I think that providing greater promotion of two parent homes (with tax incentives for successful families) who put in the effort to teach their kids well, with good principles, skills, etc. would go a long way. Stop this entitlement culture with free rides for people. Be a safety net for true needs, not a way of life. Yes, that means, accountability to your community, otherwise you're socially ostracized for trying to get ahead at the expense of others.
It would be good if they could change their own hearts, but that's an effort in persuasion. They need to understand and see the benefits of good behavior, and the punishment of bad behavior. Most people are good. They're trying to just survive in a world full of people who are taking advantage of the rules without consequences.
You are spot on. Let me mention another issue we have with K-12. I got involved with a middle school support group in SC. To my surprise, I discovered that about half the students were learning English as a second language. About are 50% Hispanics and many living in poverty with poor parental guidance. About 33% (of total student body) were performing below grade level in math and reading. So, what does the School admin suggest: Teaching all students a second language, even those English speakers with two involved parents. Why? So the Spanish speaking students will be more comfortable with the need to learn a new language. Meanwhile, Reading, Writing and Arithmetic remain a good idea of the past.....This is SC and we are a long way from the southern border. Also, I would guess the Hispanic students are legal citizens. Keep pushing to reform education. The future of America depends on educated citizens.
Dick: We have a complicated system, with various "objectives" vying for top attention. Making children "comfortable" sounds nice, but it should not be a top priority.
Excellent proposal. The dumbing down of our kids has been going on for quite a while now. Critical thinking is not encouraged. Governments want a populace that's easy to control. Obedient. They are creating a hive mind that will serve the government, much like the communist governments do. That's my jaded POV. How do you get a real curriculum into an educational system where only 20% of high school graduates can read, write and do basic math as well as graduates from forty years ago?
Well, I haven't seen too many societal successes and civilizations where the populace gets out of control with lawlessness, or a lack of personal incentives to succeed.
In my experience course like chemistry and physics placed way too much emphasis on the theoretical rather than the practical. Both subjects affect a person’s everyday life, but a student would never know it by the way the courses are taught.
John...I forwarded your "Science Class" idea to the Dean of Michigan's School of Education who I know quite well and have discussed our joint interests over the last several years. As you know, I think US News has Michigan ranked #1 as the best teaching university program, for whatever that's worth. Their Dean is actually the sparkplug at a Detroit K-12 school that is doing some innovative things. I told the Dean that she should plug your "Science Class" into their 9th grade curriculum as a bold move. We'll see what happens:)...Don
In my experiences with science education from 60 years ago the problem is the teachers. For instance, my science teacher in the 8th grade knew far too little about the subject matter. She tried very hard to educate us, but her actual insight into the details was lacking. I actually knew that at the time because I was already interested in the subject and understood it better than she did.
Back then the people in charge recognized this problem and came up with a great solution. Instead of being taught in the classroom by an unprepared person, the entire class went to the cafeteria and watched a highly skilled teacher on a television. The program was put out daily on UNC-TV out of Greensboro or Raleigh. So, every student received the best of the best and I would argue our own teachers learned a lot that they did not know before.
The problem as I see it is most teachers today are a lot like those from 1956. They are not super interested in science and are attracted to the liberal arts. They are better at history, writing, and debating than at mechanics, physics, biology or mathematics. STEM programs for teachers in colleges today will help over time, but how fast can we get enough qualified teachers into the system?
I am told that the televised system I experienced was short lived because the teachers thought it was taking away their jobs. That was not correct, but apparently it worked and that system went away quickly even though as a student I thought it was excellent.
If I was I’ll, I still watched the show because it was right there on PBS. Actually, anyone could tune in an become better educated on technical subjects.
Anyway, that is my view of a way to turn the corner much faster.
You are right about the teachers. I am one of them. (elementary, but I lay the foundation for everything and give children motivation to learn)
They aren't paid enough to care IMO.
With time, teachers do learn and get better, but I think they could be easily trained as facilitators using critical thinking, research, and the scientific method. This can be applied for any subject matter. Then, through discussions, students and teachers can explore deeper meaningful content. It should be about the quality and not the quantity. What is actually remembered when you breeze through content anyway?
It seems they want to teach a little about everything (which is nothing), rather than give them the tools to be able to learn and question new things for their future.
Jim: IMO the teachers are victims here as well. They are likely getting propogandized education in getting their teaching degree. As proposed in the next comment, all Science teachers should be reqjuired to take such a PD course...
