US schools: why is science so overfunded?

[zoobyshoe]

I guess i did kind of overestimate them... but i was thinking more like "ok well realistically, they probably wouldn't be able to follow an algrabraic derivation of something no matter how simple it was"... not that they wouldn't be able to grasp the idea of mathematical derivations period.

And these people have freaken finished high school as well. There was a math requirement to get into this university as well. There has to be some certain level that all these peopel do in fact at least have a grasp on.

I suppose next time you can interview the teacher before you put your talk together to find out how much they do know.

 

[franznietzsche]

I live in the Twilight Zone, remember? Such insanity doesn't occur here.

The scary part is, that really seems to be true. The twilight zone is less screwed up than reality.

 

[ComputerGeek]

That's not the system? DAMN! My school lied to me!
Oh well, not the first time they've lied to me.
Anyway, How about this: The Question-hypothesis should give you like 5 points if you get it right, and take away 20 if you get it wrong. That'd be fair, wouldn't it? I mean, it makes it important, but not lopsided.
Oh, and if I'm just trying to defend a hopeless position, then I'm done. No sense continuing x.x

Tell you what.. to illustrate how hard(and important) it actually is to get the right question here is a situation:

You are camping at the base of a cliff. A twinky is at the top, and you have a length of rope in your supplies. Your stomach tells you that you are hungry.

what is the question you should ask in this situation?

 

[franznietzsche]

excuse me, but HS Teachers are not as dumb as you would like to think.
you seem to have a "those who can't do, teach" but that is so far from the actuality of it (these days) that I can not even express my ire for that statement.

You're very wrong about that.
You are right that there are qualified teachers, but they aren't teaching the average students that really need them. They're teaching the kinds of classes I took in high school, AP/IB courses.
For example: Of my teacher's in High school, 3 had PhDs in the subject matters they taught. 4 more had Master's Degrees in the subjects they taught. And they were very very good at what they were doing. But they were teaching mostly just the kids in the top 5% of the school. Why? Well, for starters they were the only ones qualified to teach those classes, but those students were not the ones who needed the great teachers most. The majority of teachers in my high school had bachelor's in unrelated subjects to what they were teaching, or even provisional teaching certifications.

 

[ComputerGeek]

You're very wrong about that.
You are right that there are qualified teachers, but they aren't teaching the average students that really need them. They're teaching the kinds of classes I took in high school, AP/IB courses.
For example: Of my teacher's in High school, 3 had PhDs in the subject matters they taught. 2 more had Master's Degrees in the subjects they taught. And they were very very good at what they were doing. But they were teaching mostly just the kids in the top 5% of the school. Why? Well, for starters they were the only ones qualified to teach those classes, but those students were not the ones who needed the great teachers most. The majority of teachers in my high school had bachelor's in unrelated subjects to what they were teaching, or even provisional teaching certifications.

What kind of education do you think all the other teachers have?

I have to have a major to teach my subject. To teach high school Algebra, I have to have calc 1, 2, 3, Diff EQ, Linear Algebra, Abstract Algebra, Modern Geometry, Real Number analysis, and Number Theory plus write a senior thesis paper discussing in depth a topic not covered in the curriculum.

I am sorry that your HS was full of people who did not have training in their subject, but fortunately, one of the only good things that NCLB does is make sure that teachers who teach a subject have a major in the subject (a minor is fine if they are only teaching 2 periods of that subject)

add to that all the theory and technique classes that education students have to have to get a teaching certification, you end up will a lot of very highly qualified and good teachers.

I do however doubt that most of the teachers in your school were unqualified to even teach the subject. they might have been bad teachers, but I do not see how someone with an english degree could think of teaching science or math.

and I will tell you something else, level of education has no bearing on being a good teacher.. look at all the bad college professors.

 

[loseyourname]

It's because people think "cultured" and "intelligent" are the same thing. Some people force their kids to listen to classical music because they think it will make the kid smarter. More cultured, yes; smarter, no.

It could also be that people want their children to be both cultured and intelligent, rather than just one or the other.

