Education will not be dominated by foreigners, but science will.
The reason, for example, that there are not more women and minorities in science is not because recruiting fails on the graduate level, but that they fall behind while still in elementary school. If you stop teaching kids science and math and figure those who are good at it will pick it up later, it simply isn't going to happen. However, the need for scientists and engineers will not disappear, so they will hired and brought over from somewhere else.
You will not change the world by deliberating not educating children, but instead fail them by not preparing to compete in the world that is. Why do you want to set up them to fail?
Education is not an all or nothing proposition, and specialization doesn't have to happen until much later. It is possible to both build widgets and understand why you are building them. In fact, it is beholden on us as human beings to understand all aspects of the world we live in, not just the aspects we approve of.
If the only way to get attention for your subject is to eliminate all other possibilities, then you're teaching it badly.
posted
You do realize that what you are asking for is a religion and theology-based education. It doesn't involve God, but it is all about morality and virtue and goodness, as you define it. The reason they need to read is so they can read about virtue. The reason to study is to learn how to treat another.
Convince me that this belongs in the hands of strangers instead of parents. Take into account that not everyone has the same religion as you - how do you justify force-feeding YOUR values at the expense of skills that parents generally are not equipped to teach?
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm pretty sure we already teach one set of values in school. It's the narrative or the ground on which we build step one, step two, and our elaborate technical education. The problem is that some people never buy into that ground/narrative, and never go on to step one, step two, or any of the rest. The reason people don't buy into the narrative/ground is largely because it's inadequate, and it's inadequate because the nation, except for brief periods like the civil rights movement possibly after 9/11, is slow to look carefully at how appropriate this ground is. And there is the root of the achievment gap.
quote:The reason, for example, that there are not more women and minorities in science is not because recruiting fails on the graduate level, but that they fall behind while still in elementary school.
The reason that there aren't more women and minorities in the sciences is a difference in priorities, and I'm not sure that's a bad thing.
quote:You do realize that what you are asking for is a religion and theology-based education. It doesn't involve God, but it is all about morality and virtue and goodness, as you define it. The reason they need to read is so they can read about virtue. The reason to study is to learn how to treat another.
I'm beginning to see that all education, at the ground, is religion/theologically based. Whether it involves God or morality or goodness, I don't believe that public education has to be incompatible with most reasonable organized religions. But aside from the evolution debate, there is a tacet white protestant ground on which everything else springs. And to extent that people are willing to adopt white protestant sympathies, it works. The result is that you have big diverse country whose habits and institutions only ring true to large segment, and everyone else is encourage to assimilate or be degraded. This works for immigrants, but for people whose American narrative doesn't show white protestant priorities in the kindest light, it poses a distinct problem.
posted
There is more than one reason for any series of events, and the parcity of women and minorities in science and math has a multitude of reasons. I can't believe you want to justify and encourage shutting down options for people. That's what eliminating math a science means - fewer options.
You also did not address the rest of my post. The need for engineers and scientists and doctors will not dissapear, but Americans would be unprepared and unable to fulfill it if they follow what you plan.
We have a responsibility to educate an entire person - not the just the poet/dreamer part of them.
You are advocating a return to the curriculum and content of education in the Middle Ages. You expect to be taken seriously with that?
posted
We are exploding with doctors. We have more would be doctors than we have medical schools. I'm not even sure that the number of engineers and scientists will go down. It's not as if the information is going away. And I'm willing to bet that the level of general scholarship will increase, owing to a cultural shift.
quote:We have a responsibility to educate an entire person - not the just the poet/dreamer part of them.
That's nice, but every new discovery is a new area for potential technique. We've decided that not every person needs to know how to fix a car. We should know how they generally work, but for the most part, it's tolerable that I don't know how to fix a car. There is an extent to which I don't need to know how medicine works. General principles are nice, but it's tolerable that I don't know how exactly the endocrine system works and what hormones go where. It's a way of thinking about the world that isn't too terribly penetrating.
quote:You are advocating a return to the curriculum and content of education in the Middle Ages. You expect to be taken seriously with that?
