| Topic: |
Sociology > Education |
| User: |
"Dom" |
| Date: |
14 Jan 2006 04:26:47 PM |
| Object: |
ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
I was particularly fascinated to see that Belgian students and teachers
still write on the board. About 12 years ago, one of my students was
enrolled in a program to obtain K-8 teacher certification in
Connecticut. One of her requirements was to teach a class that would be
observed by educrats. The regulations that she was given stated that
she was not to use the board. Everything had to be written on
transparencies and shown with an overhead projector.
I enjoyed the program, but in many ways it was too superficial. I wish
they had shown some of our bloated junk books. It would have made great
video to stuff typical fifth-grade doorstops in a backpack, to weigh
the backpack on a scale, and to show viewers that this rubbish weighs
more than 25 pounds.
The U.S. public education system was, and in some cases still is, a
great success story. The fact that this program was done in a complete
historical vacuum was a major weakness.
Dom Rosa
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
http://www.reason.com/hod/js011306.shtml
January 13, 2006
Stupid in America
Why your kids are probably dumber than Belgians
John Stossel
For "Stupid in America," a special report ABC will air Friday, we gave
identical tests to high school students in New Jersey and in Belgium.
The Belgian kids cleaned the American kids' clocks. The Belgian kids
called the American students "stupid."
We didn't pick smart kids to test in Europe and dumb kids in the United
States. The American students attend an above-average school in New
Jersey, and New Jersey's kids have test scores that are above average
for America.
The American boy who got the highest score told me: "I'm shocked,
'cause it just shows how advanced they are compared to us."
The Belgians did better because their schools are better. At age
ten, American students take an international test and score well
above the international average. But by age fifteen, when students
from forty countries are tested, the Americans place twenty-fifth.
The longer kids stay in American schools, the worse they do in
international competition. They do worse than kids from countries
that spend much less money on education.
This should come as no surprise once you remember that public
education in the USA is a government monopoly. Don't like your
public school? Tough. The school is terrible? Tough. Your taxes fund
that school regardless of whether it's good or bad. That's why
government monopolies routinely fail their customers. Union-
dominated monopolies are even worse.
In New York City, it's "just about impossible" to fire a bad
teacher, says schools chancellor Joel Klein. The new union contract
offers slight relief, but it's still about 200 pages of
bureaucracy. "We tolerate mediocrity," said Klein, because "people
get paid the same, whether they're outstanding, average, or way
below average." One teacher sent sexually oriented emails to "Cutie
101," his sixteen year old student. Klein couldn't fire him for
years, "He hasn't taught, but we have had to pay him, because that's
what's required under the contract."
They've paid him more than $300,000, and only after 6 years of
litigation were they able to fire him. Klein employs dozens of
teachers who he's afraid to let near the kids, so he has them sit in
what they call "rubber rooms." This year he will spend twenty
million dollars to warehouse teachers in five rubber rooms. It's an
alternative to firing them. In the last four years, only two
teachers out of 80,000 were fired for incompetence.
When I confronted Union president Randi Weingarten about that, she
said, "they [the NYC school board] just don't want to do the work
that's entailed." But the "work that's entailed" is so onerous that
most principals just give up, or get bad teachers to transfer to
another school. They even have a name for it: "the dance of the
lemons."
The inability to fire the bad and reward the good is the biggest
reason schools fail the kids. Lack of money is often cited the
reason schools fail, but America doubled per pupil spending,
adjusting for inflation, over the last 30 years. Test scores and
graduation rates stayed flat. New York City now spends an
extraordinary $11,000 per student. That's $220,000 for a classroom
of twenty kids. Couldn't you hire two or three excellent teachers
and do a better job with $220,000?
Only a monopoly can spend that much money and still fail the kids.
The U.S. Postal Service couldn't get it there overnight. But once
others were allowed to compete, Federal Express, United Parcel, and
others suddenly could get it there overnight. Now even the post
office does it (sometimes). Competition inspires people to do what
we didn't think we could do.
If people got to choose their kids' school, education options would
be endless. There could soon be technology schools, cheap Wal-Mart-
like schools, virtual schools where you learn at home on your
computer, sports schools, music schools, schools that go all year,
schools with uniforms, schools that open early and keep kids later,
and, who knows? If there were competition, all kinds of new ideas
would bloom.
This already happens overseas. In Belgium, for example, the
government funds education=97at any school=97but if the school can't
attract students, it goes out of business. Belgian school principal
Kaat Vandensavel told us she works hard to impress parents. "If we
don't offer them what they want for their child, they won't come to
our school." She constantly improves the teaching, "You can't afford
ten teachers out of 160 that don't do their work, because the
clients will know, and won't come to you again."
"That's normal in Western Europe," Harvard economist Caroline Hoxby
told me. "If schools don't perform well, a parent would never be
trapped in that school in the same way you could be trapped in the
U=2ES."
Last week, Florida's Supreme Court shut down "opportunity
scholarships," Florida's small attempt at competition. Public money
can't be spent on private schools, said the court, because the state
constitution commands the funding only of "uniform, . . . high-
quality" schools. But government schools are neither uniform nor
high-quality, and without competition, no new teaching plan or No
Child Left Behind law will get the monopoly to serve its customers
well.
A Gallup Poll survey shows 76 percent of Americans are either
completely or somewhat satisfied with their kids' public school, but
that's only because they don't know what their kids are missing.
Without competition, unlike Belgian parents, they don't know what
their kids might have had.
John Stossel is an ABC News correspondent and co-anchor of 20/20.
His special Stupid in America airs Friday, January 13, at 10 pm.
.
|
|
| User: "Secret Squirrel" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
15 Jan 2006 04:27:55 PM |
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
"Dom" <DRosa@teikyopost.edu> wrote in
news:1137277607.404511.14510@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
I was particularly fascinated to see that Belgian students
and teachers still write on the board. About 12 years ago,
one of my students was enrolled in a program to obtain K-8
teacher certification in Connecticut. One of her
requirements was to teach a class that would be observed by
educrats. The regulations that she was given stated that
she was not to use the board. Everything had to be written
on transparencies and shown with an overhead projector.
I enjoyed the program, but in many ways it was too
superficial. I wish they had shown some of our bloated junk
books. It would have made great video to stuff typical
fifth-grade doorstops in a backpack, to weigh the backpack
on a scale, and to show viewers that this rubbish weighs
more than 25 pounds.
The U.S. public education system was, and in some cases
still is, a great success story. The fact that this program
was done in a complete historical vacuum was a major
weakness.
Dom Rosa
===============================
http://www.reason.com/hod/js011306.shtml
January 13, 2006
Stupid in America
Why your kids are probably dumber than Belgians
John Stossel
For "Stupid in America," a special report ABC will air
Friday, we gave identical tests to high school students in
New Jersey and in Belgium. The Belgian kids cleaned the
American kids' clocks. The Belgian kids called the American
students "stupid."
We didn't pick smart kids to test in Europe and dumb kids
in the United States. The American students attend an
above-average school in New Jersey, and New Jersey's kids
have test scores that are above average for America.
The American boy who got the highest score told me: "I'm
shocked, 'cause it just shows how advanced they are
compared to us."
The Belgians did better because their schools are better.
At age ten, American students take an international test
and score well above the international average. But by age
fifteen, when students from forty countries are tested, the
Americans place twenty-fifth. The longer kids stay in
American schools, the worse they do in international
competition. They do worse than kids from countries that
spend much less money on education.
No, the problem is that the US curriculum is different.
US students take many of the *same classes*, particularly
the math clases, just at later grades than their foreign
counterparts. That explains this fact:
At age ten, American students take an international test
and score well above the international average. But by age
fifteen,
^^^^^^^
when students from forty countries are tested, the
Americans place twenty-fifth.