 

[ShawnD]

You guys are forgetting that being a good teacher and being "educated" are not the same thing. Classic example: talk to any science student in college.
They know a lot of things but they sound like retards; because they have been trainend to sound like idiots. Ask a mechanic if oil conducts electricity, and he will say "no". Ask a chemistry major and he'll say "the theory supports it" (a guy actually said this to me). Theory supports it? What the hell does that mean? Yes or no?

Most college people today have stupid answers to basic questions. I too gave those same dumb answers until last year (first year university) when I had a teacher who deducted a lot of marks if you gave what she called "shotgun answers". She would give a simple question like "suggest a way to break the emulsion between ether and sodium hydroxide water", and you had to answer it in 1 sentence. Yes, only 1 sentence with no run-ons. If you couldn't do that in 1 sentence, she concluded that you didn't know what you were talking about, and therefore did not deserve the marks. I answered that question by saying "add salt until the water is saturated" and I got full marks. My friend, who had previously taken a year of engineering at university, gave a blanket statement of "change the pH, add salt, add another organic solvent" etc etc. He got 0 because he was making incredibly vague statements.
That teacher did not have a PhD, or a masters. She is not famous for doing any sort of research work. She's just a normal person who likes short, concise answers. She is by far the best teacher I have ever had.

 

[ComputerGeek]

You guys are forgetting that being a good teacher and being "educated" are not the same thing. Classic example: talk to any science student in college.
They know a lot of things but they sound like retards; because they have been trainend to sound like idiots. Ask a mechanic if oil conducts electricity, and he will say "no". Ask a chemistry major and he'll say "the theory supports it" (a guy actually said this to me). Theory supports it? What the hell does that mean? Yes or no?
Most college people today have stupid answers to basic questions. I too gave those same dumb answers until last year (first year university) when I had a teacher who deducted a lot of marks if you gave what she called "shotgun answers". She would give a simple question like "suggest a way to break the emulsion between ether and sodium hydroxide water", and you had to answer it in 1 sentence. Yes, only 1 sentence with no run-ons. If you couldn't do that in 1 sentence, she concluded that you didn't know what you were talking about, and therefore did not deserve the marks. I answered that question by saying "add salt until the water is saturated" and I got full marks. My friend, who had previously taken a year of engineering at university, gave a blanket statement of "change the pH, add salt, add another organic solvent" etc etc. He got 0 because he was making incredibly vague statements.
That teacher did not have a PhD, or a masters. She is not famous for doing any sort of research work. She's just a normal person who likes short, concise answers. She is by far the best teacher I have ever had.

very nicely put.

 

[franznietzsche]

You guys are forgetting that being a good teacher and being "educated" are not the same thing. Classic example: talk to any science student in college.
They know a lot of things but they sound like retards; because they have been trainend to sound like idiots. Ask a mechanic if oil conducts electricity, and he will say "no". Ask a chemistry major and he'll say "the theory supports it" (a guy actually said this to me). Theory supports it? What the hell does that mean? Yes or no?
Most college people today have stupid answers to basic questions. I too gave those same dumb answers until last year (first year university) when I had a teacher who deducted a lot of marks if you gave what she called "shotgun answers". She would give a simple question like "suggest a way to break the emulsion between ether and sodium hydroxide water", and you had to answer it in 1 sentence. Yes, only 1 sentence with no run-ons. If you couldn't do that in 1 sentence, she concluded that you didn't know what you were talking about, and therefore did not deserve the marks. I answered that question by saying "add salt until the water is saturated" and I got full marks. My friend, who had previously taken a year of engineering at university, gave a blanket statement of "change the pH, add salt, add another organic solvent" etc etc. He got 0 because he was making incredibly vague statements.
That teacher did not have a PhD, or a masters. She is not famous for doing any sort of research work. She's just a normal person who likes short, concise answers. She is by far the best teacher I have ever had.

What made these teachers great was not their level of education. What made them great led to their level of education. See the difference?

