|
Inspired by another thread...
4 Classes that every child should be taught, in my humble opinion
1) A comparative religious class, that covers the major mainstream religions in a respectful manner.
2) a Basic economics class including how to balance a check book, pay your bills on time and to save for big ticket items. Including why credit is a bad idea.
3) A home economics class including how to shop for healthy foods, how to budget so you have enough money for food. Why it is better to prepare for your own food. How to properly cook basic items such as an omelet or a descent hamburger. Even better how to prepare a tasty salad. Why vegetables and fruits are your friends and not every meal needs meat in it.
4) Basic self defense course. I think I would replace most standard PE classes which are all but useless anyway. There are ways to make this a team sport as well. But that would require schools to pay for paint ball guns and armor which honestly I think would be a good idea. Included would be basic gun safety classes. With mock ups not with real weapons.
Ideas? complaints? Other classes or variant classes you would like to see?
Including why credit is a bad idea.
I would reword that as either:
Including why abusing credit is a bad idea.or
Including why not properly balancing credit is a bad idea.
Credit by itself is not a bad idea, but like with most things, it should be used in moderation.
|
|
Including why credit is a bad idea.I would reword that as either:
Including why abusing credit is a bad idea.
or
Including why not properly balancing credit is a bad idea.Credit by itself is not a bad idea, but like with most things, it should be used in moderation.
Fair enough.
Everything in Moderation, including at times moderation itself.
3)...and not every meal needs meat in it.
...
complaints?
Blasphemy.
|
|
4 Classes that every child should be taught, in my humble opinion
All very, very sound choices.
5) Basic first aid and resuscitation
6) Estimation - learn how to form a reasonable guess of whether numbers are too high or too low
7) Critical thinking and debate - how to argue a point and how to find gaps in an argument
Basic engine maintenance....
|
Inspired by another thread...
4 Classes that every child should be taught, in my humble opinion
1) A comparative religious class, that covers the major mainstream religions in a respectful manner.
2) a Basic economics class including how to balance a check book, pay your bills on time and to save for big ticket items. Including why credit is a bad idea.
3) A home economics class including how to shop for healthy foods, how to budget so you have enough money for food. Why it is better to prepare for your own food. How to properly cook basic items such as an omelet or a descent hamburger. Even better how to prepare a tasty salad. Why vegetables and fruits are your friends and not every meal needs meat in it.
4) Basic self defense course. I think I would replace most standard PE classes which are all but useless anyway. There are ways to make this a team sport as well. But that would require schools to pay for paint ball guns and armor which honestly I think would be a good idea. Included would be basic gun safety classes. With mock ups not with real weapons.
Ideas? complaints? Other classes or variant classes you would like to see?
1) Had that - in my Catholic high school no less.
2) Dad taught me that.3) That's what wives are for. Just kidding. Actually mom and grandmother taught me that.
4) That's what my brothers were for.
|
|
Inspired by another thread...
4 Classes that every child should be taught, in my humble opinion
1) A comparative religious class, that covers the major mainstream religions in a respectful manner.
2) a Basic economics class including how to balance a check book, pay your bills on time and to save for big ticket items. Including why credit is a bad idea.
3) A home economics class including how to shop for healthy foods, how to budget so you have enough money for food. Why it is better to prepare for your own food. How to properly cook basic items such as an omelet or a descent hamburger. Even better how to prepare a tasty salad. Why vegetables and fruits are your friends and not every meal needs meat in it.
4) Basic self defense course. I think I would replace most standard PE classes which are all but useless anyway. There are ways to make this a team sport as well. But that would require schools to pay for paint ball guns and armor which honestly I think would be a good idea. Included would be basic gun safety classes. With mock ups not with real weapons.
Ideas? complaints? Other classes or variant classes you would like to see?
1) Had that - in my Catholic high school no less.
2) Dad taught me that.
3) That's what wives are for. Just kidding. Actually mom and grandmother taught me that.
4) That's what my brothers were for.
I was an only child, never went to Catholic School. In High school I had actually lost my faith. Mom was never a great cook or teacher, but she did show me kindness and thinking of others before myself.
Basic engine maintenance....I think this should be a required part of Drivers education. It should include how to change you own oil and tires. Along with others basics of car use and maintenance.