Since middle schoolers don't enter the workforce, it matters
very little whether or not they take algebra or trig at
age 14 or age 16, now does it? If you test the *graduates*
of high school equivalents both countries, the gap narrows
back. That's how you also get the data that toto provided.
But this doesn't matter to the ideologues who write that
rag _Reason (surely a misnomer if there ever was one), now
does it?
Secret Squirrel
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQEVAwUBQ8mQgT/rA6+b3AyhAQHj9gf/SFKvyNnE03rSQm9KfsFQuQejcMVLfFx2
UuMas9jzpFu64BI3g1KiWyeApkjZaogdK/HyxBhgyl3JeXiPN+8eAaz8LdWlNHUT
iC10aC+z/BXI7io8oeSX+clTTTxiH13P/wA38dcaqhYs6tuZiUkesdxVHK7e+NX7
CJXU1wHBdK6j9CUfr61bRELxmKWDGe9LtxQYx3wnsNJg78uclmw57Ck2RKltEt1c
rhuS7lUK0U/zyPilaVjDPQVq4rbr3Bs1vjmX38H0J2GOCysxUdBfL90lqYkR9NRU
VKTZpABTxsuePfhmPtsJbu0bPRxj336bWaIEF9TlFH36kZW3K1EEtw==
=SMhI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gary Schnabl" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
17 Jan 2006 07:16:35 PM |
|
|
"Secret Squirrel" <ssquirrel@nottheremailer.net> wrote in message
news:VEXH402D38732.6860532407@anonymous.poster...
The Belgians did better because their schools are better.
At age ten, American students take an international test
and score well above the international average. But by age
fifteen, when students from forty countries are tested, the
Americans place twenty-fifth. The longer kids stay in
American schools, the worse they do in international
competition. They do worse than kids from countries that
spend much less money on education.
No, the problem is that the US curriculum is different.
US students take many of the *same classes*, particularly
the math clases, just at later grades than their foreign
counterparts. That explains this fact:
At age ten, American students take an international test
and score well above the international average. But by age
fifteen,
^^^^^^^
when students from forty countries are tested, the
Americans place twenty-fifth.
Since middle schoolers don't enter the workforce, it matters
very little whether or not they take algebra or trig at
age 14 or age 16, now does it? If you test the *graduates*
of high school equivalents both countries, the gap narrows
back.
Nonsense. The academic gap widens at high school graduation, even
considering the AP courses. The academic-age spread in math and science
courses between Americans and students abroad is probably some six years at
HS graduation.
What evidence is there to prove a narrow (or even narrowing) gap? Are you so
poorly informed or misled to believe that foreigners just sit on their hands
and fritter away their middle and high school years so that the
low-achieving Americans might catch up? You're dreaming or smoking something
illegal!
It's only inevitable that the AP courses themselves would finally come under
attack also, suspected of being dumbed-down. This recent article mentioned
that schools like Harvard no longer accept the AP-grade outcomes of 3 or 4
that other colleges might accept.
http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060111/SCHOOLS/601110343/1022
Wednesday, January 11, 2006
Laura Pedrick / New York Times
As schools like those in Hackensack, N.J., are jumping on the AP bandwagon,
many elite schools are losing enthusiasm.
AP courses lose luster, gain ground
Public districts strive to give more students access; some elite schools opt
to cut the program.
Tamar Lewin / New York Times
Every summer, there is a fabulous moment at the Greensboro, N.C., "Cool to
Be Smart" celebration, for students who have passed five or more Advanced
Placement exams -- the moment when one of them selects a lucky key and wins
a new car and balloons cascade from the ceiling.
"I was so surprised when my key fit in the door that I just stood there for
a couple seconds, and the balloons came down and everybody was clapping and
cheering and my dad came screaming and yelling from the audience," says
Laura St. Cyr, last year's winner, now a freshman at nearby Elon University.
In the last four years, the Guilford County School District has given away
four cars, 20 laptop computers and 22 scholarships of $1,500 each -- all in
the service of coaxing students into more rigorous courses.
When Terry B. Grier became superintendent of the district, which serves more
than 67,000 students, the two high schools with the most affluent students
offered at least 15 Advanced Placement courses; the 12 others offered only a
handful. So Grier decreed that every high school would have at least 15 AP
courses, every student who took an AP class would be required to take the AP
exam, paid for by the district, and every AP teacher would have special
training. He cajoled local businesses to donate the prizes to create
momentum for the program.
"Why should your ability to access a quality academic course be bound by
where you live in our community, in our country?" Grier said. "APs are not
for the elite, they're for the prepared. And it's our job to prepare these
kids."
His efforts have doubled the number of students taking AP courses, doubled
the scholarship money they receive from colleges, and tripled the number of
AP students who are black, in a district that is about half minority. Last
year, 246 students qualified for "Cool to Be Smart," and while Laura St. Cyr
was the only one to get a Honda CRV, all of them were eligible for college
credits that could save them on tuition.
(Many universities award credit for courses when students score at least a
3 -- out of 5 -- on the exam.)
Incentives generate interest
Tactics differ, but Grier's commitment to the Advanced Placement program has
become part of the gospel of improving education in hundreds of struggling
urban and rural districts. Schools are doing all kinds of things to nudge
students into AP classes, which are intended to mirror introductory college
survey courses.
At some schools in Dallas, students get $100 for every test on which they
score 3 or higher, thanks to a partnership with Texas Instruments; their
teachers also get $100, in addition to $20 an hour for tutoring them. In New
Jersey, Hackensack High School attracted 300 students to a new summer-school
program to help hard-working students move into AP classes. Arkansas,
Florida and South Carolina pay for all their students' exams, which would
otherwise cost $82 a shot. Minnesota will join the list this year.
The Advanced Placement program, administered by the College Board, began 50
years ago as a way to give a select few high school students a jump-start on
college work. But in recent decades, it has morphed into something quite
different -- a mass program that reaches more than a million students each
year and is used almost as much to impress college admissions officers and
raise a school's reputation as to get college credit. As the admissions race
has hit warp speed, Advanced Placement has taken on new importance, and
government officials, educators and the College Board itself have united
behind a push to broaden access to AP courses as a matter of equity in
education.
Are tests 'watered down'?
But at the very time that schools like those in Guilford County, Dallas and
Hackensack are jumping on the AP bandwagon, many of the elite schools that
pioneered AP are losing enthusiasm, looking for ways to cut their students
loose from curriculums that can cram in too much material at the expense of
conceptual understanding and from the pressure to amass as many AP grades on
their transcripts as possible. A few have abolished AP programs altogether,
and many have limited students to taking three a year, fearing burnout and
bad scores.
Sixty percent of American high schools now participate in the program, which
offers courses in 35 subjects, from macroeconomics to music theory. Last
year, 1.2 million students took 2.1 million AP exams, and the number of
students taking AP courses has increased tenfold since 1980. Newsweek
magazine has gone so far as to rank the nation's best public high schools
using the number of students who merely show up to take AP or International
Baccalaureate tests as the sole criterion. (IB is another advanced
curriculum, though far less common; Grier counts it for his "Cool to Be
Smart" program.)
So many more students are arriving at colleges with a slew of AP courses
under their belts that some institutions have become more choosy about
giving them credit. Harvard, for example, no longer gives credit for scores
below 5. And AP classes have spread so widely that the College Board is
concerned that some schools are putting the label on courses that offer a
diluted curriculum. So starting next month, it will begin to audit the
15,000 high schools that offer AP classes to make sure students everywhere
get the same quality of curriculum.
