Curriculum Debate

[12th Doctor]

NASA needs a major overhaul - it first off needs a serious mission with enough pressure to ensure it gets done, and second it needs utilize the private sector wherever possible. Make space profitable, and advancement will come quickly.

I wouldn't trust them with a serious mission.  If we sent a mission to Mars, they would probabably forget to install the tiolets or the oxygen tanks or something.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

We can't increase every subject, unless you cut into Summer break.

I happen to think that the most important change we could make to improve public eductaion would be to do just that and go from the 180 day school year to a 200 day school year.  The original purpose of the long summer break, to let kids help out on the farm during the busy summer growing season, is long gone for almost all kids and four less weeks of inactivity would mean that less time would need to be spent getting kids back up to speed on skills that atrophied because of lack of use during the summer.

[Akno21]

NASA needs a major overhaul - it first off needs a serious mission with enough pressure to ensure it gets done, and second it needs utilize the private sector wherever possible. Make space profitable, and advancement will come quickly.

I actually agree. I don't see what we would lose by privatizing a lot of NASA. The most useful thing they do is satellites which help with finding weather and predicting natural disasters. What has Hubble done for us? True, we may know an obscure star lightyears away, but so what?

[ilikeverin]

NASA needs a major overhaul - it first off needs a serious mission with enough pressure to ensure it gets done, and second it needs utilize the private sector wherever possible. Make space profitable, and advancement will come quickly.

I actually agree. I don't see what we would lose by privatizing a lot of NASA. The most useful thing they do is satellites which help with finding weather and predicting natural disasters. What has Hubble done for us? True, we may know an obscure star lightyears away, but so what?

You seem to lack an insatiable curiosity

[Akno21]

We can't increase every subject, unless you cut into Summer break.

I happen to think that the most important change we could make to improve public eductaion would be to do just that and go from the 180 day school year to a 200 day school year.  The original purpose of the long summer break, to let kids help out on the farm during the busy summer growing season, is long gone for almost all kids and four less weeks of inactivity would mean that less time would need to be spent getting kids back up to speed on skills that atrophied because of lack of use during the summer.

I see your point, but do you realize how much that would cost? We have to buy more teacher hours, find stuff for kids to do for an extra twenty days, and the camp organizations would be ticked about losing millions of dollars and would offer resistance.

[Akno21]

NASA needs a major overhaul - it first off needs a serious mission with enough pressure to ensure it gets done, and second it needs utilize the private sector wherever possible. Make space profitable, and advancement will come quickly.

I actually agree. I don't see what we would lose by privatizing a lot of NASA. The most useful thing they do is satellites which help with finding weather and predicting natural disasters. What has Hubble done for us? True, we may know an obscure star lightyears away, but so what?

You seem to lack an insatiable curiosity

I'd rather spend the money on improving the pay of our troops, getting them the armor they need, and helping those in poverty.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I happen to think that the most important change we could make to improve public eductaion would be to do just that and go from the 180 day school year to a 200 day school year.

I see your point, but do you realize how much that would cost? We have to buy more teacher hours, find stuff for kids to do for an extra twenty days, and the camp organizations would be ticked about losing millions of dollars and would offer resistance.

Personnel costs would increase by about 20% I figure, as since it would cut into the ability of teachers to do the required continuing education during the summer, they would need to take some quarters off.  Building costs would be about the same, as there would be no need to build new facilities, as schools lie largely unused during the summer months.  Other groups that depend upon the long summer break would also be unhappy.  The Myrtle Beach area merchants are already unhappy that as a result of when the year-end exit exams are given, most schools in the state start up in early August so they can get in as many teaching days as possible in before the test day.  They definitely don't like school starting before Labor Day.  However, it has definitely been shown that going to a 200-day school year would help children to learn better, and isn't that what is really important?

[Akno21]

I happen to think that the most important change we could make to improve public eductaion would be to do just that and go from the 180 day school year to a 200 day school year.

I see your point, but do you realize how much that would cost? We have to buy more teacher hours, find stuff for kids to do for an extra twenty days, and the camp organizations would be ticked about losing millions of dollars and would offer resistance.

Personnel costs would increase by about 20% I figure, as since it would cut into the ability of teachers to do the required continuing education during the summer, they would need to take some quarters off.  Building costs would be about the same, as there would be no need to build new facilities, as schools lie largely unused during the summer months.  Other groups that depend upon the long summer break would also be unhappy.  The Myrtle Beach area merchants are already unhappy that as a result of when the year-end exit exams are given, most schools in the state start up in early August so they can get in as many teaching days as possible in before the test day.  They definitely don't like school starting before Labor Day.  However, it has definitely been shown that going to a 200-day school year would help children to learn better, and isn't that what is really important?

I agree with you, except we would have to generate more income somehow, and the suggestions I have (repeal Bush tax cuts for those making over $350,000 per year) might not appeal to everyone.
If we pay the teachers well, they wouldn't complain.