I taught my daughter that before I taught her how to drive a standard. I've know folks in their thirties who can't even find the dip stick. That just blows my mind.
|
|
4 Classes that every child should be taught, in my humble opinion
All very, very sound choices.
5) Basic first aid and resuscitation
6) Estimation - learn how to form a reasonable guess of whether numbers are too high or too low
7) Critical thinking and debate - how to argue a point and how to find gaps in an argument
9) Logic (This can combine with Grammar and Rhetoric to form... THE TRIVIUM!!!!)
10) Philosophy
All good choices.
I am thinking Logic should be taught in Middle school. I wonder about Philosophy however since some of the concepts can be harder to "get" maybe a class required for Seniors.
Estimation I think should be included with Mathematics courses. But not as "new math" Hard Math should still be taught.
Basic first aid, wow why did I not think of this one. Maybe a health course that includes a refresher course every year of first aid. Reinforce it yearly.
|
|
I taught my daughter that before I taught her how to drive a standard. I've know folks in their thirties who can't even find the dip stick. That just blows my mind.Basic engine maintenance....I think this should be a required part of Drivers education. It should include how to change you own oil and tires. Along with others basics of car use and maintenance.
You and I both. I think I will start this with my kids before the summer is out. Thank you for the idea.
Basic engine maintenance....Dude, I was a mechanic in the Army and I don't know if I'd do much more than change the oil or a water pump in these new cars. All that computerized crap makes shade tree mechanic work iffy at best.
Maybe I should just get an '89 Bronco and do all my own work...
+1 How many chips does a car need for crying out loud! You can't do much more than change plugs and fluids without a laptop and the right software.
|
|
You and I both. I think I will start this with my kids before the summer is out. Thank you for the idea.I taught my daughter that before I taught her how to drive a standard. I've know folks in their thirties who can't even find the dip stick. That just blows my mind.Basic engine maintenance....I think this should be a required part of Drivers education. It should include how to change you own oil and tires. Along with others basics of car use and maintenance.
+2, I'll certainly teach any kid of mine the basics.
|
|
1. Possibly. 2 and 3 should the responsibility of the parents but many parents cannot perform these tasks themselves, let alone instruct their kids in them. 4. Again, the responsibility of the parents. Also, I would believe in the existence of flumphs before I would believe that gun training would ever take place in a school.
I know, but one can hope right?
Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games
|
Based on visits to many a fast food restaurant/retailer: Basic addition/subtraction WITHOUT using a calculator.
I can't tell you how many times the cashier has rung up my order before I gave her/him my full payment (for example: If the bill is $15.16, I usually pay $20.16 so I can get $5 back). In other words, the cashier rings up the bill before I fish out the change I need, indicating the wrong amount was collected (usually $20 instead of $20.16) and starts making change based on what the register says. Then, when I give them the extra change so I can get a full bill back, they give me a blank stare or say something to the effect "I can't do that. I've already entered your payment, so I have to give you what the register says." When I try to explain to them that if I give them the change, they only have to give me paper money back, they don't understand and either I accept what they give me, or they get a manager to make change.
Ugh. It pains me to see a basic skill like making change become something that cannot be done without calculator/register/computer assistance.
Based on visits to many a fast food restaurant/retailer: Basic addition/subtraction WITHOUT using a calculator.
I can't tell you how many times the cashier has rung up my order before I gave her/him my full payment (for example: If the bill is $15.16, I usually pay $20.16 so I can get $5 back). In other words, the cashier rings up the bill before I fish out the change I need, indicating the wrong amount was collected (usually $20 instead of $20.16) and starts making change based on what the register says. Then, when I give them the extra change so I can get a full bill back, they give me a blank stare or say something to the effect "I can't do that. I've already entered your payment, so I have to give you what the register says." When I try to explain to them that if I give them the change, they only have to give me paper money back, they don't understand and either I accept what they give me, or they get a manager to make change.
Ugh. It pains me to see a basic skill like making change become something that cannot be done without calculator/register/computer assistance.
I must firmly disagree here, based on my experiences in high school, college, and my best man being a high school math teacher.
