[comp.edu] In defence of the K-12 school system

leigh2@unibase.UUCP (Leigh Calnek) (02/24/88)

I am a newcommermer to the network, and am excited about the
opportunity for educators at all levels to participate in
such a discussion.

As an educator with responsibilities at the K-12 level, I
seem to detect a note of superiority expressed in many of
the postings where they relate to the lower echelons of the
education system.  This is not surprising to me in that I
have always noted that the K-12 system was not held in high
regard by educators from post secondary institutions.

There are some things that we need to remember however when
we criticize our education system.  In the first instance,
we seem too quick to forget that western society has
embraced a philosophy of universal education, at least for
the population at the K-12 level.  We forget the
implications of this kind of philosophy, especially when we
don't have to implement it.  I would suggest that if we were
to apply that same philosophy to the post secondary level,
we would have at least an equivalent number of concerns
about that system.  Please recognize the benefits which come
from only having to accept the top 10-15% of the population,
and the problems which must be present when you try to
address the needs of the other 85-90%.  Remember when you
criticize the teacher at the K-12 level, and his methods,
that this teacher is a product of your system as well, and
if we are unhappy about what happens in those K-12
institutions, some introspection on your part may be well
advised.

I do not want to suggest for a moment that all is well in
the K-12 sector....but let's keep the problem in perspective
and recognize the magnitude of the issues involved in
attempting to educate an entire population.  How would post
secondary institutions be different if they were required to
accept ALL who presented themselves?  If they were subject
to close scrutiny at the community level?  If social
pressure prohibited a failure rate of less than 10%?  If 52%
of the student population came from broken homes and for the
most part that population was still trying to figure out who
they were and what was their purpose in life?  I would
suggest that most of these issues do not need to be
addressed by the post secondary institutions, and indeed if
they were, we would have most of the same kinds of concerns
that we currently express about the K-12 system.  

My experience has all been in Canada, but I suspect that
some reasonable parallels can be drawn.  

ok@quintus.UUCP (Richard A. O'Keefe) (02/27/88)

In article <73@unibase.UUCP>, leigh2@unibase.UUCP (Leigh Calnek) writes:
> As an educator with responsibilities at the K-12 level, I

I'm not from North America.  What's "K-12"?

> In the first instance,
> we seem too quick to forget that western society has
> embraced a philosophy of universal education, at least for
> the population at the K-12 level.

The phrase back home used to be "free, universal, and compulsory".
Might be interesting to discuss this, or would that be talk.politics?

> How would post
> secondary institutions be different if they were required to
> accept ALL who presented themselves?  If they were subject
> to close scrutiny at the community level?  If social
> pressure prohibited a failure rate of less than 10%?  If 52%
> of the student population came from broken homes and for the
> most part that population was still trying to figure out who
> they were and what was their purpose in life?

What proportion of people who *seek* tertiary education are denied it?
Does anyone have any figures to show that the proportion of tertiary
students from broken homes is significantly different than the
proportion of primary students from such homes?  (Careful how you
measure it, of course:  the older the student, the longer his parents
have had to break up.)  As for "who am I, what is my purpose?", are you
really suggesting that 18-year-olds don't ask questions like that?
What evidence is there that the distribution of ``ability'' across the
children who are now taught is significantly different from the
distribution of ``ability'' across the children who used to be taught
before?

I'm sure such figures exist, this is a request for references.

But "Don't blame us, we now teach ALL the children" won't wash.
They were teaching ALL the children before my parents' time.

jec@nesac2.UUCP (John Carter ATLN SADM) (02/28/88)

In article <73@unibase.UUCP>, leigh2@unibase.UUCP (Leigh Calnek) writes:
                [article has been edited]
] 
] As an educator with responsibilities at the K-12 level, I
] seem to detect a note of superiority expressed in many of
] the postings where they relate to the lower echelons of the
] education system.  This is not surprising to me in that I
] have always noted that the K-12 system was not held in high
] regard by educators from post secondary institutions.
] 
] There are some things that we need to remember however when
] we criticize our education system.  In the first instance,
] we seem too quick to forget that western society has
] embraced a philosophy of universal education, at least for
] the population at the K-12 level.  

Free education, free transportation, free/reduced cost meals,
special facilities for children with special needs (including
elevators for those in wheelchairs), special programs for
exceptional children (exceptional can range from those with learning
disabililties to the 'gifted' children that are working at a level
well beyond their school placement and need challenging courses).

