| Thursday,
December 14, 2006 We have a
several letters on education.
Subject: Guerrilla
Intellectuals and Randall Parker's idea
The professional certification tracts show some
encouragement for this plan. Some programs have little value as the testing
was not well thought out (many who passed the MCSE simply studied "brain
dumps" of the exam questions and answers), but others provide value to those
who hold them.
Moving education in the direction proposed would allow
the market to establish the value of the different programs. I can see
programs taught by actual experts in a field as being much more valuable
than professional teachers with no real world experience. Lots of self study
augmented by good tutors and seminars.
-- --- Al Lipscomb
==
Subject: Education
Jerry,
Some comments regarding the discussion this week on
matters related to education:
- Despite all the technology that is now available,
much of Unversity education is done the way it has been for 500 years:
Learned men standing at the front of classrooms, lecturing, giving reading
assignments, handing out problems, going through the solutions, grading
exams and papers. Maybe, in a few cases, powerpoint slides have replaced
chalk boards. But the basic mode of delivery is the same. So is it this way
because this works best, or is it this way because no one has made a
determined effort to "reengineer" education?
- Even as the cost of higher education has spiraled
upward, the basic mode of delivering content seems not to have changed that
much (see above). Beyond that, I have been told that a growing percentage of
lower level university courses at big name schools are being taught by low
paid adjunct professors, often the same adjuncts that are also teaching down
the street at the local community college. That being the case, one has to
wonder what has happened with all that tuition money.
- Further to Phil's point about certification for
critical professions, I'd point out that a common career path for many high
skill professionals involves (1) getting a degree, which indicates having
"mastered" a common body of theory, and (2) a period as an apprentice
professional, sometimes followed by (3) a final certification exam.
In the case of medical professionals, completing the
course work in medical school does not make you a doctor. Before you can
practice, you have to do a low paid residency (i.e. work as an apprentice
doctor). Advanced specialties require futher time as an apprentice. No one
learns brain surgery from a textbook and lectures.
For those who want to become a professional engineer,
the path is a 4-year degree, and passing the EIT exam, followed by 4 years
of relevant experience before you are allowed to sit for the PE exam.
One might argue that, in the sciences, getting a PhD
is somewhat like a stint as a low paid research apprentice.
As far as law goes, I believe there are still a few
states which allow you to go the apprentice route before sitting for the bar
exam, and do not make a law degree an absolute requirement to be a lawyer. I
also note that there recently has been some discussion of the real need for
a third year of law school - the preception is that that final year, which
is just as expensive as the previous two, is mostly a time for partying and
networking.
Learning by doing, under the guidance of someone
skilled in the art is still a pretty good way of learning. But given the
technical sophistication of some fields, I don't find it outrageous to
suggest a benefit to taking some college courses as a prelude to being an
apprentice. What that degree should cost, and whether or not there are more
cost effective ways to acquire the really necessary prerequisites is worth
discussing.
CP, Connecticut
============
I'm at work checking personal email when I should be
working so thanks for pulling me off-task. However, I thought it was
important to toss out a science teacher's perspective on this issue.
I have felt that the NSTA has been more and more of a
"business enterprise" in years of late as opposed to an organization that
helps to improve science education in our nations schools. My opinion has
been validated by the continued "familiar faces" at various NSTA conventions
over the years. Additionally, I'm shocked at how the NSTA continues to rob
science teachers with the overpriced admission to conferences and events all
in the name of improving science education. The reality is that those
science teachers who attend NSTA events, at least from my district, have
often had to find ways to scrape up funding for travel, lodging, and
admission to these kinds of events because they can be so expensive. In my
opinion, NSTA has become a "trade organization" with the goal of being a
conduit for corporate growth in science education. The vast majority of
seminars I attend at NSTA conferences are done by corporations pushing their
products as way to improve science education as opposed to tried and true
methods that can deal with our mission.
It doesn't surprise me that NSTA has denied
distribution of "An Inconvenient Truth" to be honest. It might be
interesting for readers of this email to know that NSTA had no problem
distributing a series called "A Search for Solutions" which highlights
science, how science works, and the connection between science, technology
and engineering. This came out a few years ago and was produced in large
part by funds from Conoco-Phillips. Their name is all over the thing. This
was mentioned on the web page from Borowski.
