What can we do to help improve science education in the US?

The whole world should be worried about the US education system.

Quote:

Kansas gives science a rare political win

By Wendy Wagner and Rena Steinzor

• Revising a National Cancer Institute Web site to suggest that women who have had abortions are more likely to have breast cancer (an assertion unsupported by science).

Suppose ros, in science's many imaginative experiments, that a scientist discovered that 200 wasp stings in one go, give you a 90% chance of not getting (******) and a 10% chance of a painful demise.

What would you do?

real life wrote:

The places where schools produce the poorest results are mostly large cities where the mayor and school boards are predominantly liberal Democrat.

Those are also the poorest areas, and the most populated. It's probably more of a money problem than a "liberal" problem.

But if you want to bash liberals, go ahead (I'm not a liberal, so I don't care. I'm a wishy washy moderate

real life wrote:

Possibly you would want to contend that the Bush presidency 'predicted' the poor performance of public schools since it was already a long established fact before he showed up.

No, but I could say that his presidency didnt' help the educational problems, and probably made things worse.

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Quote:

Kansas gives science a rare political win

By Wendy Wagner and Rena Steinzor

• Revising a National Cancer Institute Web site to suggest that women who have had abortions are more likely to have breast cancer (an assertion unsupported by science).

I thought that one item was particularly unsavory.

In a world of free information, veracity needs to be measured in some way.

The world needs the methods of science, now more than ever.

"The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons believes that patients have the right to give or withhold fully informed consent before undergoing medical treatment. This includes notification of potential adverse effects. While there is a difference of medical opinion concerning the abortion breast cancer link, there is a considerable volume of evidence supporting this link, which is, moreover, highly plausible. We believe that a reasonable person would want to be informed of the existence of this evidence before making her decision."

Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists

On March 13, 2000 the U.K.'s Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists became the first medical organization to warn its abortion practitioners, saying that Dr. Brind's review was methodologically sound and that the abortion-breast cancer research "could not be disregarded." ["Evidence-based Guideline No. 7: The Care of Women Requesting Induced Abortion" (2000) RCOG Press, p. 29-30]

Later that summer after the London press learned of the RCOG's warning, the BBC and The Guardian strenuously objected. Angry, post-abortive women, who hadn't been informed of the breast cancer risk, called their doctors to learn what they could do to reduce their risks and otherwise protect their health. After being intimidated by members of the press who don't respect human life, the RCOG put its tail between its legs and dutifully withdrew the warning.

The incident reveals the cowardice of the RCOG's leadership. It demonstrates what the medical group was willing to say when it thought it was politically safe to do so.

Today, the RCOG says that the relationship between abortion and breast cancer is "inconclusive." The group repeats the falsehood that the abortion-breast cancer studies which relied on interviews, not medical records, contain a bias called "report bias." This hypothetical problem proposes that studies, which use interviews, are inherently flawed because there is allegedly a difference in the reporting levels between healthy women and unhealthy women. In other words, healthy women lie or underreport their abortions, but unhealthy women don't. However, a far more reasonable hypothesis is that women, who don't want to report their abortions to researchers truthfully, would refuse to participate in these studies in the first place.

If the RCOG's claim of report bias were true, then the findings of scientists who relied on interviews would be inaccurate and artificial. However, the RCOG provides no citations to support its claim because there are none. The RCOG expects women to accept its phantom theory as if it were a fact. Truth is, there are no scientists who presently claim to have found credible evidence of such a bias or difference in reporting levels.

The RCOG says it relies on the supposed findings of an abortionist, David Grimes, who is affiliated with the population control group, Family Health International. Despite the fact that Grimes clearly does not respect human life, the RCOG repeats his unsupported assertion that the studies which relied on medical records are superior to those relying on interviews.

rosborne979 wrote:

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Quote:

Kansas gives science a rare political win

By Wendy Wagner and Rena Steinzor

• Revising a National Cancer Institute Web site to suggest that women who have had abortions are more likely to have breast cancer (an assertion unsupported by science).

I thought that one item was particularly unsavory.

In a world of free information, veracity needs to be measured in some way.

The world needs the methods of science, now more than ever.

Seems to be a difference of views on this subject.

http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/medicalgroups/index.htm

Get you lot off the case and put some professionals in charge.

BTW -- It is perfectly silly to say that school boards in large cities are headed by liberals.....

Frankly, real life, I am not going to read the rest of your post because I hate those posts that quote others and go on and on. Pay attention and stop taking things out of context. I really do try not to answer posts that are that silly.

..............So they called in Morris. They told him that they were worried that if they failed that many teachers, the political reaction from the unions would be too great. On the other hand, since they hadn't released the test scores, there was still time to rig the results.

