0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I keep reading phrases like "thrust down our throats" and "forced to", in this thread - relating to the education that was received by contributors.Quite honestly, if you had been given the option at the age of, say 13, to sit in class or to be out playing, which would you have done? There are very very few teenagers who would volunteer for a week in School if they could choose an alternative. If they are not to be 'forced' to be there, how are we to get them educated?
Were you all so amazingly mature that you would have come into lessons just through a thirst for knowledge?
My Sixth formers, who have actually chosen to study Physics and who find a lot of it interesting, still take every opportunity to avoid work, unless 'forced' to do it.
Many kids who would be quite capable of A level Physics, choose softer courses because they are aware that they can get grades easier and with less work by avoiding Physics, Chemistry and Maths. (This is a common fact, voiced in the media).
As far as presenting 'core Science' to 95% of kids goes - (no, > 99%) there is little point in suggesting that they should doubt its content - it just unsettles them and, "if it may not be true, it's not worth knowing".
In any case, what proportion of core Science is, actually, up for question, in as far as it can be used to predict pretty well all that happens to us in every day life? Is the only real complaint about the semantics of the word 'fact'? How much more 'factual' can you get than Newton's Laws of Motion or Snell's Law? Can you suggest a better way of describing those two everyday phenomena?
It's always easy to blame the system when things have gone wrong.
I should say that there have been a lot of improvements in Science education BUT, the changes in attitude of parents and the state to the education system have not helped at all.
That idea of 'respect' for a system which may be locally flawed but is, basically, sound seems to have died. This is a pity because young people need a bit of 'blind allegiance' to a few core values to help them through a confusing period in their lives.
George, you should respect both the person and the position held. By all means disagree with their actions, but the fact that they have that position does deserve respect.I respect your position as a moderator and you as a person, yet i don't happen to agree with what you say. The respect is still there.
The point is to recognise that Newton's laws are two things - they are observations (which anybody can make, and is the core of all science), and modelling. It is to demonstrate that models are merely a way of linking together observations, and making predictions (which are then testable) from that. None of this is about 'fact' in any absolute sense, but it is about a functioning mathematical model (which is only considered a close approximation of fact, and its closeness of approximation depends totally on how well the predictions agree with observed fact - but only the observations can be regarded as actual fact). This allows the notion that if a better model comes along, it does not make the previous model 'wrong', or untrue, or not worth knowing, and it certainly does not make the proponents of those models out to be liars. It also demonstrates to pupils both how models are created, as well as their limitations. It demonstrates that the best you have is merely the leading edge of knowledge, and not any right or wrong; and it gives them an idea of how they can push forward that leading edge of knowledge.
QuoteThe point is to recognise that Newton's laws are two things - they are observations (which anybody can make, and is the core of all science), and modelling. It is to demonstrate that models are merely a way of linking together observations, and making predictions (which are then testable) from that. None of this is about 'fact' in any absolute sense, but it is about a functioning mathematical model (which is only considered a close approximation of fact, and its closeness of approximation depends totally on how well the predictions agree with observed fact - but only the observations can be regarded as actual fact). This allows the notion that if a better model comes along, it does not make the previous model 'wrong', or untrue, or not worth knowing, and it certainly does not make the proponents of those models out to be liars. It also demonstrates to pupils both how models are created, as well as their limitations. It demonstrates that the best you have is merely the leading edge of knowledge, and not any right or wrong; and it gives them an idea of how they can push forward that leading edge of knowledge.And just how many kids in your average school would really make sense of that particular (very reasonable, well written) paragraph?
One problem is that people who complain about the way they were taught are viewing what they experienced, and sometimes resented at the time, in the light of many years' experience and with a more mature mind. Post hoc rationalisation is understandable. It is easy to delude oneself that one provided all one's own motivation against overwhelming odds.It is very lucky and rare to be the sort of person who is that self motivated at such an early age. I know many who are not.
We can all have a good moan about the state, education and parents but the people who are ultimately responsible for the government in power - which, in turn, is responsible for the system of education- are the parents.
These parents have, if they choose, much more time than the 1000 hours a year during which kids are in School in which to have some influence.
On the subject of 'respect', I think the attitude in the services says it all - you are saluting the rank and not, necessarily, the man.
It is the responsibility of society to produce an environment where this 'blind allegiance' is morally well founded.
BTW, I have seen no volunteers to get stuck into the system, yet. How about it guys?
Just a quick question for you guys. Is homeschooling allowed in the UK?
Firstly, my view is that all children are inherently self motivated - but self motivated at what is the question. No adult can motivate a child, they can only try and find constructive ways of channelling their innate motivation.
Certainly, mothers can, if they elect (and can financially afford) stay at home to concentrate on bringing up their children.
it gives them an idea of how they can push forward that leading edge of knowledge.
Why would we not expect a variation in human intelligence?
Paul, I am not a teacher, Never said I was so wondering how you came to this conclusion?