Following is an excerpt dealing with science and education:
And to keep America competitive, one commitment is necessary above all: We must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity. Our greatest advantage in the world has always been our educated, hardworking, ambitious people -- and we're going to keep that edge. Tonight I announce an American Competitiveness Initiative, to encourage innovation throughout our economy, and to give our nation's children a firm grounding in math and science. (Applause.)
First, I propose to double the federal commitment to the most critical basic research programs in the physical sciences over the next 10 years. This funding will support the work of America's most creative minds as they explore promising areas such as nanotechnology, supercomputing, and alternative energy sources.
Second, I propose to make permanent the research and development tax credit -- (applause) -- to encourage bolder private-sector initiatives in technology. With more research in both the public and private sectors, we will improve our quality of life -- and ensure that America will lead the world in opportunity and innovation for decades to come. (Applause.)
Third, we need to encourage children to take more math and science, and to make sure those courses are rigorous enough to compete with other nations. We've made a good start in the early grades with the No Child Left Behind Act, which is raising standards and lifting test scores across our country. Tonight I propose to train 70,000 high school teachers to lead advanced-placement courses in math and science, bring 30,000 math and science professionals to teach in classrooms, and give early help to students who struggle with math, so they have a better chance at good, high-wage jobs. If we ensure that America's children succeed in life, they will ensure that America succeeds in the world.
I have some questions concerning the identification of a "problem" and the application of reources to "fix" it.
First, I believe in basic (or pure) research and I understand that an investment by the government in this area may have very positive payoffs. Doubling that investment over ten years implies an annual growth rate of 8%. It doesn't sound like a huge number but I don't see any way that such an increase can be spent in a manner likely to actually double 'results' over ten years. The 'new' scientists available to actually conduct the experiments are already in the leaky educational pipeline - which as the the second portion of the selection notes is leaking badly and in need of replacement - not repair. Increasing the flow while saying that you're going to repair leaks (maybe) over time does not seem to be a particularly rational approach.
The second item is the actual focus of the exercise - making the R & D tax credit permanent. This will be described as a "corporate giveaway" and can be logically construed as such. I don't disapprove of the tax credit because it's one of the few that actually directly achieve the intended purpose in that more research and development actually occurs because of it. A tax credit (rather than a deduction) creates a 50-cent dollar rather than a .70 or .80 cent (maybe) dollar. If the credit is permanent then long term planning comes more strongly into play and permanent programs are strengthened.
The third item is going to meet heavy resistance from the NEA because it enters into the realm of their greatest fear and greatest weakness - measurable outcomes.
I've been thinking about what's going on in public education for a bit. I've been involved in budget and facility planning for an expansion of a pre-school into a primary school for about two years (with a huge milestone passed Sunday last) and I have a fair idea about what actual costs are involved in running a private school. Gaining that knowledge has not improved my perception of public schools one whit.
Recently, Knuck did a pointer piece that led me over to Kitchen Table Math where Carolyn and Catherine are exploring the 'rubber meets the road' aspects of math instruction at the (for the moment) early middle school level. They both have PhD's with Carolyn's field being mathematics. Recently Catherine has been writing about what she perceives as a disparity of treatment and results between boys and girls in education. The subject interested me so I went fishing in a couple of excellent data pools but to no avail. The only definitive statistics in support of Catherine's position are provided in the differences in starting salaries offered to men and women with like grade averages in identical disciplines. Men get the edge but "Why" would be open to dispute. I lean toward efficiency of the market in its valuation of talent but I might be wrong.
All the foregoing leads to a hypothesis that I've developed that is in need of evidentiary support. The hypothesis is that the reduction in meaningful discipline (meaningful = discipline that has a lasting effect) within the classroom and schools has led the educracy to the point where docility is over rewarded in an effort to make life bearable for teachers and administrators. Concurrently, while little Festus is being punished through a grading system, he is also not learning due to his behavior not being corrected. He's suffering a lot more from the C grade that keeps him from advancement than he is from the temporary pain he would feel if his knuckles had been rapped sharply a few times. The only real evidence I can find for this is the number of boys applying to college. That number started dropping in '01 and the drop off continues. The class of '01 entered the educracy in '87-'88 - just about the time when actual discipline had been pretty thoroughly weeded from the classroom.
I would be very interested in thoughts concerning this hypothesis. I don't regard it as being the result of any 'plan' by educrats. One reason being that I am unconvinced that educrats have an actual grasp of cause and effect on a level beyond the most superficial to begin with.
The President isn't going to have much luck in getting math whizzes to teach undisciplined mobs of kids and the idea of elevating 70K teachers to the competency in math required to teach at the AP level is risible on its face. Math competency is a card that is not in their hands and wishing it so won't put it there.