[Alcon]

I do not know, but I would vote for anyone who gets me out of a class with people who can't seem to understand that 3.0 is the same number as 3 even after 15 minutes of explanation.

(@%&)(&

[Gabu]

I do not know, but I would vote for anyone who gets me out of a class with people who can't seem to understand that 3.0 is the same number as 3 even after 15 minutes of explanation.

(@%&)(&

But 3.0 has a dot and a zero after it!

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I do not know, but I would vote for anyone who gets me out of a class with people who can't seem to understand that 3.0 is the same number as 3 even after 15 minutes of explanation.

(@%&)(&

But 3.0 has a dot and a zero after it!

And in some applications 3 and 3.0 are not the same thing as 3.0 indicates a greater degree of precision.

[John Dibble]

I do not know, but I would vote for anyone who gets me out of a class with people who can't seem to understand that 3.0 is the same number as 3 even after 15 minutes of explanation.

(@%&)(&

But 3.0 has a dot and a zero after it!

And in some applications 3 and 3.0 are not the same thing as 3.0 indicates a greater degree of precision.

In computer programming 3 is an integer or a short and 3.0 is a float or a double.

[Gabu]

I do not know, but I would vote for anyone who gets me out of a class with people who can't seem to understand that 3.0 is the same number as 3 even after 15 minutes of explanation.

(@%&)(&

But 3.0 has a dot and a zero after it!

And in some applications 3 and 3.0 are not the same thing as 3.0 indicates a greater degree of precision.

True, but they are the same number, although not the same representation of that number.

[muon2]

Here are the skills necessary to survive in our society:

Reading
Writing
Arithmetic

That's all that's required. Anything else schools teach children is for two purposes:

1. Keep them busy until the job market is ready for them,
2. Show future prospective employers that they can put up with bullsh**t.

I was all set to praise you for the nice link on math literacy, but now I'm confused by this post. Either it's sarcastic or you didn't read your link.

Now let me speak about math and HS curriculum.

Mathemtaics is used all the time around us. Those who lack certain basic skills will be at the mercy of others who misinterpret information for them. Just review this forum's many posts about the guts of polls and how so many were misinterpreted and used to present a slanted view of reality.

The HS curriculum tends to be driven by those parents (not the state) who are trying to get the best advantage for their children. This ususally means offering as many "college-level" subjects in HS as one can. The idea is that by completing these courses those students will have an advantage in getting into the top universities and performing well. This overlooks the fact that for the majority of the students they are not going to spend enough time on the foundations, and better students can easily pick up university material at the university.

The link Avelaval cited puts it well, we don't really need calculus and precalculus classes in HS for their content. We do need to add classes in probability, statistics, and mathematical logic. These subjects are the backbone of our information age, and they get too little treatment - largely because they are not prerequisites for core university courses.

Ideally, I would envision a core mathematics curriculum that broadly goes like this:

K-5: Counting and arithmetic facts
6-8: Problem solving, sets and logic, algebra, and arithmetic applications in algebra
9-12: Geometry, probability & statistics, and advanced problem solving featuring algebra and logic applications

HS elective options: financial math, trigonometry

I wouldn't include a calculus course, but I would include the basic notions of slopes and areas of curves in geometry. I'd even define them as the derivative and integral, but avoid going into the mathematical details found in a calculus course.

[muon2]

I tend to think Science is more useful than Math, but of course schools are tested on Math, so that's the most often taught subject.

We can't increase every subject, unless you cut into Summer break.

You'll find that virtually every science uses large amounts of math. Biology, chemistry, and especially physics, all use math. Virtually all engineering is math.

Yeah, what he said.

I'm taking two courses in physics next semester.  Guess what they use extensively?  The math I learned this semester.

The interesting thing about physics is that much of it is really conceptual and does not require the math with which it is taught. The math is a tool and to get more precise predictions with the physics concepts one needs more powerful mathematical tools. However, a lot can be approached with a simpler set of math tools, even though the physics stays conceptually strong.

For example, consider the questions "You are moving northward when you accelerate briefly to the east. In which direction is your subsequent motion?", or "A car rounds a banked turn at a speed lower than the design speed. In which direction does the force of friction act on the tires?" These questions don't take much math to solve, but they get to the core of understanding motion. They are also questions that HS graduates enrolled in university physics will get wrong more often than right.

Over the last dozen years a number of schools have adopted the Physics First model.  This system reverses the traditional order and teaches physics then chemistry then biology in HS. The system is based on a great deal of work and the recognition that the concepts of physics are vital for mastering modern chemistry, which is then needed to understand modern biology. We don't live in 1900 whcih was when the current structure was largely established.

[ilikeverin]

WHAT?!?

NO CALCULUS?!?

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

(finally, I'll learn something that seems remotely useful )

[Inverted Things]

The problem, Muon, it that if it's not immediately useful or interesting, kids forget it. I'd like to see higher math standards, but ultimately it just means that the kids will forget more.