I don't know how to put this into words, unfortunately, but at least in my experience, the way teachers/the school board/the MAN/evil liberals/even more evil conservatives/my homeboy Xenu go about introducing calculators in school makes no sense. Maybe it's just my experience, but being harangued, written up, suspended or what have you when a teacher find you cheating on a test using a calculator when just three rows over the "math accelerated" kids are using them on the same test seems hypocritcal. I got into this with my math teacher friend and he tried to explain the practice, even as he condemned the fact that these kids were in the same class with the rest of us math-morons: apparently, they don't NEED the calculator, but they were using it anyway because their test was slightly different in some way. Or something like that. Either way, I find most policies regarding calculators in school to be backward, possibly because they're written by people who have no problem with math or love it wholeheartedly and dont' see how their zeal makes life harder for those who either don't love it or don't get it.
|
1) A comparative religious class, that covers the major mainstream religions in a respectful manner.
Not only would this never fly nowadays, it begs the question of who would make the determination of what qualifies as "major mainstream." Considering that if you break down all of the protestant sects into individual "religions" there would be hundreds, it doesn't seem feasible. Would it just be religions with an abrahamic god? (if that is the case then theological satanism would qualify as well) etc. etc.
+1 on the others.
|
Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games
|
Based on visits to many a fast food restaurant/retailer: Basic addition/subtraction WITHOUT using a calculator.
I can't tell you how many times the cashier has rung up my order before I gave her/him my full payment (for example: If the bill is $15.16, I usually pay $20.16 so I can get $5 back). In other words, the cashier rings up the bill before I fish out the change I need, indicating the wrong amount was collected (usually $20 instead of $20.16) and starts making change based on what the register says. Then, when I give them the extra change so I can get a full bill back, they give me a blank stare or say something to the effect "I can't do that. I've already entered your payment, so I have to give you what the register says." When I try to explain to them that if I give them the change, they only have to give me paper money back, they don't understand and either I accept what they give me, or they get a manager to make change.
Ugh. It pains me to see a basic skill like making change become something that cannot be done without calculator/register/computer assistance.
I must firmly disagree here, based on my experiences in high school, college, and my best man being a high school math teacher.
My friend, I hear you. But I don't think the level of math education we received is the same that kids are getting today. And I'm not talking about advanced math skills like calculus or algebra. I'm talking about using addition and subtraction to make change.
My nephews use calculators (with teacher approval) to do their math homework and their quizzes/tests (2nd and 5th grade). Neither is in any kind of accelerated program, and all of their classmates also use calculators to do their math. I'm not sure how this actually teaches them anything other than how to be dependent on a calculator. And I can tell you, this isn't isolated to their school district. The folks I mentioned in my original post are, for the most part, high school age kids who consistently have trouble doing basic addition and subtraction. To me, that is alarming. If this is only occurring in the Cleveland, Ohio, area, then it really says something about the quality of education in Northeast Ohio...
Based on visits to many a fast food restaurant/retailer: Basic addition/subtraction WITHOUT using a calculator.
I can't tell you how many times the cashier has rung up my order before I gave her/him my full payment (for example: If the bill is $15.16, I usually pay $20.16 so I can get $5 back). In other words, the cashier rings up the bill before I fish out the change I need, indicating the wrong amount was collected (usually $20 instead of $20.16) and starts making change based on what the register says. Then, when I give them the extra change so I can get a full bill back, they give me a blank stare or say something to the effect "I can't do that. I've already entered your payment, so I have to give you what the register says." When I try to explain to them that if I give them the change, they only have to give me paper money back, they don't understand and either I accept what they give me, or they get a manager to make change.
Ugh. It pains me to see a basic skill like making change become something that cannot be done without calculator/register/computer assistance.
I must firmly disagree here, based on my experiences in high school, college, and my best man being a high school math teacher.
My friend, I hear you. But I don't think the level of math education we received is the same that kids are getting today. And I'm not talking about advanced math skills like calculus or algebra. I'm talking about using addition and subtraction to make change.
My nephews use calculators (with teacher approval) to do their math homework and their quizzes/tests (2nd and 5th grade). Neither is in any kind of accelerated program, and all of their classmates also use calculators to do their math. I'm not sure how this actually teaches them anything other than how to be dependent on a calculator. And I can tell you, this isn't isolated to their school district. The folks I mentioned in my original post are, for the most part,...