 

[Cosmo16]

Trying to break down music is the easiest way to cause frustration. Most music is built from the ground up rather than taking apart bits and pieces of existing music and taping it all together to make some half-ass ripoff that doesn't express any emotion.
When you stop using your emotions, you lose track of what music is all about.
It also doesn't help when you're not actively choosing to play an instrument. Your instrument won't teach you anything unless you want to learn.

No, you misunderstand my poorly written response. I am not saying create music from these pieces. I am not even saying to write downt he pieces. however, I have found that breaking down music (Usually mentally while listening to a piece. ex. focusing on a specific insturument while listening) gives me a better understanding of that piece. But, the only way that you can truly comprhend the depth of a song is to listen to it in whole.

Oh, and I agree with you statement about emotion

Howver, I have to disagree with were you say that it is the willingness to learned hat effects it. Even if you are forced to do it, your mind still is forced to make the same connections, you will not benifiet from it in the way of someone who wishes to learn, however, benifiet, from what I can see is still achived.

 

[ComputerGeek]

I have to disagree with were you say that it is the willingness to learn that effects it. Even if you are forced to do it, your mind still is forced to make the same connections, you will not benifiet from it in the way of someone who wishes to learn, however, benifiet, from what I can see is still achived.

Umm.. if you are not willing to learn, you will not be forced to learn, there for you will not learn.

3 legged stool in public education.. teacher, parent student.

if one fails, the student does not learn.
NCLB is going to fail because of its lack of attention (and funding) to the student and parent part of the equation. Teachers can affect the student part in how they structure their lessons (make the student responsible for their learning by involving them in the lesson. The parent portion is hard to do and that is why no one tries to fix the problems.

 

[ShawnD]

Howver, I have to disagree with were you say that it is the willingness to learned hat effects it. Even if you are forced to do it, your mind still is forced to make the same connections, you will not benifiet from it in the way of someone who wishes to learn, however, benifiet, from what I can see is still achived.

From what I've seen it only makes the kid hate music that much more. I had a friend whos crazy parents forced him to play piano. Because of that, he couldn't even stand to listen to piano music.

When I have kids I'll encourage them to play musical instruments but I'll never force anything on them. Before that time I'll probably learn guitar myself so my kids will play just to be like daddy.

 

[Pengwuino]

NCLB is going to fail because of its lack of attention (and funding) to the student and parent part of the equation. Teachers can affect the student part in how they structure their lessons (make the student responsible for their learning by involving them in the lesson. The parent portion is hard to do and that is why no one tries to fix the problems.

How exactly can you legislate good parenting or enthusiasm for learning?

 

[ComputerGeek]

How exactly can you legislate good parenting or enthusiasm for learning?

You can't. Where did I say anything about legislating away the problem?
Like I said, you can solve the problem with the students through lesson planning.

As for the parents, that needs to be dealt with by cultural change.

 

[cepheid]

Tell you what.. to illustrate how hard(and important) it actually is to get the right question here is a situation:

You are camping at the base of a cliff. A twinky is at the top, and you have a length of rope in your supplies. Your stomach tells you that you are hungry.

what is the question you should ask in this situation?

Do I have any food in my supplies?

 

[ComputerGeek]

Do I have any food in my supplies?

Good Question!

that is what I was getting to :-)

I was hoping though that some one would over think it and go into "story problem mode".

 

[Pengwuino]

You can't. Where did I say anything about legislating away the problem?

What does NCLB stand for.

 

[Entropy]

My physics class in high school was always the dirtiest. But then again, my physics labs here at FSU are pretty dirty too.

 

[Pengwuino]

I was talking to the chair of our department yesterday and I received some more interesting facts. I forget what scope he was speaking of (our university, the CSU system, or hte entire nation), but he said that recently, foreigners started to out-number Americans in science graduate programs! I mean more and more people are coming to America for their education but even worse, fewer and fewer people are interested in science in this country.

We were also talking about funding problems. He said funding isn't an issue, its just that its pissed into projects that have no business being a priority at the university. They are increasing tuition 10% a year from now on as well! Executives are getting a 15% raise... staff a measily 3.8% raise (after supposedly 5 or so years with no raises)... Now where in gods name is the money going?