I'm advocating a curriculum where people are encouraged to think concerning deeply important matters, and one that's not over-burdened with specialized technique.
I think that the public ills, theft, abuse, drug use, even bankruptcy, fraud, and all manners of crimes of omission will abate with a more rigorous education in the humanities, and to the extent that scientific education serves the humanities, it's fine, but that we've gone too far and have lost our way.
quote:I'm advocating a curriculum where people are encouraged to think concerning deeply important matters, and one that's not over-burdened with specialized technique.
I think that the public ills, theft, abuse, drug use, even bankrupcy, fraud, and all manners of crimes of omission will abate with a more rigorous education in the humanities, and to the extent that scientific education serves the humanities, it's fine, but that we've gone too far and have lost our way.
So you're basically advocating a near-abandonment of teaching sciences in school-something that, unlike your method, has proven results-because you think that your method will be the cure for mankind's ills, from rudeness to financial ruin?
Good grief, it's appropriate tha Sherlock Holmes was mentioned here. You routinely talk like him, but you lack even fictional achievement to back up your boasts!
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:We have more would be doctors than we have medical schools. I'm not even sure that the number of engineers and scientists will go down. It's not as if the information is going away. And I'm willing to bet that the level of general scholarship will increase, owing to a cultural shift.
If you stop teaching science, there will no longer be enough doctors. There are too few scientists and engineers right now to replace the ones that are retiring.
The information is not going away, but self-study is a terribly ineffective way to learn math and engineering. The idea that people will embrace entire subjects that demand dedication and distinct patterns of thinking is so ludicrous I have to wonder if you even thought about it. If that's the case, why do we have a shortage of home-grown scientists now? Graduate schools beg for PhD students, especially from populations that have been badly served and prepared.
If you want to advocate studying on your own, philosophy and history are much more likely to be sought after for self-study than math and science. There's a reason the History channel exists, but the Calculus channel does not.
Do you even believe the nonsense you are saying?
----
I love a liberal, well-rounded education. If you want to achieve a more literate population, why don't you advocate for more reading to children and less TV time? Not only would that be a proven good, you don't have to plunge American education into the dark ages to do it.
quote:We are exploding with doctors. We have more would be doctors than we have medical schools.
My understanding is that we don't have enough doctors. New doctors realize that malpractice is going to follow them around for twenty years, even if they aren't working in the medical field. That's scaring off a lot folks.
I'm sure CT or someone else can speak more intelligently on the subject of the dearth of doctors. . .
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
I wasn't speaking clearly. The supply of medical school applicants outstrips, in a major way, number of positions available in medical schools.
The appearance of a dearth comes from the distribution of doctors, and inequalities with respect to specializations, not the national supply. Specific states and communities are in want because doctors don't want to live there, and specific specialties are in want because the physicians we train, opt for more lucrative specialities, which is their right, but we are overflowing with twenty-three year old medical school applicants.
posted
Quit ignoring the inconvenient parts of my posts. There are still too few scientists and engineers, and there is no evidence whatsoever that people will "pick up" calculus on their own.
And no matter how many there are now, if you stop teaching math and science, that pool of qualified applicants will evaporate.
quote:Quit ignoring the inconvenient parts of my posts. There are still too few scientists and engineers, and there is no evidence whatsoever that people will "pick up" calculus on their own.
Feeling entitled today, are you. "too few scientists and engineers" is a loaded statement. I know that there is a lot of hay being made about it, but I'm still not sure it's true, as to the "no evidence whatsoever..." My buddy Greg hadn't taken a math class since his junior year in high school and decided his senior year in college that he wanted to study math, then picked up a math degree in style. That's a little bit of evidence.
Scott, the malpractice fear is a narrative inflated for partisan reasons. It does show how much information is disseminated through narrative.
quote:The information is not going away, but self-study is a terribly ineffective way to learn math and engineering.
So we teach this information to kids because it's easy, not because it belongs. I kind of feel that way about the SAT, that we test kids on this information because it's easy to test, not because it belongs. The problem starts when we forget that that's what we are doing.
posted
I didn't say it was easy, I said it was less important and should be treated as such.