Ah, I understand more where you are coming from now. I fear we may have to disagree on this- I've been clamoring for that for some time now, if only so that future generations avoid the fundamental disconnect I experienced in high school(B~@~&y Elementary/JHS Math Teacher- WHAT DO YOU MEAN YOU WANT to use a calculator- what are you, stupid?
Burly HS Math Teacher- WHAT DO YOU MEAN YOU CAN'T use a calculator- what are you, stupid?). My friend swears that this is the road to hell with respect to math, but I'm seeing a hell of a lot of finger pointing in this regard(HS Teachers blame JHS Teachers for not doing their job, JHS Teachers blame Elementary school Teachers for not doing their job, Elementary school Teachers blame the parents for not doing their job, the system blames the parents for not doing their job, the parents blame the schools for not doing their job, ad infinitum).
1) A comparative religious class, that covers the major mainstream religions in a respectful manner.
2) a Basic economics class including how to balance a check book, pay your bills on time and to save for big ticket items. Including why credit is a bad idea.
3) A home economics class including how to shop for healthy foods, how to budget so you have enough money for food. Why it is better to prepare for your own food. How to properly cook basic items such as an omelet or a descent hamburger. Even better how to prepare a tasty salad. Why vegetables and fruits are your friends and not every meal needs meat in it.
4) Basic self defense course. I think I would replace most standard PE classes which are all but useless anyway. There are ways to make this a team sport as well. But that would require schools to pay for paint ball guns and armor which honestly I think would be a good idea. Included would be basic gun safety classes. With mock ups not with real weapons.
Ideas? complaints? Other classes or variant classes you would like to see?
All very, very sound choices.5) Basic first aid and resuscitation
6) Estimation - learn how to form a reasonable guess of whether numbers are too high or too low
7) Critical thinking and debate - how to argue a point and how to find gaps in an argument
8) Basic engine maintenance....(+1 How many chips does a car need for crying out loud! You can't do much more than change plugs and fluids without a laptop and the right software.)
1) Interestingly enough, even though I went to public schools my whole life, we got a crash course on this in Social Studies almost every year. I don't know if the teachers involved were playing loose and fast with the rules and putting their careers in jeopardy, but it was always interesting. Even in the "bad" school I was in(and valedictorian from, ha!), most everyone treated the subject with respect when broached. For many, it was the first time we learned how to deal with others whose opinion differed from our own. Bloodshed was kept to an absolute minimum. I don't know if I want it in school as part of the curriculum, but since I'm hardly a bible thumper or burner from my experiences, I say go for it.
2) Might not be a bad idea. However, I'd say be careful, if only to keep certain philosophies of economic thought from becoming too prevalent and thereby seriously messing up the economy in the future.
3) I do miss Home Ec. Cooking is an important skill to have, as is balancing a checkbook- I say 2 and 3 should be merged, and it should be a requirement.
4) Am I the only one who had a martial arts class available as a gym? It was fun, but it wasn't mandatory. I dont' understand where the PE hate is coming from- I had nothing but fun in my classes, unless we're talking JHS, which was nothing more than a screener for the various school teams.
5) Agreed. This SHOULD be mandatory.
6) I hate math with a burning passion that is rivaled only by my hatred for people named [censored]. However, there were only two parts of the subject that did not arouse my ire. One of them was logic. The other was fractions and estimation.
7) I have no problem with this, but again- in order to keep the school from being turned into a bully pulpit or mass indoctrination, a wide variety of views must be included in this aspect of schooling- even the most unpopular ones.
8) Sorry friends, but cars have changed significantly over the years. It's not necessarily a good thing or a bad thing- it's just change. It's better to keep young people abreast of these changes than to pull the wool over their eyes and perpetuate stereotypes of mechanics.
|
|
1) A comparative religious class, that covers the major mainstream religions in a respectful manner.Not only would this never fly nowadays, it begs the question of who would make the determination of what qualifies as "major mainstream." Considering that if you break down all of the protestant sects into individual "religions" there would be hundreds, it doesn't seem feasible. Would it just be religions with an abrahamic god? (if that is the case then theological satanism would qualify as well) etc. etc.
+1 on the others.
CIA World Fact book?
|
|
CIA World Fact book?1) A comparative religious class, that covers the major mainstream religions in a respectful manner.Not only would this never fly nowadays, it begs the question of who would make the determination of what qualifies as "major mainstream." Considering that if you break down all of the protestant sects into individual "religions" there would be hundreds, it doesn't seem feasible. Would it just be religions with an abrahamic god? (if that is the case then theological satanism would qualify as well) etc. etc.
