Slashdot Mirror
Making Science and Math Kid Friendly?
mtspim asks: "I work for a non-profit organization that creates interactive math and science curriculum materials for kids and their instructors. Even though we have seen kids learn difficult topic more easily by using a computational approach to learning, most instructors are reluctant to introduce these new ways of thinking into their curriculum. What do Slashdot users think are the best ways to help revitalize math and science programs in our schools, or should we stick to the old conventional methods to learning?"
Usually when we teach or do stuff we try to be as efficient and simple as possible yet with math this is not the case. We currently teach math as "problem solving". We teach it by having people solve pointless problems which they will never face and never remember the solutions for unless they are one of the rare people who actually enjoy solving problems and who actually enjoy working through calculations.
I enjoy computer work, but if I were to teach computers assuming everyone who uses one enjoys it as much as I do, I'd make everyone learn C, everyone learn the linux commandline, and everyone learn what every single component in the computer does.
Look, we all can't like the same things and in my opinion schools should focus more on the math that matters in life. Statistics, Addition and Subtraction, perhaps even some logic and discrete math. All which are more useful to the common man than calculus, algebra, geometry (perhaps some people do need geometry)
Basic math and basic english should be the primary goals of school. The other classes are simply a complete waste of time and only harm a person by preventing them from doing as well as they would have done if they focused on the basics.
The math we actually use in life should not be decided by the math experts, it should be decided by surveys which the government should conduct. Once we find out the math people use most in daily life that should be what we teach in school. If we want to learn any other math then we specialize in math and learn it in college or in AP math.
The problem with the school system is we expect a jack of all trades, as if a human can be good at every subject. In reality only several thousand go to Harvard, Yale or MIT, the rest go state schools, community college, or they never go to college at all. The majority of people simply don't need the math and never will go to a college or have a job which requires it. Statistics, working with money, and logic are the only types of math people use. Discrete math may also be useful for scientific or technical fields involving computers.
People don't exist to serve systems, systems exist to serve people.
That isn't the problem, to be honest.
Math and science *ARE* kid-friendly, and kids ARE science and math friendly. Inherently. You ever seen a six month old exploring her world, seeing what things feel like, taste like, what she can do with her hands? That's the seed of science, right there.
The problem is, science *TEACHERS* are not kid-friendly. Most of them, no matter how compassionate and pro-children they believe they are, are inherently vicious and sadistic people. They can't recognize this fact, of course, and neither can any of the other adults - but just ask an 8 year old sometime.
-Hentai [in vita non pacem est]
I think if the teacher actually cares about the students as individuals, cares about the math and science, and cares about whether the students learn it, then the teacher will do a good job and find a way to get the students to learn.
So I'd say it's more-or-less hopeless in the current society with the current unionized system.
There's money to be made pretending to care though.
Sorry to say this, but as much as I appreciate the effort to make the teaching of subjects in school easier, and for that matter more cost effective, school systems are largely ignoring their own research into providing effective instruction.
Schools are attempting to save money by doing such things as making classes 2 or even 4 hours long, so that the teachers for those classes can do other things on days that they no longer need to teach that class (usually taking classes themselves, or using those days for "inservice" work.)
This flies in the face of several decades of research that shows that instruction should be provided in 15 min blocks, and classes should not be more than 60 min long without breaks. Additionally if a student is ill one day, they loose a minimum of a week's worth of instruction in that class if that four hour block is all that is held on that course for the week. Missing that much material can easily make the difference between an A and an F in a course.
Yes. All of this is being done as part of cost cutting measures, and with a goal of meeting the "No Child Left Behind" mandate. The effect however is closer to "No Child Able To Keep Up".
Standardized test scores are going down, schools are loosing funding as a result, and some are even being forced to close their doors. Granted when they close their doors, the cost of that school goes to Zero. Supposedly that was not the intent however.
-Rusty
You never know...
Children's Television Workshop, the producers of "Sesame Street", used to have other shows as well.
- "The Electric Company" was a spinoff for kids who had just outgrown the muppets of Seasame Street, but still had more to learn. It was basically the same kind of show, but leaned just a little older.
- "3-2-1 Contact" was the science spinoff for middle school students. It presented some grade-level appropriate documentaries, followed by The Bloodhound Gang using those concepts to solve mysteries.
- "Square One Televison" was the math spinoff, presenting skits, catoons, music videos, and games that all math concepts for grade school students.