]                                    We forget the
] implications of this kind of philosophy, especially when we
] don't have to implement it.  I would suggest that if we were
] to apply that same philosophy to the post secondary level,
] we would have at least an equivalent number of concerns
] about that system.  Please recognize the benefits which come
] from only having to accept the top 10-15% of the population,
] and the problems which must be present when you try to
] address the needs of the other 85-90%.  Remember when you
] criticize the teacher at the K-12 level, and his methods,
] that this teacher is a product of your system as well, and
] if we are unhappy about what happens in those K-12
] institutions, some introspection on your part may be well
] advised.

Just how good is the education provided a prospective teacher in any
given college/university?  Is it both broad and in depth?  Does it
cover handling a child with dyslexia, one that's hungry for food,
one that's starved for affection, one that's abused by parents, one
that's on drugs/alcohol, one that's pregnant?  Now that the teacher
has the attention of the class, was there also time for the teacher to
learn to be an educator while in college?

] 
] I do not want to suggest for a moment that all is well in
] the K-12 sector....but let's keep the problem in perspective
] and recognize the magnitude of the issues involved in
] attempting to educate an entire population.  How would post
] secondary institutions be different if they were required to
] accept ALL who presented themselves?  If they were subject
] to close scrutiny at the community level?  If social
] pressure prohibited a failure rate of less than 10%?

My daughter will enter Georgia Tech aa a freshman in engineering
this fall - the 'failure rate' of freshman engineers is typically
greater than 50%.  And even though Tech is a 'public' institution,
it's not FREE ($2200/qtr if living on campus).  
How would you react to paying tuition directly to a 'public' school
and then finding that your child had failed?  Was it the teacher(s),
the child, the system, the parents or some other cause?

My children attended a church affiliated kindergarten, but
their 1-12 education has been entirely in the public system.  The
county we're in is consistently in the top 5 in the state, and the
high school my daughter is attending, although not the largest or
newest, is among the best in the state (four National Merit
semi-finalists this year, and all of them are now finalists - how
many public schools of any size can match that?)


]                                                       If 52%
] of the student population came from broken homes

The area here is growing, and there are a lot of short term job
assignments (two years or so) for the 'rising young executives'.
This frequently means that both parents work, and that there are
many stresses on the family.  

My daughter was the only child in her fifth grade class whose parents
weren't both working full time.  (Makes it very difficult to get parents
to help with any school function, especially field trips. Would you take
a day off so your child could visit the China exhibit at the High Museum?)
She was also in the odd 20% of the class who lived with both
original parents.

] and for the
] most part that population was still trying to figure out who
] they were and what was their purpose in life?  

Our kids find 'who am I?' a difficult question, and entirely too
many of them try the quick way out - three kids that my kids know
personally have attempted suicide in the past year.  Thanks to quick
action by parents and the miracles of modern medicine (including a
helipad at the hospital) two of them were not successful.  There
have been numerous suicide attempts among the middle and high school
students, and 10 have succeeded in the past two years (ONE county).

Why? 
Too much pressure from their parents about school. (From a
conversation with one of the kids who wasn't successful.)

Too little response by parents to the kids' needs for some real
attention.  

# comment on the above
# When my 13 year old daughter tells me a girl friend doesn't understand
# how she can talk to me about 'going with' someone - because the
# friend's father gets all upset if she mentions it - I think perhaps
# some parents just don't listen to what the kids say (or what they
# mean).  For those who need it, 'going with' usually translates to
# who is likely to call whom on the phone or be invited to a mixed
# birthday party (ages 10-13)  or who might meet whom at the movies or
# at the Friday night social sponsored by one of the local churches
# (ages 12-14).  ** This is subject to local variations ** and is only
# valid for the group of kids I know from school/church involvement.

Too much concern over grades and not enough concern for education.
(there is a difference).

]                                                 I would
] suggest that most of these issues do not need to be
] addressed by the post secondary institutions, and indeed if
] they were, we would have most of the same kinds of concerns
] that we currently express about the K-12 system.  
] 
] My experience has all been in Canada, but I suspect that
] some reasonable parallels can be drawn.  

My experience is in the US, as a parent, PTA member/officer, church
volunteer, camp counselor.

The opinions are my own - my company deals in communications and
education, but not at the K-12 level.  

C programming or UNIX school, anyone?

-- 
USnail: John Carter, AT&T, Atlanta RWC, 3001 Cobb Parkway, Atlanta GA 30339
Video:	...ihnp4!cuea2!ltuxa!ll1!nesac2!jec    Voice: 404+951-4642
(The above views are my very own. How dare you question them? :-)

elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green) (02/29/88)

in article <73@unibase.UUCP>, leigh2@unibase.UUCP (Leigh Calnek) says:
> As an educator with responsibilities at the K-12 level, I
> seem to detect a note of superiority expressed in many of
> the postings where they relate to the lower echelons of the
> education system.