I'm also of the opinion that for every person who is math phobic, there are people who are scared to open their mouth, open a book, or write a sentence, out of fear of being unfashionable or incorrect. I also think the latter class of people experience a greater indignity.
And I don't think that it's merely a technical problem, not knowing grammar or spelling, I think it's deeper than that.
posted
I'm sorry to say, Irami, that you've gone from ignoring logic and scientific proof, to tinfoil hats, to sitting in a corner babbling to yourself.
I just find it deliciously ironic that you're telling us that math, science, and engineering are not important while typing at a computer. (Edit: Or, I'm sorry, less important, something that all depends on your personal values/opinions.)
English majors did not build your computer, my friend.
posted
And so the quality of my computer has become more important than the adequacy of my thought and words. I'm questioning our priorities in education, Ryuko, and there is something wrong with what I'm getting back.
They aren't my values. I'd like to think that in the scope of mankind, humanities trump engineering. But maybe I'm talking about a bygone era when a PhD signified more than a piece of technical writing on big project.
posted
Irami, who do you think will make the computers? They will not appear on their own, and the need for them will not dissapear.
For the broader picture, who will build and create society so that we may comment on it and understand humanity by its aid? You say they aren't your values or what is important to you, but you are very willing to take advantage of them. Who will build them? Non-Americans, because you took away their ability. So, since you want to use it but don't want to be one of "those" people who do, you would create an immoral but necessary class of people to do the dirty work so the "good" people can sit in the ivory towers without "dirtying" their hands.
Junior year of high school is trigonometry and possibly pre-calculus. You want to take away even that preparation.
Tin foil hats are right. Are you even listening to yourself?
posted
We've got so many builders, they are building crap just for the sake of building. (To tie it back to the thread, building for the sake of building is like eating for the sake of eating.) We make builders(eaters) first and thinkers second. I'd like the trend to reverse, and it's a difference in priorities, and I think it's a morally relevant difference.
posted
You have forgotten one of the basic truths of sustaining a Western Civilization, Irami-or else you simply aren't mentioning it.
Maintenance of this civilization of ours requires vast surpluses of things. Food, material, machines, infrastructure, builders. You simply cannot have the things you want without millions of people skilled in the things you claim are less worthy.
So I guess they're just the peons for your own enlightenment, then.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not saying that we should forsake the humanities, if you notice, I love the humanities. I'm saying that the key to a worthwhile education and a well-informed work force is balance. You can't say, my God! There are not enough people who can write! We have to throw out math and science to make room for the humanities. The same is true of the opposite. You have to make sure that people have the opportunity to learn both. It's their choice whether they learn it well or not.
Posts: 4816 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
It reminds me of the arguments for sustaining brothels in Victorian England. Sex was too dirty for the "good" women to do for any reason other than making children, but there was, um, demand for more than that, so the brothels were tolerated as necessary but spat upon as immoral. They were needed and condemned by one idiotic standard.
Irami still has not explained how learning math eliminates the ability to read.
posted
Jeez, Irami! What are you trying to say? Builders first is not just something the government says we should have, it's in mazlo's heirarchy! You have to have a stable environment with shelter and food before you can consider any of the higher up stuff, that's just a given!
And besides that, thinking well or being creative does not necessarily predispose one to being able to express oneself in writing. There are some people that I love and who are very creative but who can't spell. At all.
Posts: 4816 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
To be fair, I think it's clear that he wants to spend the math/science time on something else. It's clearly some sort of humanities program, but of what sort I can't quite tell.
My big worry with it is the assumption that people can go ahead and pick up the math and science later. I'm doubtful this is true for the average person.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ryuko, in the name of tying the theme back to the beginning of this thread.
A higher percentage of scientists and engineers and technicians may have been necessary at the beginning of civilization, but now, it's a little bit gross. One can say the same thing about the American diet. Eating everything on your plate was a virtue in those times of want, but now, with all of the super-sizing going on, there is a little bit of gluttony involved.