"What percentage should we fail?" Gov. Clinton asked Morris.

"What percent actually flunked the test?" Morris replied. "It was a disaster," Gov. Clinton said. "It was way too high. If I enforced the passing grade, I'd have to flunk a third or a half of them. I can't do that. We'd particularly have to fire a high percentage of minority teachers."

The solution? Morris was told to poll Arkansas voters and find out what percentage of the teachers they expected to fail the test. As Gov. Clinton had said to Morris, "I can decide what score is passing and what is failing." Morris' polling revealed that Arkansas voters expected 10 percent of the teachers to fail, rather than the 30-50 percent who actually failed. But when the Clinton Administration released the "results" of the tests to the public, it reported that only 10 percent had failed. In the end, only a handful of Arkansas' incompetent teachers lost their jobs..................

This past spring, a group of Chicago children learned their lessons from a teacher who had flunked 24 of 25 tests of teacher competence.

In Elgin District 46, students studied the English language with a teacher who had failed 21 of 21 tests for teachers. That included nine of nine Basic Skills tests--an exam so easy, experts say, an eighth- or ninth-grader should pass it on the first try.

And in Aurora last school year, a group of elementary children took classes from a teacher who failed 15 of 16 teacher competency tests.

The three teachers were among hundreds employed full time last year in Illinois public schools who had not passed both a Basic Skills test and a subject matter test. Both must be passed for a regular, or "initial," Illinois teaching certificate.

Far more--nearly 5,250--failed at least one Illinois certification test, though most went on to pass later. Such teachers stood at the head of classrooms and taught more than 180,000 Illinois children last spring, a Chicago Sun-Times investigation found......................

real life wrote:

plainoldme wrote:

The CNN article is wrong: part of the problem is not due to American schools requiring students to memorize disconnected science facts.

Part of the problem could be addressed by the plan leftist students in Detroit had during the 1960s and 1970s: Encourage teachers to major in subjects and not in teaching. On the other hand, I worked at the Henry Ford Museum during college with women students from most of Michigan. A girl from Eastern Michigan University, basically a teachers' college, was majoring in "science" in order to teach science. Truthfully, I found her stupid beyond belief. She should have majored in business so she could run a branch of a chain store after graduation.

BTW -- Kids who are interested in science memorize random science facts.

Yes, POM, that surely is a radical idea.

Have teachers that can pass the same tests that they expect their students to pass.

from http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=1101

Quote:

..............So they called in Morris. They told him that they were worried that if they failed that many teachers, the political reaction from the unions would be too great. On the other hand, since they hadn't released the test scores, there was still time to rig the results.

"What percentage should we fail?" Gov. Clinton asked Morris.

"What percent actually flunked the test?" Morris replied. "It was a disaster," Gov. Clinton said. "It was way too high. If I enforced the passing grade, I'd have to flunk a third or a half of them. I can't do that. We'd particularly have to fire a high percentage of minority teachers."

The solution? Morris was told to poll Arkansas voters and find out what percentage of the teachers they expected to fail the test. As Gov. Clinton had said to Morris, "I can decide what score is passing and what is failing." Morris' polling revealed that Arkansas voters expected 10 percent of the teachers to fail, rather than the 30-50 percent who actually failed. But when the Clinton Administration released the "results" of the tests to the public, it reported that only 10 percent had failed. In the end, only a handful of Arkansas' incompetent teachers lost their jobs..................

from http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:nTHyoMc4SdYJ:www.suntimes.com/special_sections/failing_teacher/part1/cst-nws-main06.html+teacher+fail+test&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1

Quote:

This past spring, a group of Chicago children learned their lessons from a teacher who had flunked 24 of 25 tests of teacher competence.

In Elgin District 46, students studied the English language with a teacher who had failed 21 of 21 tests for teachers. That included nine of nine Basic Skills tests--an exam so easy, experts say, an eighth- or ninth-grader should pass it on the first try.

And in Aurora last school year, a group of elementary children took classes from a teacher who failed 15 of 16 teacher competency tests.

The three teachers were among hundreds employed full time last year in Illinois public schools who had not passed both a Basic Skills test and a subject matter test. Both must be passed for a regular, or "initial," Illinois teaching certificate.

Far more--nearly 5,250--failed at least one Illinois certification test, though most went on to pass later. Such teachers stood at the head of classrooms and taught more than 180,000 Illinois children last spring, a Chicago Sun-Times investigation found......................

real life -- Trying to provoke? Can you swallow something to raise your IQ?

That's nothing rl.

I've had lessons from a teacher who slept behind a notice reading "DON'T MAKE A NOISE LADS--THE HEADMASTER WILL COME IN.

Very orderly it was too. It was history.