From an a science teacher's perspective, our careers
aren't drifting on the winds of enlightenment, education, and connection for
all our students. It's a world where politics and commercialism reign
supreme. The challenge is to see through the egocentric needs of many who
are in "power" and do what we really need to do in the classroom: Expose our
students to the wonderful world of science and how it can lead to an
enlightened state of existence for those who choose to take it.
More in days to come. For now I have lessons to
prepare.
All the best -
Richard
==
Dear Jerry,
>>Higher pay will get
you, I am willing to say, better teachers. However, more insane red tape
will also drive those away.<<
This is a fundamental economic insight. Call it "The
Serving Officer's Law". Its existence is proven by examining the legal
profession.
>>Predictability is not optional when you
are teaching behaviors. Infraction A should always yield punishment B,
swiftly and unerringly. It is against the law to treat students in that
manner.<<
It's against the law to operate the legal system this
way, too. Ignoring Serving Officer's Law long enough leads to many more
Serving Officers' laws, all enforced by firepower operating identically to
the former random result selection system.
Best Wishes,
Mark
And see below
========
Joanne Dow for December 13
begins
"The poet Ali Ahmad Sa'id (b. 1930), known by his
pseudonym "Adonis," a 2005 candidate for the Nobel Prize for Literature,
left his native Syria for Lebanon in the 1950s following six months'
imprisonment for political activity. In 1973, he received his Ph.D. from St.
Joseph University in Beirut; in 1985, he settled in Paris, where he now
works as a writer and literary critic. Among other occupations, he has
edited the modernist magazine Mawaqif (Viewpoints), and translated some of
the great French poets into Arabic." He is also another Moderate who is
coming forward and stating that the Mohammedan world has fatal flaws.
One of his more telling comments comes near the beginning of the interviews,
"In our case, political rule was based... Ever since the struggle over who
would inherit Prophet Muhammad's place, political rule was essentially based
on religion."
link
http://memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD139306
The rest of her letter, and her previous diatribes,
can be found
here.
==========
Subject: Decreasing CO2 levels
It seems like CO2 emissions trading would drive
technology to take carbon out of the atmosphere. Maybe the best approach
would be a prize for research that would lead to long-term development of
CO2-decreasing technology, and emissions trading to support stuff we could
do today.
One of the big problems here is the nature of
political coalitions. The coalitions that can easily be built to support
decreasing CO2 emissions include people who oppose nuclear power and want to
see tight restrictions on industry and forced conservation for ideological
reasons. That coalition can raise the issue of global warming, but it
probably can't propose any workable solutions without tearing itself to
pieces.
--John Kelsey
Indeed. If the goal is to decrease the level
of CO2 one might think it would be a good idea to address that directly. The
idea periodically surfaces, but the envirocrats ruthlessly beat it down, and
Big Science does nothing except apply for more grants. You hunt ducks where
the ducks are. You hunt grants where the grant money is. IT's not science,
but it's a living.
Yet, there is a lot of CO2 out there, and
it might be worth while looking at how to get rid of a
good bit of it.
=========
Subject: Educating, Teaching and Learning
Jerry,
As a mom homeschooling a 12-year old, budding
ornithologist, and a mom of a community college freshman, I thought I'd
weigh in on the recent education discussions.
First, a story.
On Monday, a group of homeschoolers went skating at
the local county park. My ornithologist hobbled in on skates to announce
that a hawk was flying around in the rafters. Moms, a dad with a camera, and
lots of kids went into the rink to observe the bird and make some educated
guesses as to what kind of hawk it might be.
The mini-ornithologist and three others said: Cooper's
hawk. I was holding out for a juvenile Red Tail.
While we all eventually left the rink, we went home to
field guides; a couple of us emailed experts in the area, and we ultimately
concluded Cooper's hawk was the correct answer. And, we made sure we
notified those with power about the situation so the hawk would be safe and
have food and water.
One mom observed: This is what homeschooling is about;
it starts with PE and ends up with a science lesson.
