[Squeakland] the non universals
bobp at lightlink.com
Sat Aug 18 14:44:22 PDT 2007
I've been listening with interest, and I've got a couple of questions
and (possible) provocations.
1. would learning calculus as a "powerful idea" (rather than
through the duller algebraic approach) be counted as "using discovery
or inquiry based learning as a substitute for hard facts"?
2. What IS a "powerful idea", and how does it become powerful?
I'm particularly interested in asking whether ideas get their power
from abstraction (finding similarity in structure), or generalization
(finding similarity in features) - or from both.
>On 8/17/07, David Corking
><<mailto:lists at dcorking.com>lists at dcorking.com> wrote:
> > But what if the
>> secondary math teachers complained loudly? I don't think they are in
>> any decision process that I can find.
>I don't know the US systems very well. I would like to think that
>school boards and education departments consult professionals first.
>Are there countries where that does happen?
>Curriculum statements have become contentious and politicised beasts
>because they are the main instrument of attempted control over
>teachers work. Many stakeholders fighting over problematic
>As long ago as 1994 two Australian academics - rather than
>describing them as academics I should say two of the most notable
>educational maths researchers in Australia - wrote a book ('The
>National Curriculum Debacle' by Nerida Ellerton and Ken Clements)
>complaining bitterly that the leading maths educational research
>group in Australia had not been listened to in the development of
>the then national profiles. This book is really a blow by blow
>description of the farcical process as well as a critique of
>outcomes based education
>In more recent times in Western Australia (Australian education
>system is a State responsibility) there has been outrage at attempts
>at curriculum reform. One perception has been that outcomes based
>education has led to a watering down and socialisation of the maths
>/ science curriculum. To quote retired Associate Professor Steve
>Kessell, Science and Mathematics Education Centre, Curtin
>University, letter to The Sunday Times 21/5/2006: "Learning about
>the sociology of the cosmetics industry is not real chemistry,
>discussing whether air bags should be mandatory is not real physics
>... A 'culturally sensitive curriculum' borders on nonsense ..."
>This is but one small sample of a flood of complaint. See the PLATO
>(People Lobbying Against Teaching Outcomes) website for a lot more
>detail <http://www.platowa.com/>http://www.platowa.com/ btw I'm not
>endorsing their approach just pointing out how contested this area
>My understanding is that this trend is world wide:
>"Wellington Grey, a physics teachers in the UK, has written
>open letter about the conversion of physics in his country from a
>science of precise measurement and calculation into "... something
>else, something nebulous and ill defined"
>To critique it thoroughly would require a hard look at outcomes
>Summarising some of the issues:
>- watering down, diluting, trivializing science and maths curriculum
>- converting science / maths content into sociological content
>- using discovery or inquiry based learning as a substitute for hard facts
>This appears to be occurring systematically in western education
>systems. (Not in developing countries who are serious about catching
>up to the west and actively promote the importance of maths, science
>and computing science).
>This is a big topic. Science and maths education seems to be
>polarising between a back to basics movement and soft sociological
>reform, often ineffectual "discovery learning". I believe there is a
>third way, that traditional science education can be reformed and
>still remain real science. Student designed computer simulations
>using software such as Etoys / Squeak could play an important role
>Squeakland mailing list
>Squeakland at squeakland.org
* The best dictionary and integrated thesaurus on the web:
* Robert Parks - Wordsmyth - (607) 272-2190
* "To imagine a language is to imagine a form of life." (LW)
* "Philosophers have only interpreted the world. The point, however,
is to change it." (KM)
* In communicating - speaking and writing - we create community.
Through this participation we can hone our words till their meaning
potential taps into the rich voice of our full human potential.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Squeakland