"It's really important that we not give students in traditionally
underserved schools a watered-down version of APs," says Trevor Packer,
director of the Advanced Placement program.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dom" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
18 Jan 2006 01:43:43 PM |
|
|
Gary Schnabl wrote:
"Secret Squirrel" <ssquirrel@nottheremailer.net> wrote in message
news:VEXH402D38732.6860532407@anonymous.poster...
[snip]
Since middle schoolers don't enter the workforce, it matters
very little whether or not they take algebra or trig at
age 14 or age 16, now does it? If you test the *graduates*
of high school equivalents both countries, the gap narrows
back.
Nonsense. The academic gap widens at high school graduation, even
considering the AP courses. snip]
The folly of pushing high school students into calculus was exposed by
J. H. Neelley's Note [The American Mathematical MONTHLY, "A generation
of high school calculus," Dec. 1961, pp 1004-5]. Neelley concluded that
"high school calculus is largely a waste of time." A summary of
Neelley's Note is at:
http://mathforum.org/kb/thread.jspa?forumID=206&threadID=477972
Some pundits would dismiss Neelley's data as outdated, which is not at
all the case. In the June-July 1995 issue of the MONTHLY, Melvin
Henriksen wrote a commentary (p 482) in which he stated: "What is
really making it more difficult to teach college level mathematics is
the rush to have calculus taught in high school, ..., and at the price
of not teaching basic algebra and geometry." Another excellent letter,
by Joan Reinthaler, was published in the December 1999 issue of the AMS
NOTICES, "Pressure To Study Calculus in High School." This is available
at:
http://www.ams.org/notices/199911/commentary.pdf
The letters follow the Commentary article.
Dom Rosa
.
|
|
|
| User: "Herman Rubin" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
18 Jan 2006 03:41:02 PM |
|
|
In article <1137613423.134187.254560@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
Dom <DRosa@teikyopost.edu> wrote:
Gary Schnabl wrote:
"Secret Squirrel" <ssquirrel@nottheremailer.net> wrote in message
news:VEXH402D38732.6860532407@anonymous.poster...
[snip]
Since middle schoolers don't enter the workforce, it matters
very little whether or not they take algebra or trig at
age 14 or age 16, now does it? If you test the *graduates*
of high school equivalents both countries, the gap narrows
back.
Nonsense. The academic gap widens at high school graduation, even
considering the AP courses. snip]
The folly of pushing high school students into calculus was exposed by
J. H. Neelley's Note [The American Mathematical MONTHLY, "A generation
of high school calculus," Dec. 1961, pp 1004-5]. Neelley concluded that
"high school calculus is largely a waste of time." A summary of
Neelley's Note is at:
http://mathforum.org/kb/thread.jspa?forumID=206&threadID=477972
Some pundits would dismiss Neelley's data as outdated, which is not at
all the case. In the June-July 1995 issue of the MONTHLY, Melvin
Henriksen wrote a commentary (p 482) in which he stated: "What is
really making it more difficult to teach college level mathematics is
the rush to have calculus taught in high school, ..., and at the price
of not teaching basic algebra and geometry." Another excellent letter,
by Joan Reinthaler, was published in the December 1999 issue of the AMS
NOTICES, "Pressure To Study Calculus in High School." This is available
at:
I agree that teaching cookbook calculus, or cookbook
algebra, or cookbook geometry, is a bad idea. But
it was the educationists who took out the only good
high school mathematics courses, "Euclid" geometry
and proof-oriented "college algebra". Teaching how
makes it MUCH harder to learn why later.
http://www.ams.org/notices/199911/commentary.pdf
The letters follow the Commentary article.
Dom Rosa
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dom" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
19 Jan 2006 11:32:39 AM |
|
|
Herman Rubin wrote:
In article <1137613423.134187.254560@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
Dom <DRosa@teikyopost.edu> wrote:
[snip]
I agree that teaching cookbook calculus, or cookbook
algebra, or cookbook geometry, is a bad idea. But
it was the educationists who took out the only good
high school mathematics courses, "Euclid" geometry
and proof-oriented "college algebra". Teaching how
makes it MUCH harder to learn why later.
Before the ravages of todays educationists, Euclidean Geometry and the
traditional college preparatory mathematics curriculum had already been
adversely transformed by the new math strand of the School Mathematics
Study Group (SMSG). See my posts at:
http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=1461582&tstart=0
http://mathforum.org/kb/thread.jspa?forumID=206&threadID=483954
Dom Rosa
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gary Schnabl" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
19 Jan 2006 09:10:09 PM |
|
|
"Dom" <DRosa@teikyopost.edu> wrote in message
news:1137691959.898299.303460@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Herman Rubin wrote:
In article <1137613423.134187.254560@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
Dom <DRosa@teikyopost.edu> wrote:
[snip]
I agree that teaching cookbook calculus, or cookbook
algebra, or cookbook geometry, is a bad idea. But
it was the educationists who took out the only good
high school mathematics courses, "Euclid" geometry
and proof-oriented "college algebra". Teaching how
makes it MUCH harder to learn why later.
Before the ravages of todays educationists, Euclidean Geometry and the
traditional college preparatory mathematics curriculum had already been
adversely transformed by the new math strand of the School Mathematics
Study Group (SMSG). See my posts at:
http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=1461582&tstart=0
http://mathforum.org/kb/thread.jspa?forumID=206&threadID=483954
Dom Rosa
My freshman HS algebra "text" wasn't even a book, as the Jesuits (one or
more, I forgot) at Marquette University HS in Milwaukee in 1957 were still
writing their own manuscript. So we had some loosely bound pages for our
text. It covered mathematical concepts. Likewise for my axiomatic-based
plane-geometry course in HS. Every calc book I've seen at Marquette
Univrsity and the University of Wisconsin in Madison in the 1960s were all
axiomatic.
Virtually nowhere are these concepts in the texts for the usual survey
courses today in algebra, geometry, or calculus - HS, including AP or IB, or
college.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Gilmer" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
17 Jan 2006 06:01:11 AM |
|
|
Since middle schoolers don't enter the workforce, it matters
very little whether or not they take algebra or trig at
age 14 or age 16, now does it? If you test the *graduates*
of high school equivalents both countries, the gap narrows
back. That's how you also get the data that toto provided.
Gad!
At the minimum, the kid knowing algebra and trig two years sooner means he
has more analytic tools with which to attack his later work in school.
With even a tiny amount of calculus, high school physics is a snap.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "toto" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
14 Jan 2006 04:50:21 PM |
|
|
On 14 Jan 2006 14:26:47 -0800, "Dom" <DRosa@teikyopost.edu> wrote:
I enjoyed the program, but in many ways it was too superficial. I wish
they had shown some of our bloated junk books. It would have made great
video to stuff typical fifth-grade doorstops in a backpack, to weigh
the backpack on a scale, and to show viewers that this rubbish weighs
more than 25 pounds.
The U.S. public education system was, and in some cases still is, a
great success story. The fact that this program was done in a complete
historical vacuum was a major weakness.
While I have not seen the program, I am quite sure that the successes
of the schools were not mentioned at all.
I wonder if any of these stats made it into the broadcast:
http://www.nsba.org/site/sec_peac.asp?TRACKID=&CID=1244&DID=36523
Key Findings:
1. More Americans are completing high school and college.
From 1985-2002, the percentage of Americans 25 or older who completed
high school rose from 74 percent to 84 percent. During that time, the
percentage of adults with a bachelor’s degree increased from 19
percent to 27 percent.
The U.S. had the highest percentage of adults age 25-64 who had
completed an upper secondary education than any of the G8 countries
(including Japan, Canada and European competitors).