14 comments:
Knuck,
Sorry for the lack of clarity wrt the class of '01. My point was that they entered the educracy as kindergartners in '87-'88 - when the transition from a disciplined classroom to what we have today that began in the mid-late '60s was actually complete. The class of '01 is actually 'first fruit' of the maturing system. Rather adequate proof of the true value of "theoretical" educational and (societal) theory concerning the potential damage to children caused by 'traumatic' disciplinary methods.
I agree with you on school team sports as long as the PE program is retained. PE - especially early morning PE that resembles PT in nature is an excellent way to burn off little Festus and Festucina's natural excess physical energy and let them settle down to study and hopefully learn.
David,
One aspect of humanity I have noticed is that, while people generally have no problem admitting that someone else can run faster or jump higher than they can, they will resist mightily the idea that someone else is smarter than they are. This is so deeply embedded and so ubiquitous that I believe it must be a survival characteristic. That makes it very hard to give out math and science awards, etc. That might make the other kids feel bad.
In any case, I would hate for our country to become like Europe, with intelligence tests at age 12 to determine your future from then on out. I very much like the fact that our country is the Land of Second Chances, and that people can always succeed given enough motivation, no matter where they started in the talent pool.
Rick, How can we up the math abilities of the kids with ed school grads? I don't see it. They can't even manage budgets.
Now, a diabolical evil capitalist would some up with Math for Shoppers and Math War game videos and sell them for big bucks.
You know, you have X bucks to buy your wardrobe for the next school year and to have a homecoming party..etc
And the marauders of Planet Zongo are approaching. Your computer screen is down. To kill them and go to the next level---
Just a thought. Have your girl call my girl.
cf,
How to fix math education? That's a topic near and dear to my heart. I've won teaching awards at colleges across the country. But the sad fact is that ultimately you really need to teach yourself. If you don't have the oomph to study, you won't really learn. Learning math is to a great extent like learning to play the piano: you have to sit down and do it to learn it. Playing a video game about playing the piano isn't the same as playing the piano.
So it comes down to motivation, which means it's a sales job. Why would someone "buy into" doing their math homework? They have to have an incentive. A big part of the problem we have is that there is no incentive for our high school students. They can goof off endlessly, never open a math book (I never did) and there are no consequences.
While a good teacher can't help a bad student, a bad teacher can ruin a good student. My son is presently in high school physics in Salt Lake. He has a bad teacher (who can't solve the problems himself) and a bad textbook. That's a really bad combination. He is interested in physics, likes the concepts, and is willing to work and do his homework, but he's rapidly losing interest because when he gets stuck he can't get any help and the book is unreadable.
Unreadable books which don't teach is a huge part of the problem. If you read KTM you discover that there's a huge movement afoot to get rid of math within the math curriculum and replace it with English. I guess this is because so many students who were good at English have been made to feel bad in math. Instead of doing math, they now have the students come in and write about "their favorite number". When I see this, I realize this country is going down the tubes.
How's your Mandarin?
"That's all well and good and we shouldn't remove this from our society but we are pushing far too many kids into needing the second chance because we don't do much to encourage them to make a whole lot of the first one."
Lots of them can't make much of the first one because they don't have base skills on "good choice" vs "bad choice" inculcated at home prior to entry. I have a good deal of sympathy with the educrats on this one. If little Festus arrives in kindergarten with his mind full of encouraging mush that's based upon his parents having "reasoned" with him to "enable him to make rational decisions on his own" - at the age of 5 - then his teachers face a Sisyphean task that is further complicated by the fact that the same parents without parenting skills who "reason" with 5 year olds would have a heart attack if little Festus took a rap on the knuckles in 2nd grade to get his mind back on the subject.
So lil Festus gets a second chance (good) and a third chance (less good) and a fourth chance (bad) and becomes a ball that his classmates have to drag around on a chain for 12 years. And when lil Festus emerges from the sanitarium with his certificate of completion in his hand he finds that the market doesn't value the certificate as it once did - because too many duds like Festus are clutching them in undisciplined hands. And when Festus does get hired he finds that bosses might give second chances but they don't give third chances. Perhaps he notices - or perhaps, at that point, his time is spent "reasoning" with a 5 year old of his own while he takes another cash advance on the credit card that he hopes will carry him through to another job.
Clarice,
I haven't examined curricula to an extent that makes criticism a worthwhile endeavor but what I've seen is not at all impressive.
Of course, I still shudder thinking about the fifth grade "If a train leaves LA at 10AM going 50 miles an hour and another leaves NY traveling at the same speed, what time is it in El Paso?" didn't really help me much in getting excited about math.
