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

i don't think a little bit of patriotic indoctrination would hurt. every nation does it. i think since the cold war, it's been lacking in american education.

Perhaps not there ye110man. But who gets to decide what is "patriotic"? What happens when we throw a little religion into the mix?

This is, IMO, why we have a problem. People are to busy fighting over the content and direction of the indoctrination rather than worrying about raw knowledge and practical application.

Hi Fishin,



I didn't mean to imply that it all had to be done with 6 year olds, nor that we couldn't provide information which might be valuable years from now, like "critical thinking", something which is always valuable.



No, it's because those things *alone* are not enough. They are still valuable, and should be taught, but unlike years ago, our society now requires more knowledge with which to become generally productive (there are exceptions, artisans, craftsmen, inventors, and technicians for systems we don't have yet, but they all improve their odds with a basic foundation).



This is a good point. I should have included reference to the future in my previous definition of the primary goal of education And I don't think I would want to pass judgement on what a "better" society is, but rather, I am just thinking along the lines of productivity which enables a member of society benefit society, and to benefit from the society.

Thanks,

And just out of curiosity... how would others define the goals of education in the US?

Maybe we aren't yet focused on the same goals, and that's why we can't agree on a methodology.

Best Regards,

I'd say that the primary goal of the education system is to provide adequate knowledge/skills training to allow people to function within the scope of a reasonably predictable future society.

Within the total context of the "education system" that would be broken down into providing the basic knowledge/skills in primary and secondary school and advanced skills in college, trade or "other" schools.



Good! lol I'd hate to get into that.

I really think the USA is heading for 3d world status, unless we increase enthusiasm for science and engineering details and fundamentals. Some other folly is also heading The USA toward 3d world. Few agree, so effective action is improbable. I will however continue to post ideas to analyze on forums in hopes some will think and grow wiser. I am learning from your input and my own analysis, so thank you for being part of the solution. Neil

I prefer to think that the world is heading toward equilibrium, which is a good thing in the long run. Money and Knowledge and Power are flowing from areas of high density to areas of low density, as you would expect in a competative world. This is painful for the United States right now, but benefits others, and in the end will produce a more balanced and safe world for everyone (still a few hundred years away I would guess).

I'm pretty sure global equilibrium is happening at the state level, but I'm not so sure it's happening on a "class" level. For some reason pockets of wealth seem to build up in the system (Vanderbilt's and DuPonts) which endure for generations. Maybe there is a natural pressure on even these enclaves of wealth which tends to disperse them, but if there is, I've not been able to identify it yet.

to answer the original question (really i have no clue what the other posts are i'm just reading this topic late in the game and i'm to lazy to read thru the other replys) but i think that science education in the us could be greatly improved by the teaching methods. teachers are so forced now a days to teach for these tests that come around every year. its always about just getting the kids to pass the class. i know so many people who say- how is this going to affect me- i don't want to be a scientist so they find it unimportant- but it Is so important. it makes the difference in your health and how technology is being expanded. there is so much that science impacts in the lives of everyday people. so we need teachers who are going to get in and make the kids see- wow- this is important. teachers now a days aren't paid crap tho. how are we suposed to have great education when all the truely inteligent people are choosing jobs other than teaching b/c there is no money in teaching. then where is the money going to come from when the public says well why should we pay higher taxes on teachers who aren't even so great? its a nasty cycle. until the money is there to attract great educators we are stuck with crappy education. until we get some great educators people aren't willing to fork up the $ to pay these better teachers. Break the friggin circle people!!!! this is mine and your childrens education at stake! JEeez.

I've always thought that there needs to be some way for schools to make money, like corporations, before teachers will ever get paid what they deserve. But I don't know how to do it.

Schools produce a product, educated kids, and corporations buy that product years later but the schools don't get any pay for their product.

Perhaps one of a few selected goals of the education of American children might be focused towards that which has made the U.S. the envy of the rest of the world: innovation and practical application of new ideas both technological and economic. This is not a new concept, after all, some of the best schools in the nation search out and enroll students that have demonstrated these abilities, especially post secondary technical and business schools.

In the same vein, greater emphasis should be placed on academic competition to bring its level of intensity equal to that enjoyed by sports. The simple mathematical operation of addition resolves to the stark fact that there is only a miniscule amount of well paying jobs in professional sports. Further, sports "heroes" seem less so these days. Indeed, sometimes they are viewed as full time well paid athletes with part time jobs as felons. Kids take particular note of this, sometimes to their detriment. This is sad since, unlike their Heroes, they lack the economic resources to support their forays into the legal system.

Also indicated is less distraction from and more focus on the original goal of the founding fathers: A well educated citizen who is better equipped to examine and wrestle with complex problems. School uniforms would help remove a number of distractions. There are those, of course that rail against such "rigid rules" that "rob the student of his individuality". But is a place whose supposed existence is based on education a legitimate venue for the displaying of individual tastes? Are graduates of the Military Academies any less individualistic post graduation? Alternatively, is Bill Gates' wardrobe the secret of his immense success?