+1 on the others.
Protestant 51.3%, Roman Catholic 23.9%, Mormon 1.7%, other Christian 1.6%, Jewish 1.7%, Buddhist 0.7%, Muslim 0.6%, other or unspecified 2.5%, unaffiliated 12.1%, none 4% (2007 est.)
So the comparative religion class would compare protestants, catholics, mormons, and atheists?
|
|
My wife would like to teach physics as well but in order to bring the class up to speed on on the equations needed for physics problems she would have to be a part-time math teacher as well.
If she is qualified to teach a physics class, then remedial maths shouldn't be a problem. Physics is just applied maths anyway.
|
|
If she is qualified to teach a physics class, then remedial maths shouldn't be a problem. Physics is just applied maths anyway.
My wife would like to teach physics as well but in order to bring the class up to speed on on the equations needed for physics problems she would have to be a part-time math teacher as well.
I think the point is that, at that point, she wouldn't really be teaching physics AND at that point, students shouldn't need a remedial math course.
I graduated from HS a scant 10 years ago and when I took AP Calc, there were two sections to the test: a calculator and a non-calculator. You had to pass both to get credit. Why all math classes aren't like this is beyond me.
|
|
CIA World Fact book?1) A comparative religious class, that covers the major mainstream religions in a respectful manner.Not only would this never fly nowadays, it begs the question of who would make the determination of what qualifies as "major mainstream." Considering that if you break down all of the protestant sects into individual "religions" there would be hundreds, it doesn't seem feasible. Would it just be religions with an abrahamic god? (if that is the case then theological satanism would qualify as well) etc. etc.
+1 on the others.
Protestant 51.3%, Roman Catholic 23.9%, Mormon 1.7%, other Christian 1.6%, Jewish 1.7%, Buddhist 0.7%, Muslim 0.6%, other or unspecified 2.5%, unaffiliated 12.1%, none 4% (2007 est.)So the comparative religion class would compare protestants, catholics, mormons, and atheists?
World Religions
Christians 33.32% (of which Roman Catholics 16.99%, Protestants 5.78%, Orthodox 3.53%, Anglicans 1.25%), Muslims 21.01%, Hindus 13.26%, Buddhists 5.84%, Sikhs 0.35%, Jews 0.23%, Baha'is 0.12%, other religions 11.78%, non-religious 11.77%, atheists 2.32% (2007 est.)
Atheists keep pointing out that they are not a religion as such why would we speak of them in the context of a religious comparison class?
Also the CIA world fact book does not assume all unaffiliated are atheist or even agnostic, merely unaffiliated. In point of fact they seem to have a difference between non-religious and atheist, which confuses me.
Christianity and the different denominations, Muslim and the different denominations, Hindus I am unaware if they have different denominations or not, Buddhists and then other religions.
|
|
If she is qualified to teach a physics class, then remedial maths shouldn't be a problem. Physics is just applied maths anyway.
My wife would like to teach physics as well but in order to bring the class up to speed on on the equations needed for physics problems she would have to be a part-time math teacher as well.
The point is, she shouldn't have to. The kids should have learned math in the seven to eight years they've been in school before they get to a place where physics would be taught.
Remedial classes are a back door admission that the kids aren't learning anything.
Edit: ninja'd by xpletv
If she is qualified to teach a physics class, then remedial maths shouldn't be a problem. Physics is just applied maths anyway.
My wife would like to teach physics as well but in order to bring the class up to speed on on the equations needed for physics problems she would have to be a part-time math teacher as well.
I see where Xplv is coming from, but I wholeheartedly agree with this statement. I would much rather see Physics and Math taught side by side then kept separate in the fashion they are today.
|
|
Atheists keep pointing out that they are not a religion as such why would we speak of them in the context of a religious comparison class?
Also the CIA world fact book does not assume all unaffiliated are atheist or even agnostic, merely unaffiliated. In point of fact they seem to have a difference between non-religious and atheist, which confuses me.
Christianity and the different denominations, Muslim and the different denominations, Hindus I am unaware if they have different denominations or not, Buddhists and then other religions.