Five years ago I took humanities during my senior high school year. I have since forgotten everything about it except for the section when we read 1984/Brave New World. I remembered that since it interested me.

Three years ago I took a sophomore literature course. The class was tested in depth on the poetry and stort stories we read. I got an A in the class and now remember nothing.

Two years ago I took a religions of the world course. We were tested extensively on buddhaism, hinduism and islam. I got a B in the course, but I remember nothing.

Four years ago I took an understanding music class wherein I was taught the history of music from ancient times to modern composers. Got an A in the course, remember nothing.

Now these are general requirements, they weren't electives I chose to take. This begs the question: Why did I have to waste all that time in class?

The answer, of course, is twofold:
1. The job market wasn't ready for me yet,
2. I had to put up with more bullsh**t so that when the job market was ready for me, the employers would know that I could put up with said bullsh**t.

Here is my proposed curriculum, and before I tell you what it is I want you to know that I'm 100% serious about this:

The kid can choose his/her own curriculum. Let's say the kid takes an interest in video games. Let the kid spend a few days in a software delelovment office. Let the kid learn how it's done. Never force anyone to learn. It doesn't work. The information winds up forgotten. Children are most efficient learning machines, and we let 8 years (ages 5-13) of their life go to waste.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

What you propose, Avelaval, is hardy unique or new.  It's a concept called open schools that was at one time hailed as the next great advance in education.  Like most such great advances, while it works well for some, it doesn't for others.  As an alternative to traditional education for a child that has a well-developed interest in a particular field of endeavor for which appropriate teachers can be provided, it works well.  But if the child doesn't have a well-developed primary interest, it doesn't work very well.  If the school doesn't have a teacher or teachers with the necessary skills to develop that interest, it doesn't work at all.  It's a great concept for schools, either public or private, that accept only those students that have interests that the faculty can nuture.  For an attendence-area based public school where every kid must be accepted, it just doesn't work.

[muon2]

The problem, Muon, it that if it's not immediately useful or interesting, kids forget it. I'd like to see higher math standards, but ultimately it just means that the kids will forget more.

Five years ago I took humanities during my senior high school year. I have since forgotten everything about it except for the section when we read 1984/Brave New World. I remembered that since it interested me.

Three years ago I took a sophomore literature course. The class was tested in depth on the poetry and stort stories we read. I got an A in the class and now remember nothing.

Two years ago I took a religions of the world course. We were tested extensively on buddhaism, hinduism and islam. I got a B in the course, but I remember nothing.

Four years ago I took an understanding music class wherein I was taught the history of music from ancient times to modern composers. Got an A in the course, remember nothing.

Now these are general requirements, they weren't electives I chose to take. This begs the question: Why did I have to waste all that time in class?

One of the key elements was in my post:

Ideally, I would envision a core mathematics curriculum that broadly goes like this:

K-5: Counting and arithmetic facts
6-8: Problem solving, sets and logic, algebra, and arithmetic applications in algebra
9-12: Geometry, probability & statistics, and advanced problem solving featuring algebra and logic applications

More structured information has a lasting impact when reinforced through applications. The impact came from repeated practice to hone the critical thinking skills, not from learning specific trivia. The trivia was the tool on which to practice skills.

The answer, of course, is twofold:
1. The job market wasn't ready for me yet,
2. I had to put up with more bullsh**t so that when the job market was ready for me, the employers would know that I could put up with said bullsh**t.

Here is my proposed curriculum, and before I tell you what it is I want you to know that I'm 100% serious about this:

The kid can choose his/her own curriculum. Let's say the kid takes an interest in video games. Let the kid spend a few days in a software delelovment office. Let the kid learn how it's done. Never force anyone to learn. It doesn't work. The information winds up forgotten. Children are most efficient learning machines, and we let 8 years (ages 5-13) of their life go to waste.

What you propose, Avelaval, is hardy unique or new.  It's a concept called open schools that was at one time hailed as the next great advance in education.  Like most such great advances, while it works well for some, it doesn't for others.  As an alternative to traditional education for a child that has a well-developed interest in a particular field of endeavor for which appropriate teachers can be provided, it works well.  But if the child doesn't have a well-developed primary interest, it doesn't work very well.  If the school doesn't have a teacher or teachers with the necessary skills to develop that interest, it doesn't work at all.  It's a great concept for schools, either public or private, that accept only those students that have interests that the faculty can nuture.  For an attendence-area based public school where every kid must be accepted, it just doesn't work.

I spent some of my elementary years in open-school format. One time it was the standard within the attendance area, the other time was as a magnet school in another district. It seemed great at the time to a student, but in both cases my family moved to another district. The transistions were a complete mess.

It took me twenty years or more to see all the impact of various parts of my schooling. I've been able to compare my experiences to many of my students now over many years. Students coming from a more open curriculum, unless they are unusually self-motivated, generally have a hard time applying skills beyond the narrow context they found them in originally. Structure with varied experiences in childhood that reinforce key concepts provide the best background for adult learning.