No, it's just that we finished bashing colleges last week, and moved on :-).

> we seem too quick to forget that western society has
> embraced a philosophy of universal education, at least for
> the population at the K-12 level.  

Universal need not equal low quality, if we insure that high ability people
have access to the teachers needed to develop their talents. Unfortunately, in
Europe and (maybe) Canada, such an approach is decried as "elitism". I can
understand that, to some extent... in Britain, at least, the lower class/poor
people were forced to go to shoddy public-supported schools because of
economic pressures, while the upper classes went to "exclusive" "elite"
schools. Maybe some backlash was inevitable.

But still, even here in the U.S., support for the gifted/talented student
often is negligible until high school, after which time it's too late for many
things. For example, the local school system's gifted/talented program for
elementary schools consists of a single school teacher, who teaches mostly
something called "cognitive studies" that's supposed to teach students "how to
think". In my conversations with local school students, they seem to think
it's mostly just a way of getting out of class for awhile (note the
class=boring, dull, something to get out of attitude -- and these are
extremely intelligent students, need a score of 150 on a standard IQ test to
be classed as "gifted and talented" in this area). None of them feel that it's
anything more than a joke.
   Nope, they don't get any more science than other students.  
   Nope, they don't get any more math than other students. Until they reach
high school, when they're expected to take Algebra and Geometry instead of
"Consumer Math". 
   Meanwhile, I remember a conversation I had with a Syrian student back in
1982. His government sent him to an "elite" school. He'd had two years of
Calculus by the 9th grade. Of course, the average Syrian is lucky to be taught
how to read. No "supermarket" schooling there.
   But surely we're advanced enough to have both?

> address the needs of the other 85-90%.  Remember when you
> criticize the teacher at the K-12 level, and his methods,
> that this teacher is a product of your system as well, and
> if we are unhappy about what happens in those K-12
> institutions, some introspection on your part may be well
> advised.

Didn't I see that discusion two weeks ago? :-)

> secondary institutions be different if they were required to
> accept ALL who presented themselves?  If they were subject
> to close scrutiny at the community level?

Sounds like a typical public state university. In Louisiana, at least, the
state is under court order by the Justice Department. Under the terms of the
consent decree, state schools are forbidden to turn away students who have a
high school degree or GED, regardless of ACT/SAT scores, and they must provide
remedial courses for the low scorers, to do the job that high schools should
have done. The Justice Department simply noticed that test scores were
effectively segregating the state university system, via a very simple
mechanism -- black/poor students are not being given the education necessary
for them to succeed at the college level, without remedial schooling to catch
them up to where high school should have brought them. The black universities
provided that remedial schooling. The white universities rejected the
applicants. Presto, instant segregation. Chango, court order slapped on the
state forbidding that practice.
  Note that these students apparently are motivated (they applied for college,
didn't they?) and want to succeed. But because of the poor state of our inner
city schools, they were not given the schooling they needed, despite being
motivated. It is a nation-wide disaster, the throwing away of much-needed
talent, and a national disgrace. 

--
Eric Lee Green  elg@usl.CSNET     Snail Mail P.O. Box 92191      
{cbosgd,ihnp4}!killer!elg         Lafayette, LA 70509            

Come on, girl, I ain't looking for no fight/You ain't no beauty, but hey
you're alright/And I just need someone to love/tonight

windley@iris.ucdavis.edu (Phil Windley) (03/01/88)

What does this discussion have to do with comp.edu?  I thought that this
group was more specific than a general education group.  Comp.edu suggests
to me a blending of CS and Education issues. like how do we teach CS and
how do we use computers to teach.  AM I way out in left field here?  Does
comp refer to some education term I'm not familiar with and not really to
computers as I suspected it does ;-) ?

Phil Windley
Robotics Research Lab
University of California, Davis

870158a@aucs.UUCP (Benjamin Armstrong) (03/02/88)

In article <1266@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu>, windley@iris.ucdavis.edu (Phil Windley) writes:
> What does this discussion have to do with comp.edu?  I thought that this
> group was more specific than a general education group.  Comp.edu suggests
> to me a blending of CS and Education issues. like how do we teach CS and
> how do we use computers to teach.  AM I way out in left field here?  Does
> comp refer to some education term I'm not familiar with and not really to
> computers as I suspected it does ;-) ?