Sources: National Center for Education Statistics, Digest of Education
Statistics 2003, Table 8; Comparative Indicators of Education in the
United States and Other G8 Countries, NCES 2003.
2. High school students are taking a more challenging curriculum.
The percentage of high school graduates completing a core curriculum
(4 years of English, three years each of math, science and social
studies) quadrupled from 1982-2000, rising from 14 percent to 57
percent. Students of all racial / ethnic groups have made
improvements, with African-Americans making the greatest strides: from
11 percent in 1982 to 62 percent in 2000 (the highest percentage of
any group).
Source: National Center for Education Statistics, Digest of Education
Statistics 2002, Table 142.
3. More high school students are completing advanced math /
science courses.
The percentage of high school graduates completing advanced math
courses (courses more challenging than Algebra II or geometry) jumped
from 26 percent in 1982 to 45 percent in 2000. During that time, the
percentage completing advanced science courses (courses more
challenging than general biology) increased from 35 percent to 63
percent. Gains occurred for all racial / ethnic groups.
Source: National Center for Education Statistics, Digest of Education
Statistics 2004, Tables 21-1 and 21-2.
4. Student achievement is up in math.
Students ages 9 and 13 are achieving the highest math scores ever,
according to the long-term trends of the National Assessment of
Educational Progress (known as “the nation’s report card”). The 2004
average scores for those age groups are significantly higher than in
1973 when the test was first given. Students of all racial / ethnic
groups have made progress. The 2004 average score for 17-year-olds is
higher than in 1973, but the difference is not statistically
significant.
Source: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment
of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1973–2004 Long-term Trend Mathematics
Assessments.
5. Student achievement is up in reading, particularly for younger
students.
Students age 9 are achieving the highest reading scores ever,
according to the long-term trends of the National Assessment of
Educational Progress (known as “the nation’s report card”). The 2004
average score for 9-year-olds and 13-year-olds are significantly
higher than in 1971, when the test was first given. The 2004 average
score for 17-year-olds is equal to the 1971 average score.
Source: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment
of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1971-2004 Long-term Trend Reading
Assessments.
6. Some achievement gaps are narrowing.
The “achievement gap” between students of different racial / ethnic
groups is closing. On the National Assessment of Educational Progress
long-term trend assessments in math and reading, the gap between white
and minority students has narrowed to the smallest margins in three
decades.
Source: National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment
of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1971—2004 Long-term Trend Reading and
Mathematics Assessments; 9-year-old reading; 13-year-old reading;
9-year-old math; 13-year-old math.
7. U.S. students are tops in civics skills knowledge.
U.S. 14-year-olds posted the highest average score of any nation in an
international test of civic skills, which measured the interpretive
skills needed to comprehend civic-related information, such as a
newspaper article. American students topped students from all 27
participating nations, including Finland, Australia, Italy, England,
Hong Kong, Switzerland, Germany and Russia.
Source: “What Democracy Means to Ninth-Graders: U.S. Results From the
International IEA Civic Education Study,” 1999; National Center for
Education Statistics.
8. Students are safer at school than a decade ago.
Rates of school-related* crime and violence fell by half since 1992.
In addition, the rate of homicide for youths ages 5-19 is 70 times
higher away from school than in school.
*“School-related” means at school, or on the way to or from school.
Source: National Center for Education Statistics, The Condition of
Education 2005, Table 30-1; National Center for Education Statistics,
Indicators of School Crime and Safety, 2003.
9. Public school enrollments are increasing faster than private
school enrollments.
Public school enrollments jumped 21 percent from 1985-2001, compared
to a 12 percent increase in private school enrollments during that
time. Approximately 89 percent of all K-12 students attend public
school.
Source: National Center for Education Statistics, Digest of Education
Statistics 2003, Table 2.
10. More students are going to college and more young adults are
completing college.
The percentage of high school graduates going directly to college
increased from 55 percent in 1984 to 64 percent in 2003; and, the
percentage of young adults (ages 25-29) completing a bachelor’s degree
rose from 22 percent in 1985 to 29 percent in 2002.
Sources: National Center for Education Statistics, The Condition of
Education 2005, Table 20-1; National Center for Education Statistics,
Digest of Education Statistics 2003, Table 8.
The Center for Public Education
1680 Duke Street, Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone: (703) 838-6722 Fax: (703) 548-5613
E-mail:
©2006 National School Boards Association
--
Dorothy
There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..
The Outer Limits
.
|
|
|
| User: "Secret Squirrel" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
15 Jan 2006 06:45:49 PM |
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
toto <scarecrow@wicked.witch> wrote in
news:930js19qskon539a0g5k7epmrgpoiuullb@4ax.com:
On 14 Jan 2006 14:26:47 -0800, "Dom" <DRosa@teikyopost.edu>
wrote:
I enjoyed the program, but in many ways it was too
superficial. I wish they had shown some of our bloated junk
books. It would have made great video to stuff typical
fifth-grade doorstops in a backpack, to weigh the backpack
on a scale, and to show viewers that this rubbish weighs
more than 25 pounds.
The U.S. public education system was, and in some cases
still is, a great success story. The fact that this program
was done in a complete historical vacuum was a major
weakness.
While I have not seen the program, I am quite sure that the
successes of the schools were not mentioned at all.
I wonder if any of these stats made it into the broadcast:
http://www.nsba.org/site/sec_peac.asp?TRACKID=&CID=1244&DID=
36523
Dorothy, I snipped the fillers. Let's just summarize:
Key Findings:
1. More Americans are completing high school and
college.
2. High school students are taking a more challenging
curriculum.
3. More high school students are completing advanced
math / science courses.
4. Student achievement is up in math.
5. Student achievement is up in reading, particularly
for younger students.
6. Some achievement gaps are narrowing.
7. U.S. students are tops in civics skills knowledge.
8. Students are safer at school than a decade ago.
What angers me, and why this debate takes place in such a
vacuum, is that if you actually *talk* to middle and high
school students, and I do, you are impressed how much more
they know than we did at that age and how much better
educated they are.
I only conclude that the people who write this trash don't
have kids, or don't talk to them.
Secret Squirrel
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQEVAwUBQ8mQgT/rA6+b3AyhAQE25Af/fdKlk1Iy/5VQ2Ya1VWdSTZpAu8QFOgf3
MZAXUyivYKLCO0o/kx0Uiw1qTcz8eJv2JW1aYSlT1OkyMWQAx+HJOarNmQuuGiWA
FHyb2H0zuIz0OuPaL5wjIyIX6rzGu5xr3pd33Tien3ySyaWMMHKzmqR2XIlXFUaF
UtjQUG5qstHIBqivFbjDu70HXjhf26r0vVoYZjag6BEWhNMAcfmqYvNEX7g3ljtv
vV0SP3SuEV8MwLxMYFRA+oqSktT2r+YwsG8+hxZrjDrhbU17wYWPZ08onRRt7sWu
x/8ffVltf9m3vs9n2vjvB0CXtCSgdwk4CMfr3oyppNVnBtlS90OZug==
=EPCQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dom" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
18 Jan 2006 02:06:21 PM |
|
|
Secret Squirrel wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
toto <scarecrow@wicked.witch> wrote in
news:930js19qskon539a0g5k7epmrgpoiuullb@4ax.com:
On 14 Jan 2006 14:26:47 -0800, "Dom" <DRosa@teikyopost.edu>
wrote:
I enjoyed the program, but in many ways it was too
superficial. I wish they had shown some of our bloated junk
books. It would have made great video to stuff typical
fifth-grade doorstops in a backpack, to weigh the backpack
on a scale, and to show viewers that this rubbish weighs
more than 25 pounds.