Maybe so there's not publicly sponsored indoctrination? If you have a class that talks about all of these major religions most of which have a higher power (or powers) and simply compare them to themselves you have no real objectivity. It's all well and good to compare religions, but the fact that there is another option (disbelief of all) that would get no mention whatsoever is ridiculous.
And no, I don't beleive that "Atheist" is a religion but i do believe it is, for lack of a better term, an "anti-relgion" that would deserve more than a passing mention in any comparative religion class.
If she is qualified to teach a physics class, then remedial maths shouldn't be a problem. Physics is just applied maths anyway.
My wife would like to teach physics as well but in order to bring the class up to speed on on the equations needed for physics problems she would have to be a part-time math teacher as well.
The point is, she shouldn't have to. The kids should have learned math in the seven to eight years they've been in school before they get to a place where physics would be taught.
Remedial classes are a back door admission that the kids aren't learning anything.
Edit: ninja'd by xpletv
Not to be rude or anything, but once we start going down the "shouldn't HAVE to" path, we're going to start shutting each other down intellecutally with respect to debate. I still think the separation of physics and math leads to more problems than solutions, as does the you do need/don't need/shouldn't need/will need approach to calculators.
|
|
Not to be rude or anything, but once we start going down the "shouldn't HAVE to" path, we're going to start shutting each other down intellecutally with respect to debate. I still think the separation of physics and math leads to more problems than solutions, as does the you do need/don't need/shouldn't need/will need approach to calculators.
I think of physics as more of an applied mathematics, whereas the pre-requisite classes are more theoretical. You cannot apply practices which you do not know in theory, therefore I believe it better to keep it seperate. Also, while everybody needs math, very few people are going to need physics in their life...it just seems to be overkill to teach physics to everyone (chemistry, OTOH, has day to day implications and should be a must-learn).
|
|
Not to be rude or anything, but once we start going down the "shouldn't HAVE to" path, we're going to start shutting each other down intellecutally with respect to debate. I still think the separation of physics and math leads to more problems than solutions, as does the you do need/don't need/shouldn't need/will need approach to calculators.If she is qualified to teach a physics class, then remedial maths shouldn't be a problem. Physics is just applied maths anyway.
My wife would like to teach physics as well but in order to bring the class up to speed on on the equations needed for physics problems she would have to be a part-time math teacher as well.
The point is, she shouldn't have to. The kids should have learned math in the seven to eight years they've been in school before they get to a place where physics would be taught.
Remedial classes are a back door admission that the kids aren't learning anything.
Edit: ninja'd by xpletv
I believe multiplication tables were the point of contention. I don't know about anyone else, but I couldn't have passed third grade where I went to school (Upstate NY) without knowing them.
Just saying.
If you have to rely on a tool for a job a tool isn't required for, you probably aren't ready for the real world. This is the problem with our education system. Everyone wants kids to have an equal opportunity, but, due to PC crap or laziness, they don't want to insist kids have the (mental) tools the kids need to succeed. I'm sorry, but that's paramount to child abuse.
8) Sorry friends, but cars have changed significantly over the years. It's not necessarily a good thing or a bad thing- it's just change. It's better to keep young people abreast of these changes than to pull the wool over their eyes and perpetuate stereotypes of mechanics.
I have mixed feelings about the march of technology on this one, but I'm an old fart who remembers the days when you could rebuild a carburetor or do some other simple maintenance without needing your computer to talk to the cars computer. Those days are gone, but I reserve the right to complain about it and yell at kids to get off of my lawn. ;)
I've heard some of the new BMWs (IIRC) don't even have a dipstick; the car sends you an e-mail if your oil is low. Seriously!?
Not to be rude or anything, but once we start going down the "shouldn't HAVE to" path, we're going to start shutting each other down intellecutally with respect to debate. I still think the separation of physics and math leads to more problems than solutions, as does the you do need/don't need/shouldn't need/will need approach to calculators.I think of physics as more of an applied mathematics, whereas the pre-requisite classes are more theoretical. You cannot apply practices which you do not know in theory, therefore I believe it better to keep it seperate. Also, while everybody needs math, very few people are going to need physics in their life...it just seems to be overkill to teach physics to everyone (chemistry, OTOH, has day to day implications and should be a must-learn).