Take a look around.  Is there any other newsgroup in which such discussions
would be appropriate?  I haven't seen one yet.  Maybe there should be one.
-- 
_______________________________________________________________________________                Ben Armstrong at Acadia University, Wolfville N.S.
UUCP: {uunet|watmath|utai|garfield|mnetor}!dalcs!aucs!870158a
BITNET: 870158a@Acadia
INTERNET: 870158a@ACADIA.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU

elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green) (03/04/88)

in article <1266@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu>, windley@iris.ucdavis.edu (Phil Windley) says:
> group was more specific than a general education group.  Comp.edu suggests
> to me a blending of CS and Education issues. like how do we teach CS and
> how do we use computers to teach.  AM I way out in left field here?  Does

I recently (~ 2 months ago) reposted some articles about declining enrollments
in Engineering, CS, mathematics, and other mathematical-related subjects, and
concerns on the part of various parties that the trend would not reverse no
matter how much we pay our engineers. Reason: most people who graduate from
high school can barely add, much less do the sort of mathematics required for
success in a technical field. Walk into a freshman CS class at a
middle-echelon state university. Count the students. Divide by 10. That's how
many will remain, after the rest fail Calculus four times.

Right now, the only reason we have professors in Engineering fields is because
of a trade imbalance of yet another kind -- we have more foreign-born
professors than native-born professors, by a factor of more than 2 to 1. If
those people go home, we're in deep sh*t.

--
Eric Lee Green  elg@usl.CSNET    A flickering swirling veil of motion
{cbosgd,ihnp4}!killer!elg        a vision, from the corner of your eye 
Snail Mail P.O. Box 92191        ghosts, haunting you, everywhere you go
Lafayette, LA 70509              ghosts, the ghosts of dreams that have died.

tlh@cs.purdue.EDU (Thomas L. Hausmann) (03/05/88)

In article <3560@killer.UUCP>, elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green) writes:
> in article <1266@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu>, windley@iris.ucdavis.edu (Phil Windley) says:
> > group was more specific than a general education group.  Comp.edu suggests
> > to me a blending of CS and Education issues. like how do we teach CS and
> > how do we use computers to teach.  AM I way out in left field here?  Does
> 
> I recently (~ 2 months ago) reposted some articles about declining enrollments
> in Engineering, CS, mathematics, and other mathematical-related subjects, and
> concerns on the part of various parties that the trend would not reverse no
> matter how much we pay our engineers. Reason: most people who graduate from
> high school can barely add, much less do the sort of mathematics required for
> success in a technical field. Walk into a freshman CS class at a
> middle-echelon state university. Count the students. Divide by 10. That's how
> many will remain, after the rest fail Calculus four times.

Eric perhaps s t r e t c h e s things a bit but he is essentially correct.
At my undergraduate institution, most CS students washed out because of poor
reasoning skills and mathematical abilities.  (Almost) every class I took for
the first two years (excluding Intro Psych, Intro Soc, [no digs intended, 
even Soc majors say intro Soc is a trivial class.]) about one third of the 
students failed outright.  These are courses like Calc I-III, Physics I-III,
and beginning CS courses.

For most of us reading comp.edu we are well aware of this problem.  What we
could be searching for is a solution or at least some ideas for change.
Old ideas include: making certain math courses required through grade 10
as opposed to grade 8, passing standard tests prior to graduation,  requiring
more math courses for ed majors, etc.

-Tom

> 
> --
> Eric Lee Green  elg@usl.CSNET    A flickering swirling veil of motion


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Hausmann       Dept. of Computer Sciences     Purdue University
tlh@mordred.cs.purdue.edu    | My ideas?  There has never been an original
...!purdue!tlh               | thought since Plato.

elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green) (03/06/88)

in article <3435@medusa.cs.purdue.edu>, tlh@cs.purdue.EDU (Thomas L. Hausmann) says:
> In article <3560@killer.UUCP>, elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green) writes:
>> matter how much we pay our engineers. Reason: most people who graduate from
>> high school can barely add, much less do the sort of mathematics required for
>> success in a technical field. Walk into a freshman CS class at a
>> middle-echelon state university. Count the students. Divide by 10. That's how
>> many will remain, after the rest fail Calculus four times.
> 
> Eric perhaps s t r e t c h e s things a bit but he is essentially correct.
> At my undergraduate institution, most CS students washed out because of poor
> reasoning skills and mathematical abilities.  (Almost) every class I took for
> the first two years (excluding Intro Psych, Intro Soc, [no digs intended, 
> even Soc majors say intro Soc is a trivial class.]) about one third of the 
> students failed outright.  These are courses like Calc I-III, Physics I-III,
> and beginning CS courses.
> 
> For most of us reading comp.edu we are well aware of this problem.  What we
> could be searching for is a solution or at least some ideas for change.