 

[ComputerGeek]

What does NCLB stand for.

The NCLB is the No Child Left Behind Act, but it does not Legislate parenting or student performance, it legislates schools and educators.

You need to really open up your tube of grey because black and white just does not cut it.

 

[ComputerGeek]

I was talking to the chair of our department yesterday and I received some more interesting facts. I forget what scope he was speaking of (our university, the CSU system, or hte entire nation), but he said that recently, foreigners started to out-number Americans in science graduate programs! I mean more and more people are coming to America for their education but even worse, fewer and fewer people are interested in science in this country.

We were also talking about funding problems. He said funding isn't an issue, its just that its pissed into projects that have no business being a priority at the university. They are increasing tuition 10% a year from now on as well! Executives are getting a 15% raise... staff a measily 3.8% raise (after supposedly 5 or so years with no raises)... Now where in gods name is the money going?

Universities buy equipment and the price of keeping the entire institution running is extremely high.

as for the interest in science.. LOOK AT THE DEBATE! ID is being touted as science! Mathematics is not seen as relevant to students in high school. it is ridiculous, but in the US, less and less value is being placed on science and math in the culture.

 

[Chi Meson]

My physics class in high school was always the dirtiest. But then again, my physics labs here at FSU are pretty dirty too.

Your name is the reason!

 

[Pengwuino]

The NCLB is the No Child Left Behind Act, but it does not Legislate parenting or student performance, it legislates schools and educators.

You just claimed earlier that NCLB does not improve student-parent relationships... how exactly is it suppose to improve that? Grade parents? Fund hugs? I thought for a moment that maybe you didn't know NCLB was legislation passed down by Congress and not an all-powerful entity capable of modifying parental relationships with their children.

 

[Blahness]

Good Question!
that is what I was getting to :-)
I was hoping though that some one would over think it and go into "story problem mode".

That reminds me of MindTrap. Fun game, where the problem misleads you.

I get your point, however. Importance > Difficulty. ^_^'

But see, High School oversimplifies it into "You're trying to find out what the most acidic and basic liquid of these 5 are. State the question."

"Of these 5 liquids: (liquids), which is the most acidic, and which is the most basic?"


Later on, it might be better, but at 10th grade, that's what we're taught. I believe you have a good point with heavily grading what is most important, but I still can't shake the feeling that grades are being inflated in the lab...

Can you explain "Must be testable"?

 

[ShawnD]

Can you explain "Must be testable"?

State your objective of being in the lab, then state what you plan to get from this. For example "determine if a dog is diabetic" is a horrible test objective. What does that even mean? A better one is "test the % glycated hemoglobin in dog blood to determine if a dog is diabetic". It states what you are doing in the lab as well as what that data is supposed to point towards.

 

[Blahness]

^Ah, that makes sense. Thank you, ShawnD. ^_^'

Anyway, Here's what I did in science class today:

Went in
Did Bellwork (Start-Of-Class review of other materials, just 2 or 3 simple questions)
Took a page of notes on DNA (A-T, C-G, what DNA is made of(Sugar, phosphate, one of A-T or C-G, how those bond like that save mutations, Hydrogen bond between A-T and C-G, and how Sugars bond to the Nitrogen Bases.) We did that in 55 minutes.

The last 45 minutes, we were instructed to do a project involving "creating our own DNA particle", where we looked at a list of eye colors with matching DNA bases (Green eyes, for example, was CAT.) We'd then match the C's with G's and A's with T's, and then, using colored paper, MAKE a DNA particle(no helix), with phosphates between sugars, and sugars connecting to nitrogen bases, and A-T C-G connections. We are spending 3 days doing this project. I could not see the educational value, so I asked my teacher, who said it "solidifies the memorization of what we've learned". Makes sense, but MUST I BE FORCED to do this?

My theory: Unfortunately, schools cater to those who lag behind, pulling advanced students behind where they could be. See, over the summer, a friend and I had drawn out the molecular structures of the nitrogen bases, and ATP and such. Then we come to class, and make a strand of DNA.

Anyway, that's the theory I'm seeing. Truth, or false? Discuss.