if I should change the words, what would you propose?

[Sabot Cat]

I'm just going to engage in general critiques for this, if that's okay? Feel free to ignore this advice though. :)

"Many Americans seem to agree that the education system is terrible and needs drastic reform or revisioned.": I'd argue that you need to something that sounds more specific and cites something for such a pivotal part of your paper, like: "For over a decade, more Americans than not have expressed their dissatisfaction with the educational system (Gallup)."

"Education." Gallup.Com. Gallup, Aug. 2014. Web. 21 Oct. 2014. <http://www.gallup.com/poll/1612/education.aspx>.

Also, 'Revisioned' should be 'revised'.

"This first world country is even falling behind second world countries like that of Vietnam.": First, second, and third world distinctions is an outdated geopolitical paradigm. Maybe use 'industrialized' and 'industrializing'? Also, I'd probably give this a citation just to be safe too:

(Layton)

Layton, Lyndsey. "U.S. Students Lag around Average on International Science, Math and Reading Test." Washington Post. The Washington Post, 3 Dec. 2013. Web. 21 Oct. 2014. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/us-students-lag-around-average-on-international-science-math-and-reading-test/2013/12/02/2e510f26-5b92-11e3-a49b-90a0e156254b_story.html>.

"But, this is comparing apples to oranges; the American education system and the Norwegian education system are the results of the different types of governments that are in place. One could even go further to say that they are different not only because of the difference in politics, but also in culture. While the Scandinavian model may seem much better than that of the American one, there is still a lot that can be done, but it is no longer at the education system’s level, and rather at the level of society as a whole. The American education system is due for drastic change, but this must take place at not only a political level, but also a cultural and societal one too; this also cannot take place through reform but rather revolution." You're undermining your thesis with the bolded, introducing a new topic with the italicized, and for the underlined, there's no evidence you've presented that would suggest as much considering that the Scandinavia did it purely through reforms. It all seems rather shoehorned in.

"Here is where one can start to see the underlying issue. Some of the issues with American schooling maybe the attendees, it also maybe because of the staff in charge of that specific school." This is kind of clunky. I'd advise trying to make it into one sentence, and to not contract 'may be' here.

"This is still not looking deep enough into the subject, though." This sentence is extraneous and should be excised.

"One must look at who creates the standardized testing, and who runs the privatized schools. We see politicians and extremely wealthy people." consider making this one sentence, e.g. "schools: politicians [...]". I'm also not sure how these are discrete categories considering more than half of the U.S. Congress are millionaires, but that's more on the nitpicky side of things.

"but it is what drives them that makes them bad, and the system that they take place in and promote that causes them to be bad. It is what drives them that causes the American education system to fall back compared to the rest of the world, mostly to the nordic countries." Nordic should be capitalized, and this analysis is really simplistic sounding.

". Greed, corruption, and exploitation are their driving force, and it trickles down to the subpar education we see today in modern America." Are we to think that greed, corruption and exploitation don't also exist in the Nordic countries? And how are we supposed to quantify and reduce such things?

" we have Americans, who" The comma is extraneous here and should be excised.

" want. That is property, wealth, fame, and material objects." I'd make this one sentence "want: property,". But again, how is that not a part of Scandinavian culture? Honestly, I'd argue that it has more to do with the fact that the Nordic countries are more racially homogeneous and thus liberal measures are less shunned because they won't be going to a racial 'Other', but they're nonetheless just as capitalist and full of 'greed' and desire for wealth as you put it as the United States. The educational differences really do just lie in the policies.

"failing americans" Americans should be capitalized.

" the private owners," This term is suddenly introduced without explanation and rather vague in context.

"While the bourgeoisie still exist and rule in the Scandinavian model, they are more leveled, more equal to the proletarian." They are not because it's not in relative quantities of wealth alone that defines power, but relationship to the means of production. And make no mistake, the bourgeoisie loom large in the Nordic nations as well.

Also, a general stylistic thing: I usually put lines of space between my paragraphs? Not sure if you're supposed to do this though.

"The material circumstances are drastically different between the two societies. While it may work well in Finland, it would not transfer well into American. Thus, the solution to a better education system is not by reforming it by itself, but rather reform of the American political system." You are again undermining your point here. Who's to say that we haven't reached peak American educational potential with our current standards if these cases aren't comparable due to the material circumstances?

"to become better and more focused on rather" I think you need a word between on and rather; maybe learning?

"the only way to completely rid of the corruption of greed, power, and exploitation is by doing it by force, by revolution." But most of the countries in the comparative educational surveys that you cited to demonstrate the inadequacy of the American educational system got there by force. And again, you're presenting nothing in support of this and quite a lot to undermine it by stating that the comparisons you're using to make your argument are irrelevant in the first place.

"While we can reach the level of education that the Finns have, it is only possible to go beyond them by revolutionary means." You don't do anything to support this point at all, and your example with literacy is incredibly flawed because you can get similar increases without revolution. I mean Andorra, Finland, and Greenland certainly didn't have to have to. It just seems to be too small of a data point that's too irrelevant to your central thesis- which is continually muddled and undermined.

"Changing the education system in America to mirror that of the Scandinavians will not work, and can be more disastrous than what is already in place currently. This is because Americans and Scandinavians societies vary too differently. In order to become more like the Scandinavians, Americans must reform their entire political system to allow for it to happen. While this can push the American education system to be better and mimic the Scandinavian system, it will not cause it to be better than it. The only way to truly improve it is through revolutionary terms on a society level." All of these are contentious claims that deserve more substantiation and support but you provide nothing for that.

