

U.S. Should Adopt Higher Standards for Science Education - DLay
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=us-should-adopt-higher-science-education-standards

======
dkhenry
So quick things I noticed reading the Article

1\. There are still places in the US where our _current_ standards are world
class ( boston is given as an example )

2\. This quote """ The first draft, released in May, explicitly included
evolution and climate change. A second draft will be available for comment
this fall. """

Why, why as your drafting standards for something that could help all
americans do you intentionally politicise it. You have now turned this from
something everyone would agree with ( We need to educate our children better )
to something that people will draw up battle lines off of. I understand that
people see the denayal of these two aspects as a marker of an anti-science
mindset, but the solution is not to just draw the line in the sand and use the
tynnary of the majority as a hammer to force your changes through.

Prediction, this will turn political and nothing profitable will get done and
a majority of america will continue to see its education standards fall.

~~~
Retric
I up-voted you, but there is _nothing_ political about evolution or climate
change outside the US. If you want a world class science education you need to
actually you know teach science. And science is based on two and only two
ideas, everything is on the table AND reality dictates your views though
experimentation. Sacrifice either of them to political grandstanding and you
are doing something else.

PS: Biology is so closely tied to evolution at this point that I can't help
but wonder what's left once you discard it. Global warming is less important,
but it's rather hard to avoid that topic for 12 years.

~~~
dkhenry
But were not talking about ourside the US were talking about the US, and
unfortuinitly it is political. Sticking our heads in the sand and pretending
that roughly half the population won't disregard everything your working on to
get two bullet points off your list is just stupid.

Also this idea that science is underpinned by evolution and cliement science
is laughable. I guess chemestry and physics don't count ?

~~~
Retric
Climate science _IS_ chemistry and physics. More specifically Climate science
is mostly Spectroscopy and Thermodynamics and if it's off the table you can't
really talk about them. Nor can you can't talk about convection currents which
means you can talk about the gas laws which means you can talk about heat
engines.

PS: And no I am not kidding, if you actually understand why a mass
spectrometer works then climate change is obvious.

~~~
ef4
You're overestimating the anti-science critics. You can teach all the
spectroscopy and thermodynamics you want and they won't care, because they
don't know what that stuff is.

It's purely the _words_ "climate change" that they'll attack. And picking that
fight is not a winning solution.

The winning solution is to show children how awesome science is, give them the
fundamental tools to participate in it, and let them see for themselves the
validity of conclusions like climate change.

We're in the mess we're in because too many people's science education was
purely focussed on the conclusions of science without the methods of science.
When "science class" means memorizing facts it's no different than catechism,
and truth becomes a question of one authority vs another.

The conclusions of science are of secondary importance to the process of
science.

------
Shivetya
Changing standards is meaningless unless you dismantle the current structure
of public education. Ever since its founding the Department of Education has
not noticeably improved the outcomes of students nationwide. Nor has the many
fold increased spending. Yes change will require rethinking having a teachers
union

Where we have gone wrong is that school systems are saddled with far too many
non-teaching positions and new school buildings tend way too many times to be
symbols of the politicians who had them built.

~~~
panzagl
There are plenty of states without teachers' unions, and guess what- the kids
don't perform any better there.

Non-teaching positions are the results of regulations and laws to 'protect'
the interests of students. Until someone makes hard decisions that pare back
some of those mandated 'services' they're not going to go away.

~~~
droithomme
"the kids don't perform any better there"

You bring up an interesting data point. I wasn't even aware there were states
with no teachers unions, that is a bit surprising. Do you know which ones?
Without looking up the states and the stats, I'll take your word for it. I
have no expectation that labor unions increase or decrease teaching quality,
so if true as we'll assume, this is not particularly surprising.

I would expect, though I haven't checked, that these areas with teachers
unions have better pay and benefits for teachers. Is that true, from the data
you have analyzed?

------
jstalin
Being a former board of education member for a large city, I can say with some
experience that "standards" alone will do nothing. Education is so messed up
beyond recognition today.