The U.S. public education system was, and in some cases
still is, a great success story. The fact that this program
was done in a complete historical vacuum was a major
weakness.
While I have not seen the program, I am quite sure that the
successes of the schools were not mentioned at all.
I wonder if any of these stats made it into the broadcast:
http://www.nsba.org/site/sec_peac.asp?TRACKID=&CID=1244&DID=
36523
Dorothy, I snipped the fillers. Let's just summarize:
Key Findings:
1. More Americans are completing high school and
college.
2. High school students are taking a more challenging
curriculum.
3. More high school students are completing advanced
math / science courses.
4. Student achievement is up in math.
5. Student achievement is up in reading, particularly
for younger students.
6. Some achievement gaps are narrowing.
7. U.S. students are tops in civics skills knowledge.
8. Students are safer at school than a decade ago.
What angers me, and why this debate takes place in such a
vacuum, is that if you actually *talk* to middle and high
school students, and I do, you are impressed how much more
they know than we did at that age and how much better
educated they are.
I am glad that you have the above impressions. I wish mine were the
same.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Herman Rubin" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
18 Jan 2006 03:43:17 PM |
|
|
In article <1137614781.693605.101670@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
Dom <DRosa@teikyopost.edu> wrote:
Secret Squirrel wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
toto <scarecrow@wicked.witch> wrote in
news:930js19qskon539a0g5k7epmrgpoiuullb@4ax.com:
On 14 Jan 2006 14:26:47 -0800, "Dom" <DRosa@teikyopost.edu>
wrote:
I enjoyed the program, but in many ways it was too
superficial. I wish they had shown some of our bloated junk
books. It would have made great video to stuff typical
fifth-grade doorstops in a backpack, to weigh the backpack
on a scale, and to show viewers that this rubbish weighs
more than 25 pounds.
The U.S. public education system was, and in some cases
still is, a great success story. The fact that this program
was done in a complete historical vacuum was a major
weakness.
I consider it a total FAILURE. It turns out students
who have memorized a little, forgotten much of it, and
understand essentially nothing. It concentrates on
"self-esteem" and "interculturalism" and the like.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
18 Jan 2006 04:47:00 PM |
|
|
Herman Rubin wrote:
I consider it a total FAILURE. It turns out students
who have memorized a little, forgotten much of it, and
understand essentially nothing. It concentrates on
"self-esteem" and "interculturalism" and the like.
You don't have kids apparently. And I'm willing
to bet you're the 40-year-old virgin. If education
consisted entirely of memorizing supposed 'facts'
with no debate as to whether or not they're true,
it'd be religion.
Oh, here's Rubin's picture:
http://www.stat.purdue.edu/~hrubin/hrubin.jpg
And here's Ed Conrad's:
http://www.edconrad.com/images/krogwskull.jpg
Separated at birth?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
18 Jan 2006 05:25:25 PM |
|
|
In article <1137624419.971658.206820@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> writes:
{...}
And here's Ed Conrad's:
http://www.edconrad.com/images/krogwskull.jpg
Ah, if I were only 25 years younger...
(then I could make "man as old as coal" jokes)
-- cary
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Herman Rubin" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
19 Jan 2006 07:52:16 PM |
|
|
In article <1137624419.971658.206820@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
<man_in_black529@yahoo.com> wrote:
Herman Rubin wrote:
I consider it a total FAILURE. It turns out students
who have memorized a little, forgotten much of it, and
understand essentially nothing. It concentrates on
"self-esteem" and "interculturalism" and the like.
You don't have kids apparently. And I'm willing
to bet you're the 40-year-old virgin. If education
consisted entirely of memorizing supposed 'facts'
with no debate as to whether or not they're true,
it'd be religion.
My children have PhD's.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
16 Jan 2006 03:34:35 AM |
|
|
Secret Squirrel wrote:
What angers me, and why this debate takes place in such a
vacuum, is that if you actually *talk* to middle and high
school students, and I do, you are impressed how much more
they know than we did at that age and how much better
educated they are.
Basically, your typical high school curriculum emphasizes
original work and debate, where possible. So it won't appear
much in Spanish, but biology will involve a lot of collecting
samples, doing experiments, and reviewing articles. English
will focus on interpretation of the work. History isn't as
reductionist as "Lincoln freed the slaves." And so on.
Electives tend to be just as specialized as they've always
been, although now you have options like drafting, law,
and computer programming joining the classics like shop
and home ec.
Extracurriculars are pretty much what they've always been.
Institutions such as the basketball team and student
government have teachers present, while ones which
students form themselves are probably directed by the
teacher. A few will be outsourced to a local instructor.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Secret Squirrel" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
16 Jan 2006 10:39:18 AM |
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
man_in_black529@yahoo.com wrote in
news:1137404075.274426.96640@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Secret Squirrel wrote:
What angers me, and why this debate takes place in such a
vacuum, is that if you actually *talk* to middle and high
school students, and I do, you are impressed how much more
they know than we did at that age and how much better
educated they are.
Basically, your typical high school curriculum emphasizes
original work and debate, where possible. So it won't appear
much in Spanish, but biology will involve a lot of collecting
samples, doing experiments, and reviewing articles. English
will focus on interpretation of the work. History isn't as
reductionist as "Lincoln freed the slaves." And so on.
Electives tend to be just as specialized as they've always
been, although now you have options like drafting, law,
and computer programming joining the classics like shop
and home ec.
Extracurriculars are pretty much what they've always been.
Institutions such as the basketball team and student
government have teachers present, while ones which
students form themselves are probably directed by the
teacher. A few will be outsourced to a local instructor.
Socially, I also note now how much less prejudice there is--
both in interracial dating and against gays. In fact, like
you said, saying that you're "bi" is almost chic.
The only problem that I have with today's educational system
is that it seems to increasingly force students to make career
plans while still in high school, while at the same time
isolating them from the world of work. You make your career
plans while you have no practical experience in that field.
Isolation from the world of work, and from adults in particular,
also leads to a bizzare social world where kids get status
for winning at all the wrong games.
Secret Squirrel
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQEVAwUBQ8riAT/rA6+b3AyhAQGRpwf/VaIbMZbuWHToCQ+SI4mEFr8dKAERF1Fp
2dmSB9nclk7guH7j15Ow9FCZXJ+CQANzLAX8HE/jPwF8Lqp1ILLBqon9rwL2ok5m
96h238YiTyLQgtm0s7ODrCpzfrF3a21ESSnk0MHWQ6BS7vkpQDJ+71wL1opAQQp3
PTnydvmw952HpRNffNLr+nJD6xueJXhmNuCmk3nvtr3ioDJnuQHl7yMH0iQA7mM3
61sob0aCRGY1ENawN/3z8xSGh7eqB9Bj89UQq6esWQXgZrO+7yNiF2F8mno+UxRW
pLXp2rVISzyPFZdhruN2q70bYy1V9Ej8PRJKy5iKeLt5sorjXZZ8sA==
=iTHt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
.
|
|
|
| User: "Seveigny" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
20 Jan 2006 08:19:10 PM |
|
|
"Secret Squirrel" <ssquirrel@nottheremailer.net> wrote in message
news:C5OAP3VR38733.4439583333@anonymous.poster...
Socially, I also note now how much less prejudice there is--
both in interracial dating and against gays. In fact, like
you said, saying that you're "bi" is almost chic.
Yes, there is less prejudice against gays but that is damning with faint
praise. I'm one of the advisors to the Gay Straight Alliance club at my
high school and the level of homophobia is high. Last year, when students
engaged in the Day of Silence, they were spit on and kicked. Students
screamed profanities and used hateful speech. On a daily basis the phrase
"That's so gay" is used in place of "That's so stupid" or "That's so ugly".