About stretching: Note that Purdue is not a public-supported state university,
and is not under court order to accept anybody who walks through the doors.
Out of 400 freshmen who declare their major as Computer Science, 40 is a
reasonable number to expect to graduate at the large public university that I
attended. Note, however, that probably 150 or more of those change their major
to "soft" subjects such as business administration, communications, etc.  The
other big kicker, besides mathematical abilities, was reasoning skills. Even
the robot metaphor (Karel & friends) wouldn't help some of the people that I
saw. Even the "giving house directions" metaphor didn't work, sometimes. If
some of those people had been giving me directions on how to get to their
house, I would have ended up in Mamou (a fate worse than nowhere!).

Sometimes I think Mssrs Pournelle and Niven were right ("Evolution reverses
with the onset of civilization"). Bad enough that we're all becoming blind as
bats, and a huge percentage of the population explodes in sneezing fits near
ragweed. At which point images arise of the typical citizen of the year 2600,
complete with seeing-eye dog and respirator mask.  But is our collective IQ
heading for the cellar, too?

But other times, I'm more optimistic. "Just poor education". At which the
educational establishment howls, but.... if you look at it from my viewpoint
("concerned citizen & parent"), "We give them more money than they got 50
years ago, more training, better tools, and what results did we get?" If I
hire someone to dig a well, I expect them to do it. I don't expect them to
moan and groan because the field isn't level and the going's a little rocky
and so on and so forth. They're there to do a job. If they don't, out the door
they go, and don't expect a paycheck. When I hear teacher groups moaning and
groaning about those same unlevel fields and rocky strata (lack of societal
support for education, the breakup of the family structure, etc.), as an
excuse for not doing the job that we the people hired them for, I tend to have
the same knee-jerk response.  

--
Eric Lee Green  elg@usl.CSNET    Snail Mail P.O. Box 92191        
{cbosgd,ihnp4}!killer!elg        Lafayette, LA 70509              

tlh@cs.purdue.EDU (Thomas L. Hausmann) (03/07/88)

In article <3596@killer.UUCP>, elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green) writes:
> in article <3435@medusa.cs.purdue.edu>, tlh@cs.purdue.EDU (Thomas L. Hausmann) says:
> > In article <3560@killer.UUCP>, elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green) writes:
> >> matter how much we pay our engineers. Reason: most people who graduate from
> >> high school can barely add, much less do the sort of mathematics required for
> >> success in a technical field. Walk into a freshman CS class at a
> >> middle-echelon state university. Count the students. Divide by 10. That's how
> >> many will remain, after the rest fail Calculus four times.
> > 
> > Eric perhaps s t r e t c h e s things a bit but he is essentially correct.
> > At my undergraduate institution, most CS students washed out because of poor
> > reasoning skills and mathematical abilities.  (Almost) every class I took for
> > the first two years (excluding Intro Psych, Intro Soc, [no digs intended, 
> > even Soc majors say intro Soc is a trivial class.]) about one third of the 
> > students failed outright.  These are courses like Calc I-III, Physics I-III,
> > and beginning CS courses.
> > 
> > For most of us reading comp.edu we are well aware of this problem.  What we
> > could be searching for is a solution or at least some ideas for change.
> 
> About stretching: Note that Purdue is not a public-supported state university,
> and is not under court order to accept anybody who walks through the doors.
> Out of 400 freshmen who declare their major as Computer Science, 40 is a
> reasonable number to expect to graduate at the large public university that I
> attended. 

Purdue *is* a public university (in West Lafayette, Indiana.)  A Hoosier grad
student (read native to Indiana) who picked up his degree last year told
me that it is Indiana law that any Indiana high school graduate be admitted 
to either IU or Purdue if they apply.  Disclaimer: this sounds unlikely to me,
every university has minimum standards.

When I related my above experiences, Eric, I specifically referred to my
undergraduate institution.  You may recall (from last years personal
correspondence with you) this was a reasonably selective public liberal arts 
school in Minnesota.

I have no problems with students washing out of any program, that is the
way the system works.  In fact, my experience is that about 10 percent
made it (like you.)  However, if I am not mistaken there has been some
article about "Predicting the Success of Freshmen CS Students"  in  a CACM
within the last two(?) years.  The data collected (hence the conclusions
drawn) may be a bit dated now (I'll explain below) but that will give us
a basis to discuss from OTHER than our own un-verifiable  thumb-nail
guesses.

[I say that the data is dated because it is from time before CS courses
became established in Minnesota high schools and I am extrapolating to
include Indiana, where the data for the report was collected (I think).
When you read the report, you will see that the numbers today, may be 
different.]