It often seems our educational system is a victim of "mission creep".There now seems to be a tendency, by the powers to be, to focus too much on the individual and less on the ultimate goal of a well informed and adjusted citizen. Competitions that allow for no losers, where every child is considered a "winner", seem pointless. This merely robs the individual of the feeling of individual achievement and the unsurpassed emotions of joy and the feeling of personal accomplishment that results from the ego boost that is suppose to spring from such pseudo-competitions. Some might criticize my thoughts on this and point out that real competitions are the source of hurt and encourage the winner to feel superior to others, but there is more at stake. I might suggest they look at the real world. Would these same people, in the role of consumers, buy an inferior DVD at an inflated price just to make the manufacturer "feel better"? "But the children are so young" might be their reply. I would suggest that, like learning a language, the learning would be easier and more natural at an earlier age. The losing of a competition has its own value. One must learn to deal with disappointments the frequency of which usually out numbers successes. Handling both wins and losses: Lessons for life, I say.


rosborne979's suggestion that schools get paid for their product is interesting. The suggestion that the students comprise a product intrigues. The first reminds me that a lot of private Universities receive remittance from alumni (Grants and Trust funds), but skeptics might view this more a marriage between Altruism and Tax law rather than proper payment for services rendered. But we do see university backed publishing houses and even technological forays into the real business world that might serve as sources of revenue.

Secondary schools would be hard pressed to follow these university efforts simply because they lack the academic octane comprised of more mature and properly trained talent. So how would this work? The business model would imply not only payment for services but also shine the bright Klieg lights of productivity on the system. Unfortunately, the Teacher's Union has consistently refused any type of meritocratic rewards system as being implicitly untoward and explicitly excluding students of "lesser ability". But is it really? Or does it merely present an opportunity for good teachers to creamily rise to the top above the whey? I suspect professional teacher unions reject school vouchers simply because they would quickly (within a few years) expose not only better teachers but schools and the resulting academic programs. This would then promote the migration of students to those schools who produce the best education product. But this competition would allow fulfillment of rosborne's education business concept by empowering individual schools with the ability to charge a premium, that is, fee for service.

Will this "leave some students behind"? Sure, but is the present situation fulfilling all student's needs? The above system would allow apportionment of resources by putting good teachers where they are best used, encourage teacher improvement, and allow students a choice of not only the best schools but maybe even manifest a specialization of schools into the technical, scientific/mathematical, or liberal arts subject areas.

All this "voucher" system does is to allow more consumer choice while promoting more efficient use of resources. Why not some Laissez Faire in the educational system, at least to some degree? In the current educational system (up to and including the secondary schools) the government provides some regulation and most of the money. But, unlike the government administered food stamp program, there is no final choice afforded the consumer. Paradigm shift anyone?

JM

Maybe teachers should collect "royalties" on their students after they enter adult careers.

What would happen if corporations had to pay a small percentage of an employee's salary back to the teachers who educated them as kids (all the public ed teachers from first grade to twelvth).

Would this encourage teachers to teach more kids, and to try to set them on a path of high calibur education, thus benefiting the teacher as well as the student? Would this also benefit corporations in the long run by increasing the pool of educated resources from which corporations draw? The corporations would face a drain due to the royality payments, but would it be worth it?

Just playing with some numbers here...

How many students does a public school teacher have over the course of a career? 20 students per year over a 30 year period (round numbers)?

With 600 students total in a career, only a small percentage of salaries would be sufficient to give a 30 year veteran teacher a nice income based on royalties alone.

The royalty scale could be weighted to place emphasis on those grades or subjects in which students acquired the most critical pieces of education.

Hi rosbourne: I think your royalty plan would improve education sufficiently to justify the cost to consumers. It would however give foreign manufacturers another small advantage over USA manufacturers. IMHO we need to address the USA shrinking manufacturing base quickly and vigorously before we get involved in WW3 which could be very soon. Neil

Okay, I admit I didn't read every single post in this thread, so this may be a repeat. But, I think we could start with the simple premise that self esteem should come from a job well done, not just, "I exist and therefore I am wonderful." There is so little incentive for kids to actually accomplish something while they are in school that only the ones who really love science anyway are learning any of it. How about companies that need good scientist, engineers, mathmeticians, etc. give employees the opportunity to teach, either as a 2-year deal, or on an on-going part-time basis. What about corporate sponsored schools that provide incentives for appropriately qualifed students? Scholarships for math/science students that rival sports scholarships? It could be like the army - we'll pay for your college if you come to work for us for X years.

While the military can enforce agreements to serve for up to 4 years, typically industry can not enforce such agreements. The Teachers Union does not want compition and has subtile ways of discouraging corporate teachers, otherwise both are productive ideas. Perhaps special legislation can make both possible. Neil

A group called Science for all Americans (SFAA) has
a site that offers a great long term solution for improving our science and math standings worldwide.
The break it down into nearly a dozen sections. I
converted them to WAV from Text as I often
listen as I drive or ride the train.

What tool are you using to convert from text to WAV?

Is this the list you are referring to?

http://www.project2061.org/tools/benchol/bolintro.htm

I dont understand one thing. America has produced many Nobel prize winners in the past century and many top students from overseas come here to pursue their higher studies. The universities here such as MIT, Stanford etc. rank amongst the best in the world. So why this sudden concern for improvement in education? Can someone be more specific here? Are you talking about grade school or Grad. school?

Grade school. Our colleges are petty good (they charge a lot per student), but as our culture becomes more and more high tech and engineering based, our public education system is not keeping pace with the level of knowledge required to be productive in this society.

Note: my personal belief is that the public education system should give all students the education necessary to become productive and well paid contributors to the workforce. It is my believe that college should not be a "requirement" when it comes to sufficient knowledge to be a productive citizen.

IMHO, this is the 1st issue that needs ot be decided as there are divergent opinions on the purposes of primary and secondary education as well as the level of education that should be provided as "minimums". Until that is worked out there really isn't much point in worrying about improving something that there is no objective measuring point for.