Last week, in one of the math classes, a group of students amused themselves
by attaching a piece of paper to the backs of other students that said "I
support gay rights". When two students objected the response was "Oh, thats
because you're lesbians." I live in the Bay Area, a region known for its
tolerance. If you go to www.gsa.org you can read about case after case of
students being discriminated against because they are gay or lesbian. Those
who are even more marginalized--like transgender students, suffer even more.
The only folks that think being bi is "chic" are boys who are in fantasy
land.
~Cate
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Herman Rubin" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
16 Jan 2006 01:16:51 PM |
|
|
In article <C5OAP3VR38733.4439583333@anonymous.poster>,
Secret Squirrel <ssquirrel@nottheremailer.net> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
man_in_black529@yahoo.com wrote in
news:1137404075.274426.96640@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Secret Squirrel wrote:
....................
The only problem that I have with today's educational system
is that it seems to increasingly force students to make career
plans while still in high school, while at the same time
isolating them from the world of work. You make your career
plans while you have no practical experience in that field.
Even worse, the students are not given an understanding
of any subject. Most students now do not have a real
mathematics course until the third year of college, and
often these are dumbed down. But most elementary school
children are capable of understanding the concepts, which
have nothing to do with computations. Alas, the teachers
seem mostly unable to consider them.
The same is true for physics, biology, engineering. There
is no connection between engineering and operating engines.
Very little of biology is involved with collecting new
specimens and clasifying them; it is rather with using
mathematics and statistics to get biochemical results.
Isolation from the world of work, and from adults in particular,
also leads to a bizzare social world where kids get status
for winning at all the wrong games.
This aspect of "socialization" was introduced by the
educationists, who placed it above learning. Children
should not be with their age groups for academics, at
any age.
Secret Squirrel
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
.
|
|
|
| User: "Secret Squirrel" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
23 Jan 2006 01:03:39 PM |
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
hrubin@odds.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) wrote in
news:dqgrf3$bst8@odds.stat.purdue.edu:
In article <C5OAP3VR38733.4439583333@anonymous.poster>,
Secret Squirrel <ssquirrel@nottheremailer.net> wrote:
man_in_black529@yahoo.com wrote in
news:1137404075.274426.96640@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Secret Squirrel wrote:
....................
The only problem that I have with today's educational
system is that it seems to increasingly force students to
make career plans while still in high school, while at the
same time isolating them from the world of work. You make
your career plans while you have no practical experience in
that field.
Even worse, the students are not given an understanding
of any subject. Most students now do not have a real
mathematics course until the third year of college, and
often these are dumbed down.
Not in my experience. What are you considering a "real
math course"? Many if not most high school students who
plan to go to college take geometry, trig, algebra and
precalculus. What is it that you want them to take?
Keep in mind, not all these students will major in fields
requiring more advanced math courses. Why should a business
major be required to take multivariate calculus in high
school?
But most elementary school
children are capable of understanding the concepts, which
have nothing to do with computations. Alas, the teachers
seem mostly unable to consider them.
I think I'm hearing the lament of the mathematician about
the way that engineers get taught math. Let me tell you
that the engineers wouldn't want it taught any other way.
Just know how to manipulate the equations, baby.
The same is true for physics, biology, engineering. There
is no connection between engineering and operating engines.
Very little of biology is involved with collecting new
specimens and clasifying them; it is rather with using
mathematics and statistics to get biochemical results.
This complaint sounds odd, because Linnaeus is dead.
The preferred way to classify organism today is via
biochemistry; i.e., comparative DNA analysis.
Or maybe I'm not understanding your gripe?
Isolation from the world of work, and from adults in
particular, also leads to a bizzare social world where kids
get status for winning at all the wrong games.
This aspect of "socialization" was introduced by the
educationists, who placed it above learning. Children
should not be with their age groups for academics, at
any age.
How about *no* age groups or grades whatsoever?
The "academics vs socialization" debate is both trite and
wrong. The schools actually do a fairly decent job of
imparting facts to kids. They do a lousy job of socializing
them--if you mean by that, socializing them to be successful
in the "real world" of work.
What kids instead get rewarded for in high school from their
peer-only isolated social environments are doing silly things
like dressing like vampires (goths) or pulling off risky or
foolish stunts or joining ridiculous cliques. They are ill-
prepared for doing even the basic things that one has to do
as an adult to get by in life, and it's not their fault--
because they have been "protected" against going to work and
learning the real-world social behaviors and developing the
social connections that get you ahead at work and in life.
I've discussed this with other adult friends, and we concur.
It wasn't our academic learning that was deficient when we
left school, it was the socialization that we lacked. Moreover,
I see the same thing with new hires. They've got the "book
learning", but they don't know squat about the nuts and bolts
of the work experience.
Secret Squirrel
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQEVAwUBQ9QcgT/rA6+b3AyhAQHMwQf9EzfJE3U6rtkqnkM5JNfDh91tEP8ElwA3
784l/iuUvuyaFcK84k640jRgyvbkbM0A4VvAd5crAyh1BR2OPE+tzOyjaqDxYQFr
qiHcCgBkX/1ayYkVgfgqUPUrQ/Yyo4XHFRkiJmIqUSuOshynHUFg9CwGi+1wIvJl
9ZKnA+a7H0rfpzqrL696MfeD2VSg2u256VX2iWL7TKjLgFKwnjvYdgwQBmiEHsvS
13Z7irn6cg2riV83NAbZmAlAUvpfGPPfI3utUCCd3CSzlevCeUW4Qtjvq9AusPoi
bNA1nTychTv5cAqn2uYeU1DPhNq0EsLV/ez8ir/FfXHqe8gHEJ25kQ==
=TR6M
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
.
|
|
|
| User: "Herman Rubin" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
23 Jan 2006 04:02:53 PM |
|
|
In article <XKHF3FDN38740.5442013889@anonymous.poster>,
Secret Squirrel <ssquirrel@nottheremailer.net> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
hrubin@odds.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) wrote in
news:dqgrf3$bst8@odds.stat.purdue.edu:
In article <C5OAP3VR38733.4439583333@anonymous.poster>,
Secret Squirrel <ssquirrel@nottheremailer.net> wrote:
man_in_black529@yahoo.com wrote in
news:1137404075.274426.96640@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Secret Squirrel wrote:
....................
The only problem that I have with today's educational
system is that it seems to increasingly force students to
make career plans while still in high school, while at the
same time isolating them from the world of work. You make
your career plans while you have no practical experience in
that field.
Even worse, the students are not given an understanding
of any subject. Most students now do not have a real
mathematics course until the third year of college, and
often these are dumbed down.
Not in my experience. What are you considering a "real
math course"? Many if not most high school students who
plan to go to college take geometry, trig, algebra and
precalculus. What is it that you want them to take?
They need the mathematical concepts. Computational courses
seem to have the problems of getting people not only not to
realize the importance of concepts, but to later be unable
to consider them.
Keep in mind, not all these students will major in fields
requiring more advanced math courses. Why should a business
major be required to take multivariate calculus in high
school?
But most elementary school
children are capable of understanding the concepts, which
have nothing to do with computations. Alas, the teachers
seem mostly unable to consider them.
I think I'm hearing the lament of the mathematician about
the way that engineers get taught math. Let me tell you
that the engineers wouldn't want it taught any other way.
Just know how to manipulate the equations, baby.
And if the engineer formulates the plans for a new kind
of bridge by manipulating the equations, I have little
hope for the success of that bridge.