Still, it(physics)is a part of the curriculum. Would you rather see physics become optional? A part of the calculator-only/advanced mathematics classes?
|
|
Still, it(physics)is a part of the curriculum. Would you rather see physics become optional? A part of the calculator-only/advanced mathematics classes?Not to be rude or anything, but once we start going down the "shouldn't HAVE to" path, we're going to start shutting each other down intellecutally with respect to debate. I still think the separation of physics and math leads to more problems than solutions, as does the you do need/don't need/shouldn't need/will need approach to calculators.I think of physics as more of an applied mathematics, whereas the pre-requisite classes are more theoretical. You cannot apply practices which you do not know in theory, therefore I believe it better to keep it seperate. Also, while everybody needs math, very few people are going to need physics in their life...it just seems to be overkill to teach physics to everyone (chemistry, OTOH, has day to day implications and should be a must-learn).
No high school I know requires physics credit to get a general diploma. Maybe an honors diploma, but chemistry is the last required science for most high school kids.
Not to be rude or anything, but once we start going down the "shouldn't HAVE to" path, we're going to start shutting each other down intellecutally with respect to debate. I still think the separation of physics and math leads to more problems than solutions, as does the you do need/don't need/shouldn't need/will need approach to calculators.If she is qualified to teach a physics class, then remedial maths shouldn't be a problem. Physics is just applied maths anyway.
My wife would like to teach physics as well but in order to bring the class up to speed on on the equations needed for physics problems she would have to be a part-time math teacher as well.
The point is, she shouldn't have to. The kids should have learned math in the seven to eight years they've been in school before they get to a place where physics would be taught.
Remedial classes are a back door admission that the kids aren't learning anything.
Edit: ninja'd by xpletv
I believe multiplication tables were the point of contention. I don't know about anyone else, but I couldn't have passed third grade where I went to school (Upstate NY) without knowing them.
Just saying.
If you have to rely on a tool for a job a tool isn't required for, you probably aren't ready for the real world. This is the problem with our education system. Everyone wants kids to have an equal opportunity, but, due to PC crap or laziness, they don't want to insist kids have the (mental) tools the kids need to succeed. I'm sorry, but that's paramount to child abuse.
I remember multiplication tables were the basis for the extreme hatred I have of math today. I'm not sure what went wrong where, but that is certainly the focal point. Not sure why PC is being dragged into this, but whatever.
No high school I know requires physics credit to get a general diploma. Maybe an honors diploma, but chemistry is the last required science for most high school kids.Still, it(physics)is a part of the curriculum. Would you rather see physics become optional? A part of the calculator-only/advanced mathematics classes?Not to be rude or anything, but once we start going down the "shouldn't HAVE to" path, we're going to start shutting each other down intellecutally with respect to debate. I still think the separation of physics and math leads to more problems than solutions, as does the you do need/don't need/shouldn't need/will need approach to calculators.I think of physics as more of an applied mathematics, whereas the pre-requisite classes are more theoretical. You cannot apply practices which you do not know in theory, therefore I believe it better to keep it seperate. Also, while everybody needs math, very few people are going to need physics in their life...it just seems to be overkill to teach physics to everyone (chemistry, OTOH, has day to day implications and should be a must-learn).
I don't think you can get a general diploma anymore in my area. Everything is regents-based, which is both a blessing and curse.
I believe multiplication tables were the point of contention. I don't know about anyone else, but I couldn't have passed third grade where I went to school (Upstate NY) without knowing them.
Just saying.
Same here; I still remember flash cards, and I went to elementary school in Odessa TX.
|
|
Still, it(physics)is a part of the curriculum. Would you rather see physics become optional? A part of the calculator-only/advanced mathematics classes?Not to be rude or anything, but once we start going down the "shouldn't HAVE to" path, we're going to start shutting each other down intellecutally with respect to debate. I still think the separation of physics and math leads to more problems than solutions, as does the you do need/don't need/shouldn't need/will need approach to calculators.I think of physics as more of an applied mathematics, whereas the pre-requisite classes are more theoretical. You cannot apply practices which you do not know in theory, therefore I believe it better to keep it seperate. Also, while everybody needs math, very few people are going to need physics in their life...it just seems to be overkill to teach physics to everyone (chemistry, OTOH, has day to day implications and should be a must-learn).
