Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

A New Approach to Teaching Science

Posted by timothy on from the most-textbooks-don't-merit-burning dept.

Gallenod writes "The Washington Post has an article on Joy Hakim, an author trying to re-write junior-high science textbooks to make them more readable. There are some interesting observations on how traditional textbook publishing houses control pretty much everything children read in school and her difficulties in challenging the status quo. However, she's already succeeded with an award-winning history textbook series, so maybe she'll rack up another win here."

4 of 406 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Different at the College Level...Why? by Jason1729 · · Score: 4, Informative

    College textbooks are choosen for the class by the professor who has expertise in the area. K-12 books are choosen school or district-wide by committees.

    Jason
    ProfQuotes

  2. Re:Science books by JoeBuck · · Score: 3, Informative

    She wasn't talking about making them easier to read. By making it a narrative, the student sees the process of science, the adventure of figuring out what was formerly unknown, and is more likely to get an understanding of how things fit together than if she is just asked to memorize a series of facts.

  3. Feynman on Textbook Selection by Michael_Burton · · Score: 5, Informative

    In his autobiograpical book Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman, physicist Richard Feynman wrote about his service on the State Curriculum Committee, which selected textbooks for California schools. There is an excerpt from the book here.

    --
    When all you have is an axe, everything looks like a grindstone.
  4. This is the same Joy Hakim... by Daniel+Rutter · · Score: 5, Informative
    ...who's had a starring role a few times on The Textbook League's site. The Textbook League's basic purpose is to point out the large number of textbooks that say things that aren't, you know, true.

    The operator of the League site, Bill Bennetta, posted on the Skeptic list today on this subject. He said he was interviewed for the Washington Post piece, and gave the journo various straightforward examples of Hakim's deception in her previous books. This got edited down to "Even amid all the acclaim, one textbook group accused Hakim of writing in errors."

    Actually, the League didn't "accuse" her of anything; they darn well proved it, so far as I can see. But who's ever going to be able to check for themselves, while the League is anonymised as "one textbook group"?

    Well, here are the references the Post doesn't want you to see. Check 'em out here, here and here (a search reveals a few more, too).

    Basically, Hakim gets stuff wrong, and just loves calling her own religious beliefs "history". Other people's don't get the same treatment.

    Maybe she'll be just great at inspiring kids with the majesty and humanity of the scientific endeavour, tra la. Her past work doesn't bode well, though.