They need to know the concepts, so they can properly set
up the equations for the bridge. There is very little
chance that manipulating the equations will even be
worthwhile, unless done by someone who understands the
PROBLEMS in numerical analysis, and even then, they will
not be solved in "closed form", which is what manipulations
are supposed to get.
The same is true for physics, biology, engineering. There
is no connection between engineering and operating engines.
Very little of biology is involved with collecting new
specimens and clasifying them; it is rather with using
mathematics and statistics to get biochemical results.
This complaint sounds odd, because Linnaeus is dead.
The preferred way to classify organism today is via
biochemistry; i.e., comparative DNA analysis.
But the way biology is taught in elementary school is
not that. Why should children make a leaf collection
or a bug collection? Instead they should already know
the key concepts of algebra, which are linguistic but
of a type linguists refuse to recognize, and be able to
formulate problems of considerable complexity.
One could proceed from this to understanding much in
mathematics in elementary school, and place computation
where it belongs, as useful but not basic. Also, the
time to learn the computation to a point where is could
be done on paper or calculator would be GREATLY reduced.
Or maybe I'm not understanding your gripe?
You are partly understanding it.
Isolation from the world of work, and from adults in
particular, also leads to a bizzare social world where kids
get status for winning at all the wrong games.
This aspect of "socialization" was introduced by the
educationists, who placed it above learning. Children
should not be with their age groups for academics, at
any age.
How about *no* age groups or grades whatsoever?
This would be a great idea.
The "academics vs socialization" debate is both trite and
wrong. The schools actually do a fairly decent job of
imparting facts to kids. They do a lousy job of socializing
them--if you mean by that, socializing them to be successful
in the "real world" of work.
They do a fair-to-poor job of imparting facts, because
they do it so inefficiently. Understanding concepts and
structure greatly reduces the time needed to learn and
relate facts, but is harder to test. This is harder to
test, and certainly not by tests requiring no understanding
to grade.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
.
|
|
|
| User: "lariadna" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
24 Jan 2006 10:34:35 AM |
|
|
Herman Rubin wrote:
But the way biology is taught in elementary school is
not that. Why should children make a leaf collection
or a bug collection?
In my experience, that was only done in kindergarten.
Early grades emphasized very easy experiments,
and maybe by the 7th grade one got to do more
solid experiments. I remember always wishing
to learn more background information about the
experiment, which was not given in the early
grades, but was done more so in the later grades.
It didn't seem that mathematics was necessary
for all of that, though it was used more and
more by middle school/junior high.
Considering how many facts one is expected
to be familiar with (not necessarily memorize)
in college (see a typical biology or chemistry
textbook), it would seem worthwhile to learn
more of that in elementary school.
Instead they should already know
the key concepts of algebra, which are linguistic but
of a type linguists refuse to recognize, and be able to
formulate problems of considerable complexity.
Maybe, but has this been tested out? It
could be that many students don't have the
abstract capability needed at that age. And
maybe some students lack the linguistic
capability at that age as well.
I think you are only talking about a small
percentage of highly exceptional students,
who if they are prepared should indeed be
given the opportunity to learn those concepts.
C.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chess One" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
30 Jan 2006 04:24:04 PM |
|
|
"lariadna" <lariadc@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1138120475.426170.83500@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Instead they should already know
the key concepts of algebra, which are linguistic but
of a type linguists refuse to recognize, and be able to
formulate problems of considerable complexity.
Maybe, but has this been tested out? It
could be that many students don't have the
abstract capability needed at that age. And
maybe some students lack the linguistic
capability at that age as well.
I think you are only talking about a small
percentage of highly exceptional students,
who if they are prepared should indeed be
given the opportunity to learn those concepts.
C.
C. [hi!]
I agree with your correspondent. Its left-brain linear processing that is in
question; the same function for numeracy as for literacy - and so the
discussion is when students are ready to engage its development /with
others/.
It is difficult to make an argument with the way the question is formulated,
since 'lack of capability' does not mean 'lack of potential capability.'
I think it is further complicated by what seems to be hard-wired as a means
of expression and also of reception to ideas. Some people have an innate
susceptibility to process linear and logical matters - which is not exactly
to say that these are strengths, but mannerism, so to speak.
Ever take a VAK test [Video, Audio, Kinesthetic] to assess your own
preferred means of taking in and sharing information?
Cordially, Phil
PS: Microsoft does not recognise the word 'numeracy' with its on-line
spell-checker, although, ridiculously, it does recognise innumeracy :(
.
|
|
|
| User: "lariadna" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
31 Jan 2006 09:38:46 PM |
|
|
Chess One wrote:
C. [hi!]
I agree with your correspondent. Its left-brain linear processing
that is in
question; the same function for numeracy as for literacy - and
so the
discussion is when students are ready to engage its
development /with
others
Hi, Chess One.
I think this talk is all at a high level
and I'm not sure how it's supposed to
work in practice.
In any case, is how the brain works known
in so much detail? For example, even if
literacy, numeracy, and logic are done
in the left part of the brain, perhaps they
are done in different parts of the left brain.
I think I've also heard that complex use of
language requires both the left and right brain.
I don't know much about all that, but one
hears all the time that so-and-so has high
verbal ability and low math ability, and
vice versa. (Illiterate and innumerate sound
a bit harsh, I agree.)
Something like 1+1=2 is similar to
'The river is blue', but the former seems
to also be a combining of the numbers,
while the latter is a description of a
quality of a noun. It seems like the
concept of 'equality' should be obvious
to all people, yet algebra is definitely
not obvious to all people, so I can't help
thinking that there is more to it.
Ever take a VAK test [Video, Audio, Kinesthetic] to assess
your own
preferred means of taking in and sharing information?
No, I haven't, but it does seem that it would vary
on the subject studied. I think that I would
like visual input for learning history, audio
input for learning a foreign language, and kinesthetic
activities for doing science, for example.
C.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chess One" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
01 Feb 2006 07:05:02 AM |
|
|
"lariadna" <lariadc@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1138765126.091204.108290@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Chess One wrote:
C. [hi!]
I agree with your correspondent. Its left-brain linear processing
that is in
question; the same function for numeracy as for literacy - and
so the
discussion is when students are ready to engage its
development /with
others
Hi, Chess One.
I think this talk is all at a high level
and I'm not sure how it's supposed to
work in practice.
In any case, is how the brain works known
in so much detail? For example, even if
literacy, numeracy, and logic are done
in the left part of the brain, perhaps they
are done in different parts of the left brain.
Left-brain is associated with linear processing. Right-brain is associated
with content; be it a specific genius or Pandora's box of devilish
phantasms!
[lol] that's a bit portentious!
In terms of brain use - a neuroscientist has written a good book on what can
be measured as activity, 'The Right Mind' by Robt. Ornstein [it googles].
More broadly, the 'hemispheric' studies of Howard Gardner identified 9
'Intelligences' of the right brain. These ideas are now adopted by the
mainstream, in schools, etc.
I think I've also heard that complex use of
language requires both the left and right brain.
I don't know much about all that, but one
hears all the time that so-and-so has high
verbal ability and low math ability, and
vice versa. (Illiterate and innumerate sound
a bit harsh, I agree.)
Yes. Its a complex issue. Without sufficient left brain exercise and
development, all the wonders of the right-brain cannot be expressed. One
right-brain 'Intelligence' is a particualr felicity with 'aural' subjects,
such as word-use.
Something like 1+1=2 is similar to
'The river is blue', but the former seems
to also be a combining of the numbers,
while the latter is a description of a
quality of a noun. It seems like the
concept of 'equality' should be obvious
to all people, yet algebra is definitely
not obvious to all people, so I can't help
thinking that there is more to it.
yes - it is more complex - an interesting field to study - and one not
requiring any 'belief' in order to do so. i would recommend treating
especially Gardner's books as an experiment - esp. if you are in teaching
professions
Ever take a VAK test [Video, Audio, Kinesthetic] to assess
your own
preferred means of taking in and sharing information?