I have to say that as a "professional" teacher with
degrees and certification, homeschooling has been some of the best teaching
and learning I have ever experienced. My world is filled with parents who
eschew the public system that demands all children pass the same test, in
the same year, on the same material, at a certain minimum level.
I have met a 14-year old taking a Spanish class at a
local community college. I know of another homeschooling group that has just
finished refitting a golf cart into a solar-powered vehicle. My child and I
spent the fall volunteering with a bird bander who has 50 years of
experience.
Indeed, this kind of learning and teaching is not for
everyone. However, what a joy to have the world as my classroom. How
exciting to be able to take my student into other disciplines using a door
from the Avian world. (Did you know Martha Washington had parrots at Mount
Vernon?!)
Then there is my college freshman. She is barely
passing Bio 101. Why? She works hard in Lab and does well. It's the lecture
and the inevitable tests that have strangled her. From all her descriptions,
the Bio prof is on automatic pilot. He provides exactly what he wants the
students to know and tests on that body of knowledge.
Now don't get me wrong, every discipline has core
material that students need to learn. However, droning on with PowerPoints
isn't going to cut it in today's world. There also seems to be a disconnect
between Lecture and Lab. And, when our freshman comes home from Bio Lecture
with information from class, we often discover it's about five years out of
date.
Memorize and spit is one form of education that works
well for a certain part of the population. I, however, agree with CP from
Connecticut. Mentoring and hands-on experience produces the best kind of
worker and workfoce. Allowing people to follow their abilities is a gift.
Our plumber the other day was one of the happiest guys
I have met in a long time. He is in his mid-20s and LOVES his job. "I get to
play with tools everyday," he told us. "I meet new people. I like what I
do."
Yahoo!
Unfortunately, he'll meet a lot of people who won't
have one ounce of respect for his position or his work because he doesn't
have a DEGREE. And, there are lots of kids in school now days who would love
a shop class; who have limitations in one area, but excel in areas that go
unsupported by the system.
And then there is this: How many people WITH DEGREES
are running around this country unable to read, write or work?
Best wishes,
Sue
There's a lot of that going around. We
neglect "drill and kill" in primary school, where rote learning of the
Addition and Multiplication Tables is vital, and where some drills in phonic
decoding is required for about half (perhaps more) of the population
including some bright kids; then in the colleges we often put the kids in
the hands of either graduate students who don't want to teach but have to do
it in order to get on with their graduate research, or professors who
retired on salary a long time ago.
If you have not read Jacques Barzun's
TEACHER IN AMERICA, I urge you to do so; and if you have, read it again. It
may help.
==
For those who don't know, Sue is a bit
more than just a Mom who homeschools, but then most of this readership is a
bit overqualified for being "just a" anything. If nothing else, this forum
allows some exchanges of ideas and encouragement.
It is exceedingly unlikely that the United
States will remain a First World Country for two more generations. Our
schools are not producing people who know how to maintain a First World
economy, our work ethics are not inducive to that, and our teachers unions
are in active opposition to any reform that might produce quality education
among the people.
Our only hope is that the wealthy -- and
some teachers -- know this and send their own children to private schools or
teach them at home. This will help stave off the Long Night, and perhaps,
just perhaps, our grandchildren, in reaction to the horrors we have made,
will do something meaningful.
Liberalism is a philosophy of consolation
for Western Civilization as it commits suicide. Liberalism tells us we are
doing the right things in our schools, although we aren't doing enough of
it. More of the poison is their remedy. Liberalism is a philosophy of
consolation for Western Civilization as it commits suicide. I know many of
you are weary of my saying this, but it must be said often enough that it
gets through. Liberalism is not the answer, and more liberalism and
diversity will not save us. We know how to build and maintain a First World
-- i.e. Western -- civilization. We are actively destroying it, not
rebuilding it; and our intellectual leaders, liberals and Jacobins, cheer as
we do it.
Hang in there, Sue. You did not light the
torch and you will not see the bonfire; this generation is destined to be
the torchbearers for a future without our madnesses.
TOP
CURRENT
VIEW Thursday |