> [Some of Eric's stuff deleted]
> Sometimes I think Mssrs Pournelle and Niven were right ("Evolution reverses
> with the onset of civilization"). Bad enough that we're all becoming blind as
> bats, and a huge percentage of the population explodes in sneezing fits near
> ragweed. At which point images arise of the typical citizen of the year 2600,
> complete with seeing-eye dog and respirator mask.  But is our collective IQ
> heading for the cellar, too?

No. 

> But other times, I'm more optimistic.

Good. 

>                                           "Just poor education". 

High attrition rates are related mostly to misconceptions about what is
required of people in a given discipline.

>At which the
> educational establishment howls, but.... if you look at it from my viewpoint
> ("concerned citizen & parent"), "We give them more money than they got 50
> years ago, more training, better tools, and what results did we get?" 
> ...
> When I hear teacher groups moaning and
> groaning about those same unlevel fields and rocky strata (lack of societal
> support for education, the breakup of the family structure, etc.), as an
> excuse for not doing the job that we the people hired them for, I tend to have
> the same knee-jerk response.  

To say it is entirely the teachers fault that children are not learning
oversimplifies the problem.

> Eric Lee Green  elg@usl.CSNET    Snail Mail P.O. Box 92191        
> {cbosgd,ihnp4}!killer!elg        Lafayette, LA 70509              

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Hausmann    R.A.   Dept. of Computer Sciences     Purdue University
tlh@mordred.cs.purdue.edu    | My ideas?  There has never been an original
...!purdue!tlh               | thought since Plato.

870158a@aucs.UUCP (Benjamin Armstrong) (03/25/88)

In article <3435@medusa.cs.purdue.edu>, tlh@cs.purdue.EDU (Thomas L. Hausmann) writes:
>For most of us reading comp.edu we are well aware of this problem.  What we
>could be searching for is a solution or at least some ideas for change.
>Old ideas include: making certain math courses required through grade 10
>as opposed to grade 8, passing standard tests prior to graduation,  requiring
>more math courses for ed majors, etc.

The old ideas don't sit very well with me.  By grade eight most of the damage
is already done.  Students simply hate mathematics, and even the ones who don't
are bored to death with it.  All of the "math is fun" crap that I got in late
grade school and early junior high never did anything for me.  Very few of my
teachers or the writers of the curriculi they were using knew anything about
motivation.  Does anyone know anything about motivation for that matter?  Why
is it that so very many people end up hating math?

Take the case of my brother Chris who is currently the computer specialist
in a fledgling language institute.  When he was in early grade school he was
put in a couple of experimental schools where he learned mathematics under
the Montessorri (sp?) Method.  He enjoyed it and excelled at it.  As soon as
he was put into the public school system, his interest declined and so did
his grades.  By junior high he was frustrated with math and believed himself
incapable of doing well in it.  He avoided science courses all through high
school and by the time he reached university, the only science course he
took was an introductory computer science course for non-computer science
majors the primary objective of which was to teach Pascal.  He failed that
course.  By this point Chris was completely turned of to math and computers
and, in general, wary of "high-tech" things.

A couple of years ago, however, Chris started working at the International
Language Institute in Halifax as an editor.  It was here that his first
positive encounters with computers took place.  Chris learned very quickly
and in a matter of time he was doing everything on the computer: page
layout, maintaining a dial-up service for clients and translators, management
of the office LAN, software evaluation and purchasing...  He was never
incapable of comprehending computers and would have shown his aptitude much
earlier if he had been provided with the proper environment.  (Incidentally,
Chris's SAT scores for the sciences were excellent despite his lack of
success in his courses.)

Now, in my case, I did well enough in mathematics throughout high school,
but for me, the lack of stimulation in the earlier grades had a different
effect.  I was bored out of my skull, so I never did any homework.  My
speed of computation suffered considerably.  To date, I still find myself
struggling with very basic things such as dividing or subtracting.  I
understand mathematical concepts just fine and survived honours math in
high school pretty well, all things considered.  But now, in my second year
of an Honours Computer Science degree, I am looking for ways to avoid
taking Calculus because I'm afraid I will not do well enough in it for
an Honours program.

Most of my friends who took honours level science courses in high school found
them under-stimulating.  Making math mandatory in high school will not help
matters.  That's a band-aid solution to a problem which starts in the very
beginning, in early grade school.

Some of my friends who are now in the arts tell me that they cannot multiply
fractions or solve algebraic problems and also, not surprisingly, that
they hate and/or fear mathematics.  Why?  These are not stupid people.  How
many people go through life believing themselves to be "dumb" when it comes to
the sciences when actually they are victims of poor quality education?