We've moved beyond the level of mere survival and have gone headlong to the part of living well, a stage that comes with new burdens and benefits. The problem is that we've maintained our old sensibilities. Some people have, anyway. Others have given up on the enterprise of living well, all together, rather than embrace an inadequate standard.
posted
Irami you seem not to care were any thread leads as long as you can spout your own educational bittereness. I don't think this thread is going to go anywhere with this kind of logic. Maybe, Irami, you should start your own new thread and see if you can attract like minded thinkers.There you can debate the lack of an educations need for math or any other speciality that disagrees with your sensitivities.
Posts: 63 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Aunty Eem, why don't you start a thread about Abby as a kid, complete with embarassing photos/stories? Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:You know, all this should really go on the Tricknology Thread.
This thread used to concern when it's appropriate to make pudgy people feel better about their pudginess.
But this is fine. My educational bitterness extends to OSC's bid to circumvent good health. As to moving to attract like-minded thinkers, that smacks too much of the white-flight approach to public discourse. If there is a problem that occurs here, it may as well be settled here.
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Aunty Em, threads here at Hatrack drift, and at the moment Irami's topic is what this thread is about. Most attempts to transplant a conversation to a new thread end up killing the conversation, unfortunately. Probably better to just contine discussing this here.
quote:A higher percentage of scientists and engineers and technicians may have been necessary at the beginning of civilization, but now, it's a little bit gross. One can say the same thing about the American diet. Eating everything on your plate was a virtue in those times of want, but now, with all of the super-sizing going on, there is a little bit of gluttony involved.
That's an interesting thought. Not one that I agree with, but an interesting one nonetheless. At what point do you feel that our society attained a level at which continuing to produce engineers and scientists in any significant number was unnecessary Irami?
This leads me to wonder what you envision as an ideal. If your thoughts on education were instituted, and they functioned as you predict, what would the resulting nation look like? I have ideas of what I think you're hoping to achieve through this, but I don't want to just go with what I assume you're thinking.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thank you Noemon,I get it--just surprised by Irami animosity.I was told it was a little more open on this site. I stand corrected Posts: 63 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, and as a follow up question, what specifically do you think the consequences would be of having far fewer engineers being produced in this country? I'm not talking about what you think the benefits of your educational theories would be here--I'm just asking about what you think the effect on the nation would be if we produced only a tiny percentage of the engineers and scientists that we currently do.
And kat, Banna, and others who are arguing against Irami's ideas, what do *you* think that the consequence of having far fewer engineers and scientists produced would be? This seems clearer to me than Irami's thoughts on the matter, probably because I largely agree with you, but nevertheless it's not a bad idea to state it explicitly, just to get it out there.
posted
Oh,I just saw the "ryuko baby thread" suggestion. Where as I have much I could share I never would without permission,and, she knows this. Posts: 63 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:And kat, Banna, and others who are arguing against Irami's ideas, what do *you* think that the consequence of having far fewer engineers and scientists produced would be?
People would have to be hired from countries that have people who have those skills, and companies would quickly move operations to those places since it is cheaper to be local than hire and ship. Since Irami has also expressed scorn for those who conduct business, we'd turn into a nation of self-important philosophers who can't understand why, if they are supposed to be so much smarter and better than everyone else, it is so hard to live.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Auntie Em, it's actually a *very* open site. Most of us here are pretty opinionated on at least one subject or another (and usually most of them), but the ideal is that we get as passionate as we like in stating our opinions while making it a point to listen respectfully to each other even if it sounds to us as though that other person's voice is emenating from the general vicinity of their butt. It's an ideal, and we often fall short of it, but we shoot for it nonetheless.
[Edit--you'd think I'd know how to spell by now, but it would seem that you'd be wrong.]
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Kiss]](graemlins/kiss.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Wave]](graemlins/wave.gif)
![[Evil Laugh]](graemlins/evillaugh.gif)
![[Grumble]](graemlins/grumble.gif)
![[Hat]](graemlins/hat.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
I'm having a nice, serious debate and then my mom all comes and makes kissy-faces at me. Next she licks her thumb and washes my face with it. 