You're absolutely correct about the educracy - the "Math is hard" slogan was developed with them in mind.
I don't know where to begin on this topic.
Teacher education--there should be no bachelor's degrees in education.Teachers whould have degrees in real subjects and then learn teaching skills,
Accreditation is a ed school bonanza--everywhere stupid requirements which only can be met by taking mind boggling courses at local colleges sharply reduces the already small pool of capable teachers. In D.C. you cannot teach calculus withoug having passed a local course in remedial reading.
Textbooks, years ago Ms Tuchman had a series in the New Yorker about the appalling way history textbooks (and other soc studies books were written). They are intended to satisfy a braod swath of school systems and therefore have become idiotic, unconnected trips.
Ditto with science books--where hundreds of glaring errors escape attention because the committees which pass on them never even read them.
Getting more math and science teachers--Years ago when we were trying to figure out what to do with all those suddenly unemployed Soviet scientists, I proposed they be brought here on special visas to prepare teachers for teaching math and science--they do it well as do the Israelis and Chinese.
When my son was in private school, he went to one which used texts fromm around the world. I want you to know that the early math books from Barcelona and Buenos Aires, teach algebraic and geometry concepts with elementary math at the earliest ages without the kids even realizing it. And every concept is taught by several different methods (visual/word/ etc) so that no matter how a child learns he can get the concept.
Next time you're abroad--or if you have friends abroad--try to get your hands on some of those books to see what I mean.Maybe there's money in getting permission to reprint and translating them.
Sometimes I wonder if schools were consolidated to improve education or get better basketball teams...whatever the reason it is near impossible to put thousands of teenagers in a building and hope to maintain discipline. Especially when the parents refuse to allow anyone to give little Johnny a bad time.
I have friends who sent their kids to a Christian school. I thought it was a mistake. I thought the teachers were not well educated enough, the curriculum was not broad enough...and I was wrong. Those kids did not only keep up, they are ahead.
A couple of years ago someone sent me an 8th grade test from about 1900. I was shocked. It was hard. Really... the math was tough and the student was also tested on English grammar and geography. If I can find that I will post it.
But after seeing that I realized that those teachers might not have been PhD's and the resources were limited, but the students were really challenged.
I am not good at math. I blame it on my poor father who is not here to defend himself.
He used to lean over my shoulder when I was doing my homework and yell at me. I loved him dearly, but he was a math tyrant. To this day I fell like I am going to break out in hives when I have to do long division.
Knuck - S'OK - Lots of tims I don rit two gud so I nevir tak a fence wen sum1 doesn't cathc whatever I thought my point was supposed to be.
Terrye,
The Christian pre-school that I'm involved with interviews parents prior to allowing a child to enroll. If the parent doesn't 'measure up' the kid never darkens the door - something unthinkable in public schools. Qualification for scholarships (to pre-school) is also determined by parent's attitude as well as need. 'Course they're not told that.
We have had applications on file from licensed public school teachers wanting to leave the public school system since the expansion project was first mentioned two years ago. In fact, we have at least eight apps for four slots plus an app from a public school principal who desperately wants out. We will offer about 80% of the public school salary and no benefits (our hires are all from dual income families with coverage provided by the spouse).
Think that one through for a bit to get a full understanding of what a totally screwed up system the educrats ( and doofus parents) have created.
I have sympathy with you on the math bit - I managed to arrive in the 7th grade with good fundamentals but in the year that pre-algebra was first taught using "New Math" techniques. The teacher stumbled and I fell and didn't regain my feet until my junior year in college. I'm still pissed about that because I really like math and statistics.
Google News has this Forbes article pointed out--good details on the SOTU outline:
(Malcolm Forbes: "If you don't know what you want to do, you can't do it."
A couple of years ago someone sent me an 8th grade test from about 1900. I was shocked. It was hard.
Old textbooks aren't bad, either. We could do worse than throwing out the current batch and using the old ones. In some subjects it would be no loss at all -- arithmetic, reading, and chemistry come to mind. On the other hand, history and geography would need an update.
To this day I fell like I am going to break out in hives when I have to do long division.
I knew a fellow from Afghanistan who said his dad would threaten to kill him for low grades -- and that it was a credible threat. He could hardly study for nerves until he got to the US. There is discipline and then there is abject terror.
That guy is a piece of work, idn't he. His behavior is almost forgivible on grounds of dullardness.
'forgivable'. The grounds of dullardness are vasty.
Har! Don't we wish that was 'parody'? (*sob*)
remember during the campaign all those pics of him riding a bike?
Post a Comment