I challenge the whole system.  People learn in different ways at different
rates, yet I have found our schools to be inflexible, not providing stimulating
material for students who excel, and not finding effective motivators for those
who take longer either.  When will we see it begin to happen?

I am thrilled by the potential computers have as motivators for children and
adults alike.  I am dismayed, however, when I see how far we have yet to come
in using computers in education.  It seems that attempts have been made to
dress up the old curriculi in CAI software, but maybe what we really need is
to find new ways of teaching math and the sciences which exploit our new
tools more effectively and which result in more captivating and motivating
lessons.
-- 
          Ben Armstrong at Acadia University, Wolfville N.S.
UUCP: {uunet|watmath|utai|garfield|mnetor}!dalcs!aucs!870158a | In quest of
BITNET: 870158a@Acadia                                        | a cure for
INTERNET: 870158a@ACADIA.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU               | technophobia...

tlh@cs.purdue.EDU (Thomas L. Hausmann) (03/26/88)

In article <1005@aucs.UUCP>, 870158a@aucs.UUCP (Benjamin Armstrong) writes:
>In article <3435@medusa.cs.purdue.edu>, tlh@cs.purdue.EDU (Thomas L. Hausmann) writes:
>>Old ideas include: making certain math courses required through grade 10
>>as opposed to grade 8, passing standard tests prior to graduation,  requiring
>>more math courses for ed majors, etc.
> The old ideas don't sit very well with me.  By grade eight most of the damage
> is already done.  

As it has been discussed before...you are right in saying that most damage has
been done by grade 8.  That is what I meant by more math courses for education
majors.  Educators that are math-phobic in our elementary schools have the 
potential for great harm.

> ...  But now, in my second year
> of an Honours Computer Science degree, I am looking for ways to avoid
> taking Calculus because I'm afraid I will not do well enough in it for
> an Honours program.

Why should you be avoiding a course (or course sequence) that would enable you
to become a better computer scientist?  Math is very important throughout
a CS major.  Which is why I double majored.  In graduate school, a very
significant portion of my courses rely on my math background, not to mention
research.

> Most of my friends who took honours level science courses in high school found
> them under-stimulating.  Making math mandatory in high school will not help
> matters.  

I disagree.  In my elementary years, my class always had the same teacher. (A 
different one each year.)  The difference in our educations began in later
junior high when some students were no longer taking math courses.  And when
we bacame seniors, it was decided that *all* students would have at least one 
course in grades 9-12.  So "consumer math" was invented and the students
who had not taken math for a few years had to struggle.

> 
> Some of my friends who are now in the arts tell me that they cannot multiply
> fractions or solve algebraic problems and also, not surprisingly, that
> they hate and/or fear mathematics.  Why?  These are not stupid people.  How
> many people go through life believing themselves to be "dumb" when it comes to
> the sciences when actually they are victims of poor quality education?

Or are victims of their own fear of failing.  You cannot always attribute
ignorance to "poor quality education"  If your friends did not take higher
math courses where skills with fractions become commonly used, then it is 
their own fault for not taking those courses.

> I challenge the whole system.  People learn in different ways at different
> rates, yet I have found our schools to be inflexible, not providing stimulating
> material for students who excel, and not finding effective motivators for those
> who take longer either.  When will we see it begin to happen?


When someone has a better idea (that works...)


> 
> ... but maybe what we really need is
> to find new ways of teaching math and the sciences which exploit our new
> tools more effectively ...

Amen.

>  Ben Armstrong 

-Tom

      .^.^.        Tom Hausmann 
     . O O .       tlh@mordred.cs.purdue.edu    ( ARPA )
      . v .        ...!purdue!tlh   ( UUCP  )
     / | | \
     ./   \.       "Whooo do ya think you're foolin' "
______mm.mm_____
       \_/

870158a@aucs.UUCP (Benjamin Armstrong) (03/31/88)

In article <3635@medusa.cs.purdue.edu>, tlh@cs.purdue.EDU (Thomas L. Hausmann) writes:
> Or are victims of their own fear of failing.  You cannot always attribute
> ignorance to "poor quality education"  If your friends did not take higher
> math courses where skills with fractions become commonly used, then it is 
> their own fault for not taking those courses.