However, all of those shows have since faded off of PBS, and CTW has now even taken on the name of Sesame Workshop which more-or-less indicates that they don't intend on ever expanding beyond Seasame Street again...
The entire PBS Kids lineup seems to have taken a turn for the younger, with babby-level shows like Teletubbies and Barney lining up with Seasame Street and still-timeless episodes of Mr. Rogers's Neighborhood. Shows aimed at middle schoolers have fallen off the board altogether... and I see that as a problem.
The problem is, science *TEACHERS* are not kid-friendly.
And why
I come from a country where the teachers are just as bad, probably worse. The difference is, in that country Engineers, Doctors and Mathematicians are regarded as the best members of society whereas businessmen, athletes and entertainers are just average people. That is motivation enough to make kids learn math and science well. Of course, good teachers and good motivation would be best, but cultural motivation is the biggest factor.
I've had some kid-friendly teachers. They played their parts well, putting up a wall of immaturity that the kids related to. One teacher, Mr. Cosmano, would mess up his experiements on purpose to make them explode or bubble over or otherwise amuse the students enough to hold the class' attention. He'd go over with us what went wrong, and the more knowledgeable kids would pick his experiment apart. It gave the class the opportunity to criticize him, but gave him the the opportunity to dump huge amounts of information in our heads when we were most vulnerable to it.
I think this type of thing is why "Beakman's World" and "Bill Nye the Science Guy" are popular, because they give the audience something besides an otherwise sterile subject to focus on. It would be good for more teachers to learn such techniques.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
I just tell them:
"even if you do not use this in your job, this material exercises your brain. it helps you to think so you can cut through the garbage in the world and see what is really going on. by working at this, you will not be held hostage to the great manipulators in the world because you will have the thought processes in place that allow you to see that those people, groups, and companies are just giving you a bunch of lies"
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
For the 9th Grade Proficiency Tests (which students are required to pass in order to graduate in Ohio), our students in higher-level classes take it early in 8th grade so they get it out of the way and can focus on college prep, honors and AP classes. Our high school in particular has a ton of activities and sports, from Honor Society to Wildelife Ambassadors, from a bible club to a step team (which is particularly popular). We even hold LAN parties in the cafeteria once a month. Our school certainly isn't perfect - by definition, no school can meet all the individual needs of every student; you'd need one teacher per student - but we do try to get every student involved in some way past just being another body in a seat. We even started making a list of all of our students and passing it around from teacher to teacher to find out who's involved in what activity, and see if there's any way we can reach kids who aren't involved. You'd be surprised, but this is generally the case at most schools, it's just that some schools are more successful and effective than others.
I agree that teachers aren't sadistic. Some teachers care about the education process. Almost none care about students as individuals.
Again, I have to call bullshit on this one too. Until you go through teacher training and have to put up with the infinite amount of paperwork, the unreasonable (and unfunded) demands of out-of-touch legislators, and experiences with parents that range from wonderful to strange to threatening, and all of these things outside of dealing with students, you simply can't make a statement like that with any degree of accuracy. Believe it or not, the vast majority of teachers I've met get into education because they care about kids. Fifteen, twenty, thirty years down the line, that original reason for getting into education tends to fade, but the really great teachers are able to keep it going and use their experience and expertise to truly master their craft. I can easily list many, many examples of our teachers caring about students as individuals; I'm sure similar things happen at schools all over the country, but we usually only hear about negative incidents on the news like shootings and drug busts and teachers fooling around with students, primarily because those things grab more viewers than "Local Teacher Gives Poor Students Rides Home After School So They Can Participate In After-School Activities." Two teachers bought one of our students a winter jacket because he had to walk about 2.5 miles to school every morning, but stuff like that doesn't (and won't) make the news.
If you're concerned about students getting more personal interaction, I would encourage you to stop by and volunteer at your local school and help out. Nearly every school needs help, even the ones that are financially well-off. Some of them have non-profit volunteer groups that come in and work one-on-one with kids; we have a group with us called City Conquest that will do anything from running copies for teachers to talking to kids with problems in private or even doing presentations in class. Immediately after the September 11th attacks, their group was called to New York to help out, and when they came back, they did presentations to social studies classes about how they helped.
Either way, it's one thing to claim that no teachers care about students as individuals, but it's another thing to go into a school and try to make a difference.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. -- Gandhi