Mandating a course like this for Grade 9 students is an excellent idea. To fill a gap NOW, I suggest that two more groups be mandated to take AND pass this course. Namely ALL teachers of students from Grade 9 to Grade 12, and ALL school board members. To answer Don Runkle's question "who in the world could possibly be opposed to teaching our kids about the basics of science and critical thinking?" The only ones that come to mind are those teachers and the bosses of those teachers who themselves have no idea what the basics of science and critical thinking really are. It's not that they're apposed; just that they are ignorant of it. If none of it is even included in the NGSS, then the ignorance must be omnipresent.
Russ: don't take my word for it about the NGSS. Feel free to wade through the Framework and NGSS document s— which are both found and explained here <https://c19science.info/Education/Fixing_Education.pdf>. Yes having the Science teachers take such a course would be a fine idea.
I doubt that the science teachers created the NGSS. Probably masterminded by some political scientists or social scientists, but not by REAL scientists. The problem that the NGSS clearly elucidates (primarily by what is missing) is much deeper than just the lack of appreciation or understanding of the scientific process and of critical thinking capacity by just science teachers. Surgically cutting out or treating only the cancer we see will not eradicate the metastases.
In any event, you have identified an excellent way to help solve this very serious problem regarding the education of our children. I wish you well in your endeavor.
Russ: I regret to inform you that Science teachers WERE a key player in creating the NGSS. There were four major organizations who colluded in creating the NGSS, and NSTA (National Science Teaching Association) was one of them <https://www.nsta.org/science-standards>.
If we dig a little deeper, would we find that most of the members of the NSTA have an education background in any or all of the sciences - Physics, Chemistry, Biology? Or would the academic background of most NSTA members be found to be based in other fields of study? My reference to REAL scientists includes people like you and many in your audience, but not necessarily to all teachers who happen to teach middle school or high school science.
And then, we are still faced with the fact that the NSTA members were only 1/4 of the NGSS creators. The other 3/4 likely had 3/4 of the input to that creation. What are their academic backgrounds? More importantly, what is THEIR mission?
Getting to the root of this problem (the degraded K-12 education curriculums) is an imperative if we expect to fully resolve it (IMHO). Through steady infestation of counter-education ideologues and their ideologies over decades, this problem has built itself in a festering kind of manner. It's DEEP. In many respects, education has been replaced with indoctrination. Critical thinking ability is the main enemy of indoctrinators, and those indoctrinators are hell bent to keep it as far removed from students as possible.
The common theme among all four groups is that they are Left-wing progressives. Progressives are known to be anti-real-Science, as real Science is a gatekeeper that exposed the failings of their technical policies (e.g., more wind energy, etc.).
John...great suggestion for adding a real science class to 9th grade curriculum. Now the obvious question is how to get the 500 State School Board members across all states to adopt your idea...one member by one member. It sure shouldn't be a partisan topic.. I hate to ask...but, who in the world could possibly be opposed to teaching our kids about the basics of science and critical thinking.
Don: TY. I am working with a few select states on this idea, but before I proceeded to far I wanted to put it out there to see if anyone here has suggestions for additions, deletions or modifications.
I'm expecting serious pushback from those who thinbk that NGSS is really about Science, becuase none of my 30 proposals are accurately covered by NGSS.
VS: Clearly such a plan is not good for our society, in any way shape or form. My proposal might be perceived by some as a shot-across-the-bow by academics.
Perhaps if we had REAL school choice where money is given to parents and only redeemed in educational establishments best suited to their children's needs/interests/learning styles.
John, so very true!! The crop of engineering students who are graduating today is beyond scary. For decades now civil engineering firms do not "engineer" new projects they pull "like" projects from their files and modify them. Factor in engineers who cannot critically think about the modifications they are making and you have a recipe for a fatal disaster.
I did my undergraduate and master's degree a decade apart in two different state schools, lets just say the masters program was all about can you pass the test, and nothing to do with critical thinking about is your answer reasonable.
And I can tell you the Professional Engineering exam is a curved exam, of all the individuals taking the test, the top 30% pass, no matter how poorly the group does as a whole.
This ist a really great post.
Need to read it carefully and slow again...
Please do — there is a LOT of merit to this...
I wold like you to come on my radio show and discuss this with me. I totally agree. Let me know.
kbschoen@bellsouth.net
I think that providing greater promotion of two parent homes (with tax incentives for successful families) who put in the effort to teach their kids well, with good principles, skills, etc. would go a long way. Stop this entitlement culture with free rides for people. Be a safety net for true needs, not a way of life. Yes, that means, accountability to your community, otherwise you're socially ostracized for trying to get ahead at the expense of others.
It would be good if they could change their own hearts, but that's an effort in persuasion. They need to understand and see the benefits of good behavior, and the punishment of bad behavior. Most people are good. They're trying to just survive in a world full of people who are taking advantage of the rules without consequences.