A particular friend of mine (whom I had in mind when I suggested that the
quality of education is at fault) said that she did take math courses in which
she learned to manipulate fractions.  However, she never really understood
what she was doing at the time despite the fact that her marks were above the
average for her class.  She never retained what she learned because her school
made it easy for her to pass her math courses without actually learning
anything.  I believe that this may be more common in math courses than
many educators are aware.  What happens is the student will not be motivated
to explore the subject and become familiar with the basic concepts which are
being taught if she can get by without them.  I encountered the same problem
in my honours high school math courses.  I often did not need to do anything
more than study for the tests the night before in order to get a good mark,
and by the end of high school a lot of what I had "learned" was lost.  The
difference is that in the case of my friend, she was being taught material
which didn't motivate her because of her fear and dislike of math; in my case
I was not motivated because I did not deem it worthwhile to put effort into
the courses if I could get by without it.  I now regret my apathy in high
school but am asking myself whether I am completely to blame.  After talking
to others about their experiences with mathematics in school I am lead to
believe that the schools are, for whatever reasons, not adequately equipped
to motivate mathematics students.

As for my avoidance of calculus, I am sure that I will overcome my apprehension
and take it for the reasons you have stated.  The fact remains, however: I
do not look forward to the experience and I don't believe I should be feeling
this way considering that in other respects I am quite a capable student and
fledgling computer scientist.  No thanks to the schools for letting me get by
so far with so little and for dulling my appetite for mathematics.

> -Tom

Benjamin.
-- 
          Ben Armstrong at Acadia University, Wolfville N.S.
UUCP: {uunet|watmath|utai|garfield|mnetor}!dalcs!aucs!870158a | In quest of
BITNET: 870158a@Acadia                                        | a cure for
INTERNET: 870158a@ACADIA.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU               | technophobia...

leigh@unibase.UUCP (Leigh Calnek) (04/05/88)

I sense that there are many differences between how we
approach similar problems between Canada and the U.S. In
Saskatchewan, students would appear to be in math courses
over a longer grade span than in the U.S.  Our school system
graduates students after 12 years, and we regard grades
10-12 as high school.  To illustrate my point about greater
retention, the following table shows our provincial grade
population and enrolment figures.

Grade    Total Enrol   Algebra   Gen.Math.  Geom-Trig  Calculus
======   ===========   ========= =========  =========  ========
10          14,798       12,943     888        7,845
11          13,786       11,291     840        5,197
12          14,174       10,161     645        7,014    1,289

Students who are enrolled in the Algebra course may not enroll
in the General Math program.  Also, students who are
enrolled in the Calculus or Geom-Trig programs are also
found in the Algebra course.  As you can see, over 70% of
our senior grade enroll in some kind of math program.  One
reason for this relates to our requirements for graduation,
which requires a math or science to be completed at the
grade 11 or 12 level.

This is not meant to suggest that our graduating students
would necessarily better math skills, for this set of
statistics does nothing to describe the 25% of the student
population that fails to graduate from grade 12.

In addition, it would be safe to suggest that the recipients
of our students are not fully satisfied with the math skills
of students on exiting of the school system.  The
Kindergarten (pre-grade 1) to grade 12 (ie K-12 system) is
constantly under fire for students exiting with "poor"
skills, and most frequently the criticism points to a
perceived inadequacy to use basic math skills.

I feel there is some considerable room for discussion
regarding any expectation we may have that all students
should be able to develop competency in all or any subject.
Educators at all grade levels find students who challenge
their abilities beyond our capacity to deliver....that is to
say we find students that are incapable of learning what we
are teaching.  This is true of teachers in the primary
grades and it is true of teachers at the university level.
The sign of the true teacher is that upon recognition of the
problem, a variety of approaches are tried hoping to find
one which will allow the student to master the necessary
concepts.  We do no favours for ourselves or others to
suggest the problem lie in the earlier education experience.
Teachers at all levels need to be able to respond to the
skills level brought by the students, and work with them
from that point.

A good education system is one which is constantly reviewing
its needs and products, seeking alternative strategies and
approaches to improve its product and retain its student
population.  In Saskatchewan, we have begun implementation
of a new strategy for attempting to educate our students.
It combines the concept of a "core curriculum" (content and
processes in major curriculum areas) for all students with
that of "common essential learnings" (concepts and processes
common to all subject areas) to address some of the problems
we all recognize exist in an education system.  The
mobilization and "re-tooling" of 10,000 teachers looms as a
major task in the successful implementation of this "new"
approach.  The exciting aspect is that educators at all
levels are prepared to "give it a try".  I will try to
provide some further information pertaining to the new
thrust in Saskatchewan over the coming months.

------------------------
uunet!mcl!unibase!leigh
Leigh Calenk
3002 Harding St.
Regina, Sask. Canada
S4V 0Y4
phone: home (306)789-9007
       bus. (306)787-9448