There's so much incredible bureaucracy. So much. Unimaginable. Federal, state,
local. School districts have centralized to the point that it's nearly
impossible to implement changes unless it's some sort of "one size fits all"
scheme. Local schools are hamstrung by work rules, union rules, tenure rules,
and then on top of that state and local education "standards."

Then there are socio-economic issues. Parents who themselves never learned to
read. Kids living in areas where the person to look up to is a drug dealer.
Cultures of dependence and reliance on government handouts. Many (if not most)
urban school districts have dropout rates of over 50%.

Even where there is not that sort of culture, there are parents who think that
the schools are babysitters and any kid who does something wrong much have
done so because it's the <i>school's</i> fault.

And of course, teachers unions, licensing rules, pay scales, and lack of
individual accountability contribute as well.

It's such an enormous problem that there's no single answer. I think that
decentralizing education would go a long way toward helping to spur
innovation. Charter schools, vouchers, and removing attendance boundaries help
too.

Centralization has really hurt education and the only answer that seems to be
proposed is <i>more centralization.</i>

------
zhemao
Better standards are good, but without change in other areas, they won't have
much effect. If kids are failing to meet the current standards, how do you
expect them to meet newer, more rigorous ones? I am sure Massachusetts and
Minnesota's education systems have other things going for them besides
standards.

~~~
sukuriant
Better teachers.

I'm sorry but, using my mother as an example, in a single year, my mother
elevated inner-city students in English from very low scores to very high
scores. I'd need to ask her for specifics; but, the change was incredible. I
believe they were getting near highest marks in the area. She demanded a LOT
from the students, a truly incredible amount of writing and work. She was
very, very hard on her students; but at the same time rewarded achievement
greatly and taught in an effective, repetitive way. Years down the road, her
old students have repeatedly come back to her, thanking her for her work with
them. It is all about the teachers.

If people are sufficiently interested in her method, I might be able to get
her to log in to my account (or one of her own), and expound upon her methods
of training and relating to the children.

~~~
MordinSolus
We need better teachers AND a better system AND better parents. We can't just
put all of the expectations on the teachers and expect any sort of change. We
do need teachers who are willing to be tough (like it sounds like your mother
was) yet caring, but that requires a system that rewards teachers not based on
seniority but on merit (sorry unions) but also doesn't encourage teachers to
artificially raise grades or teach to specific tests. This means we'd have to
invest more in evaluating progress in students, instead of just throwing
standardized tests at kids. We also need parents who allow teachers to be
tough (no complaining because your kid fails!) _and_ who are supportive yet
disciplined back on the homefront.

~~~
sukuriant
Ab-so-lute-ly. We agree on pretty much all fronts. (I don't know my mother's
stance on unions; and I don't have a stance on unions since I haven't given it
any thought).

Since I haven't seen many willing parents (indeed in some situations, the
parent isn't a positive or even present factor at all), I've only raised up
the factor that I've actually seen make a positive change. It's actually the
same way for me with computer science. A good first introduction made all the
difference in the world.

------
fjorder
One problem with this article is that it attempts to exonerate some American
districts (that happen to be some of the most affluent urban regions in the
country) by pointing out they can compete favorably with the world's top
nations. That is an Apples to Oranges comparison. They're being compared to
those _entire_ nations including all children from their affluent urban
suburbs to their impoverished backwoods one-room schools. If you compared
Boston's math performance to only the richest urban areas of Finland, South
Korea, or Canada you'd find the disparity as stark as ever.

------
japhyr
I think this points out the need for a "crowdsourced" set of standards.

I put crowdsourced in quotes because it needs to be done carefully. We need a
body of standards that is subject to continuous improvement by subject-matter
experts, and expert teachers. It needs to be set up so that popular opinions
can be expressed, but simple votes do not override expert conclusions.

This body of standards should be mapped to each state's standards. Teachers
could work from the crowdsourced standards, but fulfill reporting requirements
on their state standards. This is what good teachers in states with poor
standards do anyways. Teachers work from a set of high-quality standards, but
report on their own state's standards.

------
lucian303
U.S. Should Adopt Education First