You are spot on. Let me mention another issue we have with K-12. I got involved with a middle school support group in SC. To my surprise, I discovered that about half the students were learning English as a second language. About are 50% Hispanics and many living in poverty with poor parental guidance. About 33% (of total student body) were performing below grade level in math and reading. So, what does the School admin suggest: Teaching all students a second language, even those English speakers with two involved parents. Why? So the Spanish speaking students will be more comfortable with the need to learn a new language. Meanwhile, Reading, Writing and Arithmetic remain a good idea of the past.....This is SC and we are a long way from the southern border. Also, I would guess the Hispanic students are legal citizens. Keep pushing to reform education. The future of America depends on educated citizens.
Dick: We have a complicated system, with various "objectives" vying for top attention. Making children "comfortable" sounds nice, but it should not be a top priority.
Children thrive best when they're loved, and they have limits. Supporting two parent homes would be a great start.
Excellent proposal. The dumbing down of our kids has been going on for quite a while now. Critical thinking is not encouraged. Governments want a populace that's easy to control. Obedient. They are creating a hive mind that will serve the government, much like the communist governments do. That's my jaded POV. How do you get a real curriculum into an educational system where only 20% of high school graduates can read, write and do basic math as well as graduates from forty years ago?
Well, I haven't seen too many societal successes and civilizations where the populace gets out of control with lawlessness, or a lack of personal incentives to succeed.
Penny: Thank you. Agreed on all points. Where do we start to meaningfully fix this? IMO this one basic course would be a barn-burner.
That's what needs to happen. The barn must be burned flat and rebuilt on a good foundation.
In my experience course like chemistry and physics placed way too much emphasis on the theoretical rather than the practical. Both subjects affect a person’s everyday life, but a student would never know it by the way the courses are taught.
Jack: You are likely right, but the majority of HS students do not take Physics or Chemistry.
👍
John...I forwarded your "Science Class" idea to the Dean of Michigan's School of Education who I know quite well and have discussed our joint interests over the last several years. As you know, I think US News has Michigan ranked #1 as the best teaching university program, for whatever that's worth. Their Dean is actually the sparkplug at a Detroit K-12 school that is doing some innovative things. I told the Dean that she should plug your "Science Class" into their 9th grade curriculum as a bold move. We'll see what happens:)...Don
Don: Very good idea. Please call it "Real Science 101," as it is a LOT more than just a "Science class".
In my experiences with science education from 60 years ago the problem is the teachers. For instance, my science teacher in the 8th grade knew far too little about the subject matter. She tried very hard to educate us, but her actual insight into the details was lacking. I actually knew that at the time because I was already interested in the subject and understood it better than she did.
Back then the people in charge recognized this problem and came up with a great solution. Instead of being taught in the classroom by an unprepared person, the entire class went to the cafeteria and watched a highly skilled teacher on a television. The program was put out daily on UNC-TV out of Greensboro or Raleigh. So, every student received the best of the best and I would argue our own teachers learned a lot that they did not know before.
The problem as I see it is most teachers today are a lot like those from 1956. They are not super interested in science and are attracted to the liberal arts. They are better at history, writing, and debating than at mechanics, physics, biology or mathematics. STEM programs for teachers in colleges today will help over time, but how fast can we get enough qualified teachers into the system?
I am told that the televised system I experienced was short lived because the teachers thought it was taking away their jobs. That was not correct, but apparently it worked and that system went away quickly even though as a student I thought it was excellent.
If I was I’ll, I still watched the show because it was right there on PBS. Actually, anyone could tune in an become better educated on technical subjects.
Anyway, that is my view of a way to turn the corner much faster.
Jim Schout
You are right about the teachers. I am one of them. (elementary, but I lay the foundation for everything and give children motivation to learn)
They aren't paid enough to care IMO.
With time, teachers do learn and get better, but I think they could be easily trained as facilitators using critical thinking, research, and the scientific method. This can be applied for any subject matter. Then, through discussions, students and teachers can explore deeper meaningful content. It should be about the quality and not the quantity. What is actually remembered when you breeze through content anyway?
It seems they want to teach a little about everything (which is nothing), rather than give them the tools to be able to learn and question new things for their future.
Dawn: TY for your thoughtful comments. We are on the same page.
Jim: IMO the teachers are victims here as well. They are likely getting propogandized education in getting their teaching degree. As proposed in the next comment, all Science teachers should be reqjuired to take such a PD course...