I wouldn't mind seeing physics become optional TBH. Maybe a little more leeway in selecting classes appropriate for a desired career path? When I was in HS I was able to do concurrent enrollment and knock out some college classes in lieu of my HS classes during my senior (might have been junior) year. The schools and counselors are always telling kids how important it is to look forward to what they're going to be studying in college, but have very few options to let kids prepare for their desired course of study.
|
|
Same here; I still remember flash cards, and I went to elementary school in Odessa TX.I believe multiplication tables were the point of contention. I don't know about anyone else, but I couldn't have passed third grade where I went to school (Upstate NY) without knowing them.
Just saying.
Something I noticed about Odessa: if the kids can avoid meth, they generally do ok academically. Weird, considering how strong the draw of just giving up and working in the fields for six figures is...
The PC thing refers to kids being passed in schools whether they can do the work or not, so as to not mess with their "self esteem". I don't know how being further and further behind classmates in academic achievement helps anyone's self esteem, but that's the theory.
That has very little to do with political correctness and more to do with an overarching change in approach to teaching due to a massive change in administration and the philosophies thereby espoused with the PC blanket thrown over it to make it appealing to some and unappealing to others. It's something that's happened to us all as time goes by and changes are instituted. Administrators retire and are replaced in waves, unfortunately, which leads to this type of format for schooling. It sucks, but it happens.
|
|
I don't think you can get a general diploma anymore in my area. Everything is regents-based, which is both a blessing and curse.No high school I know requires physics credit to get a general diploma. Maybe an honors diploma, but chemistry is the last required science for most high school kids.Still, it(physics)is a part of the curriculum. Would you rather see physics become optional? A part of the calculator-only/advanced mathematics classes?Not to be rude or anything, but once we start going down the "shouldn't HAVE to" path, we're going to start shutting each other down intellecutally with respect to debate. I still think the separation of physics and math leads to more problems than solutions, as does the you do need/don't need/shouldn't need/will need approach to calculators.I think of physics as more of an applied mathematics, whereas the pre-requisite classes are more theoretical. You cannot apply practices which you do not know in theory, therefore I believe it better to keep it seperate. Also, while everybody needs math, very few people are going to need physics in their life...it just seems to be overkill to teach physics to everyone (chemistry, OTOH, has day to day implications and should be a must-learn).
They've had the Regent's tests in NY forever. For every class, honors or general. The thing I dislike about the system (unless they've changed it) is that you can do dick all all year, cram for the test, pass the test and pass the class. I knew kids who couldn't add two and two who somehow managed to pass the algebra Regents after I gave them a two day crash course.
|
|
That has very little to do with political correctness and more to do with an overarching change in approach to teaching due to a massive change in administration and the philosophies thereby espoused with the PC blanket thrown over it to make it appealing to some and unappealing to others. It's something that's happened to us all as time goes by and changes are instituted. Administrators retire and are replaced in waves, unfortunately, which leads to this type of format for schooling. It sucks, but it happens.The PC thing refers to kids being passed in schools whether they can do the work or not, so as to not mess with their "self esteem". I don't know how being further and further behind classmates in academic achievement helps anyone's self esteem, but that's the theory.
I still consider it child abuse. Real life doesn't grade on a curve. The universe doesn't give a rat's ass about "self esteem".
Just created a whole generation of kids who feel entitled to something they didn't earn, imo.
That has very little to do with political correctness and more to do with an overarching change in approach to teaching due to a massive change in administration and the philosophies thereby espoused with the PC blanket thrown over it to make it appealing to some and unappealing to others. It's something that's happened to us all as time goes by and changes are instituted. Administrators retire and are replaced in waves, unfortunately, which leads to this type of format for schooling. It sucks, but it happens.The PC thing refers to kids being passed in schools whether they can do the work or not, so as to not mess with their "self esteem". I don't know how being further and further behind classmates in academic achievement helps anyone's self esteem, but that's the theory.
I still consider it child abuse. Real life doesn't grade on a curve. The universe doesn't give a rat's ass about "self esteem".
Just created a whole generation of kids who feel entitled to something they didn't earn, imo.
The bell curve is older than I am, and I think a little older than you are. I agree that it's not the solution to all of life's problems, but its certainly nothing new, and I think we've all benefitted from it academically at least once.