Overall, your prose is decent but your thesis is horribly confused. If reforms don't work, why are you constantly pointing to the Scandinavian countries? On what basis do you assert that revolution would make the United States educational system better? And so on and so forth.

I don't think your paper is entirely lost, though. I'd advise simply consolidating your thesis around reforming the American educational system like the Scandinavian one- and I don't buy the argument that this wouldn't work, because they both have capitalist modes of production and educational reforms don't in of themselves challenge bourgeois power- and then explain what that system gets right in contrast to the flaws of the American one e.g. the debt, the structure, etc. It seems like you veered off of your point just to shoehorn in a plethora of socialist points you don't give the proper time and evidence for.

Anyway, I hope this helped a little? And I also hope you get a good grade. :)

[Zanters]

Really appreciate this, comrade!

While I have read and agree with all of these points, I will change what I can. Very good critique, and I am beginning to see the flaws.

Really, it just needs further explanation, but I can only do so much. The paper can only be 6 pages long, double spaced :/. This causes a lot of crunching and lack of explanations.

Also keep in mind, that I whipped this up in 3.5 hours, but that isn't an excuse for some more liberally minded ideas. I guess I should look more into the education system.

Also, in my defense, if there should be anymore lol, is that I had to edit a lot of stuff out from my rough draft. Like a lot. It was originally 10 pages, so what you see is very consolidated. I can re-add content and explanations in a revised edition later this year :) so I will use all of your advice when I do so.

[Sabot Cat]

:) Not a problem, and again, I'd just advice cutting it down to a suggesting for the U.S. educational system to pivot more towards the Nordic model, while maybe making a longer essay for your own sake if it strikes your fancy.

[Zanters]

:) Not a problem, and again, I'd just advice cutting it down to a suggesting for the U.S. educational system to pivot more towards the Nordic model, while maybe making a longer essay for your own sake if it strikes your fancy.

That is just begging for liberal reform :rolleyes:

But it is a college paper, I think that writing it with a communist flair is risky. Makes me wonder how it would've turned out written differently if the readers were to be Marxists rather than Liberal Capitalist.

[Chomskyan]

Yeah dude, you come across as a Marxist and that's not a good thing unless your professor is sympathetic to socialism or already knows you're coming from that perspective. Get rid of the unnecessary shit about proletarian revolution and violence and shit. You can say it but you can't SAY it like that. Say "sweeping reforms from the ground up", or if you really just have to name drop, "socialism". But I wouldn't even go that far. Avoid buzz words at all cost. If you don't, quite frankly, they're going to dismiss you as an idiot. Sorry but that's just reality and it isn't worth losing points and getting a worse grade just because your professor is a liberal.

This. If you want to have an opinion that isn't overtly biased towards Marxism, use substitute words. Instead of "proletarian revolution" use "popular protests" or something.

[Chomskyan]

That is just begging for liberal reform :rolleyes:

But it is a college paper, I think that writing it with a communist flair is risky. Makes me wonder how it would've turned out written differently if the readers were to be Marxists rather than Liberal Capitalist.

I've typed papers with my Leftist opinions, but I've never quite used the words "Proletarian Revolution" in them. In fact, in my Gender class some Feminist terminology is already just begging for my Left-wing exploitation of it. Or take Anthropology, much is discussed about Western and Eastern societies, as well as division of labor and Empire. I mean, how can't I remain unbiased in some of these classes. Politics class should be an easy one to be biased at.

If anyone cares (maybe the OP?) I could post a College paper I did on wealth and economic inequality or something more along the lines of Left-wing Politics. That is, if someone tells me how to post it online. I usually get As on my papers.

[Tim Cornelis]

Why would you be afraid of using Marxism explicitly? A high school teacher can't fault you for that if you back it up properly, and in academia Marxism is widely accepted in the sense that you won't discredit yourself for using it (not widely accepted as in widely regarded as accurate).

Use Marxism. But don't use Stalinoid jingoism (the glorious people's yadayada).

[Zanters]

Why would you be afraid of using Marxism explicitly? A high school teacher can't fault you for that if you back it up properly, and in academia Marxism is widely accepted in the sense that you won't discredit yourself for using it (not widely accepted as in widely regarded as accurate).

Use Marxism. But don't use Stalinoid jingoism (the glorious people's yadayada).


Plus this is for college, so it will be better.

[Return_Of_The_Mac]

Surely you should just write with the viewpoint you believe in, rather than trying to get it to fit a certain 'genre'?

[Zanters]

Surely you should just write with the viewpoint you believe in, rather than trying to get it to fit a certain 'genre'?

Now see, this is tricky. I tried to write it liberally, for the sake of education, but I wanted it to be Marxist, because that is what I believe. But, when writing it liberally, I initially feared it lost its Marxist flair in order to receive a good grade. So I guess I am trying to intermediate the two, even though if I were to write it not for a grade, it'd be very much longer and much more... "Communistic"

But we all know saying one thing and actually doing it are not related. Aka, take whatever I say with a grain of salt.

[Zanters]

Got an 148/150.:grin:

[Sabot Cat]

Can we see the final product? =O

[Zanters]

It should be exactly what I posted, except for an added header with my name class and teacher's name.

Take note, any changes I make show up live on that link. I only changed little things though.