Mandating a course like this for Grade 9 students is an excellent idea. To fill a gap NOW, I suggest that two more groups be mandated to take AND pass this course. Namely ALL teachers of students from Grade 9 to Grade 12, and ALL school board members. To answer Don Runkle's question "who in the world could possibly be opposed to teaching our kids about the basics of science and critical thinking?" The only ones that come to mind are those teachers and the bosses of those teachers who themselves have no idea what the basics of science and critical thinking really are. It's not that they're apposed; just that they are ignorant of it. If none of it is even included in the NGSS, then the ignorance must be omnipresent.
Russ: don't take my word for it about the NGSS. Feel free to wade through the Framework and NGSS document s— which are both found and explained here <https://c19science.info/Education/Fixing_Education.pdf>. Yes having the Science teachers take such a course would be a fine idea.
Hi John,
I doubt that the science teachers created the NGSS. Probably masterminded by some political scientists or social scientists, but not by REAL scientists. The problem that the NGSS clearly elucidates (primarily by what is missing) is much deeper than just the lack of appreciation or understanding of the scientific process and of critical thinking capacity by just science teachers. Surgically cutting out or treating only the cancer we see will not eradicate the metastases.
In any event, you have identified an excellent way to help solve this very serious problem regarding the education of our children. I wish you well in your endeavor.
Russ
Russ: I regret to inform you that Science teachers WERE a key player in creating the NGSS. There were four major organizations who colluded in creating the NGSS, and NSTA (National Science Teaching Association) was one of them <https://www.nsta.org/science-standards>.
John,
If we dig a little deeper, would we find that most of the members of the NSTA have an education background in any or all of the sciences - Physics, Chemistry, Biology? Or would the academic background of most NSTA members be found to be based in other fields of study? My reference to REAL scientists includes people like you and many in your audience, but not necessarily to all teachers who happen to teach middle school or high school science.
And then, we are still faced with the fact that the NSTA members were only 1/4 of the NGSS creators. The other 3/4 likely had 3/4 of the input to that creation. What are their academic backgrounds? More importantly, what is THEIR mission?
Getting to the root of this problem (the degraded K-12 education curriculums) is an imperative if we expect to fully resolve it (IMHO). Through steady infestation of counter-education ideologues and their ideologies over decades, this problem has built itself in a festering kind of manner. It's DEEP. In many respects, education has been replaced with indoctrination. Critical thinking ability is the main enemy of indoctrinators, and those indoctrinators are hell bent to keep it as far removed from students as possible.
Russ
The common theme among all four groups is that they are Left-wing progressives. Progressives are known to be anti-real-Science, as real Science is a gatekeeper that exposed the failings of their technical policies (e.g., more wind energy, etc.).
John...great suggestion for adding a real science class to 9th grade curriculum. Now the obvious question is how to get the 500 State School Board members across all states to adopt your idea...one member by one member. It sure shouldn't be a partisan topic.. I hate to ask...but, who in the world could possibly be opposed to teaching our kids about the basics of science and critical thinking.
...Don Runkle
Don: TY. I am working with a few select states on this idea, but before I proceeded to far I wanted to put it out there to see if anyone here has suggestions for additions, deletions or modifications.
I'm expecting serious pushback from those who thinbk that NGSS is really about Science, becuase none of my 30 proposals are accurately covered by NGSS.
The purpose of the educational establishment:
1. Pre-school: Prepare for Kindergarten
2. Kindergarten: Prepare for elementary school
3. Elementary school: Prepare for middle school
4. Middle school: Prepare for high school
5. High school: Prepare for college
6. College: Prepare for grad school -- or NFL
7. Grad school: Prepare to be a professor
Why is the entire educational establishment aimed at only about 0.01% of the population? And why does it utterly fail for the other 99.99%?
John has answered this question.
VS: Clearly such a plan is not good for our society, in any way shape or form. My proposal might be perceived by some as a shot-across-the-bow by academics.
Perhaps if we had REAL school choice where money is given to parents and only redeemed in educational establishments best suited to their children's needs/interests/learning styles.
John, so very true!! The crop of engineering students who are graduating today is beyond scary. For decades now civil engineering firms do not "engineer" new projects they pull "like" projects from their files and modify them. Factor in engineers who cannot critically think about the modifications they are making and you have a recipe for a fatal disaster.
I did my undergraduate and master's degree a decade apart in two different state schools, lets just say the masters program was all about can you pass the test, and nothing to do with critical thinking about is your answer reasonable.
And I can tell you the Professional Engineering exam is a curved exam, of all the individuals taking the test, the top 30% pass, no matter how poorly the group does as a whole.
My structural engineering neighbor agrees with what you're saying (about the quality/calibre of students coming out of schools these days).
Lou: This is the type of direction we need to arrest.