No, I haven't, but it does seem that it would vary
on the subject studied.
ah! but that's the thing of it! it doesn't. it seems to measure 'hard-wired'
responses we have, as a generality and these things do not vary particularly
according to subject or overall context
I think that I would
like visual input for learning history, audio
input for learning a foreign language, and kinesthetic
activities for doing science, for example.
interesting! one aspect of VAK is that it measures your habit, or
predeliction, rather than necessary strength - after you take a test [maybe
there still are simple on-line ones, takes 10 mins] it would be interesting
to talk more, since there is a heightened awareness of other people's VAk -
and suddenly you notice that your friend of 10 years uses nothing but visual
metaphors - do you see? :)
cordially, phil
C.
.
|
|
|
| User: "toto" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
01 Feb 2006 01:38:51 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 01 Feb 2006 13:05:02 GMT, "Chess One" <innes8@verizon.net>
wrote:
In terms of brain use - a neuroscientist has written a good book on what can
be measured as activity, 'The Right Mind' by Robt. Ornstein [it googles].
More broadly, the 'hemispheric' studies of Howard Gardner identified 9
'Intelligences' of the right brain. These ideas are now adopted by the
mainstream, in schools, etc.
While they have been adopted by the schools, the science behind this
is not well-validated.
--
Dorothy
There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..
The Outer Limits
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chess One" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
01 Feb 2006 02:58:59 PM |
|
|
"toto" <scarecrow@wicked.witch> wrote in message
news:gh32u1piajsgmffhrvq5dkc2ea33i1tl5l@4ax.com...
On Wed, 01 Feb 2006 13:05:02 GMT, "Chess One" <innes8@verizon.net>
wrote:
In terms of brain use - a neuroscientist has written a good book on what
can
be measured as activity, 'The Right Mind' by Robt. Ornstein [it googles].
More broadly, the 'hemispheric' studies of Howard Gardner identified 9
'Intelligences' of the right brain. These ideas are now adopted by the
mainstream, in schools, etc.
While they have been adopted by the schools, the science behind this
is not well-validated.
The neural scence has not - quite right! Ornstein spends half his book
regretting certain policy making activities by behavioral scientists which
have departed very far from the original science base, so far as to make it
unrecognisable.
On the other hand, psychologists are not bound by neural science in order to
report their activities, and there are even brain 'cargo-cultists' whose
'science' is peculiar indeed.
This particular issue, that of multiple intelligences, is a more
conservative issue and does not rest on measured brain activity, but on
perceived behaviors - I think there may be summary reports on it from
Harvard's Project Zero.
Cordially, Phil
--
Dorothy
There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..
The Outer Limits
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "lariadna" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
31 Jan 2006 10:04:20 PM |
|
|
lariadna wrote:
Something like 1+1=2 is similar to
'The river is blue', but the former seems
to also be a combining of the numbers,
while the latter is a description of a
quality of a noun.
Or maybe it's supposed to be
something like 'The sun is a
star', but that is more like a
classification, and we still don't
have the combining quality. I think
just doing the algebra is easier!
C.
.
|
|
|
| User: "lariadna" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
01 Feb 2006 12:01:38 AM |
|
|
lariadna wrote:
lariadna wrote:
Something like 1+1=2 is similar to
'The river is blue', but the former seems
to also be a combining of the numbers,
while the latter is a description of a
quality of a noun.
Or maybe it's supposed to be
something like 'The sun is a
star', but that is more like a
classification, and we still don't
have the combining quality. I think
just doing the algebra is easier!
C.
The closest thing to equality in
language might just be the word
and its dictionary definition.
C.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chess One" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
01 Feb 2006 07:15:26 AM |
|
|
"lariadna" <lariadc@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1138771398.999889.198280@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
lariadna wrote:
lariadna wrote:
Something like 1+1=2 is similar to
'The river is blue', but the former seems
to also be a combining of the numbers,
while the latter is a description of a
quality of a noun.
Or maybe it's supposed to be
something like 'The sun is a
star', but that is more like a
classification, and we still don't
have the combining quality. I think
just doing the algebra is easier!
C.
The closest thing to equality in
language might just be the word
and its dictionary definition.
this 'intelligence' thing is really quite far-ranging. for example, a
student can have no ability to memorise the 12x table, BUT can sit down at
the piano and play a Mozart piece for 5 minutes from memory
and the [possibly apocryphal] reference to Einstein not being able to tie
his show-laces is indicative of high numeracy but the kinesthetic
development of a komplete klutz ;(
what is strange is schools - at least historically, is the insistence of a
uniform minimum achievement across several categories, somewhat to the
neglect of discovering if you have a Mozart, Barishnikov or an Einstein
before you
it is also psychologically of some moment to identify the specific
'intelligence' of the student, since a good deal of self-esteem is at stake.
so these students are not 'stupid'! curriculum does nothing other than stuff
into them, rather than drawing out the intelligence already in there!
Phil
C.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Herman Rubin" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC Special Report:"Stupid in America" |
25 Jan 2006 12:54:20 PM |
|
|
In article <1138120475.426170.83500@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
lariadna <lariadc@yahoo.com> wrote:
Herman Rubin wrote:
But the way biology is taught in elementary school is
not that. Why should children make a leaf collection
or a bug collection?
In my experience, that was only done in kindergarten.
Early grades emphasized very easy experiments,
and maybe by the 7th grade one got to do more
solid experiments. I remember always wishing
to learn more background information about the
experiment, which was not given in the early
grades, but was done more so in the later grades.
It didn't seem that mathematics was necessary
for all of that, though it was used more and
more by middle school/junior high.
To analyze any experiment requires mathematics.
Considering how many facts one is expected
to be familiar with (not necessarily memorize)
in college (see a typical biology or chemistry
textbook), it would seem worthwhile to learn
more of that in elementary school.
A great deal of this can be reduced or eliminated by
teaching the structure instead of memorizing. This
includes mathematics as well. A poster to a mailing list
stated that all the numerous formulas in a biochemistry
course could be reduced to four principles plus what came
before.
Another advantage of this is that the relationships
will also be recognized, if not explicitly taught.
Instead they should already know
the key concepts of algebra, which are linguistic but
of a type linguists refuse to recognize, and be able to
formulate problems of considerable complexity.
Maybe, but has this been tested out? It
could be that many students don't have the
abstract capability needed at that age. And
maybe some students lack the linguistic
capability at that age as well.
The abstract capability needed is quite simple, and the
more abstract it is done, the simpler! The key aspects of
"variables" are that they can be used for anything, and
cannot change their meanings within a given context. The
usual parts of speech are completely inadequate.
The game of WFF 'N PROOF uses this. For this stage, only
the WFF part is used; the use of variables is to make
precise statements, which are also short enough to be
understood.
Filling in blanks is not quite right, and only allows one
variable. This is a kind of language which has very little
vocabulary and a few simple grammar rules, and is thus very
much simpler than ordinary language. Children handle grammar
better than vocabulary at an early age, three or so at the
latest, and some have made it less than one.
I think you are only talking about a small
percentage of highly exceptional students,
who if they are prepared should indeed be
given the opportunity to learn those concepts.
A major problem is that FEW of the present teachers seem
capable of learning concepts. This is probably due to
them "knowing" too much which is false. Attempts to
teach teachers and teacher candidates the ideas have
failed miserably, even when taught by those who could
teach them to children. It is not just the highly
exceptional who need them, but eve | | | | | | | | | |
