ISEN-ASTC-L is a service of the Association of Science-Technology Centers
Incorporated, a worldwide network of science museums and related institutions.
*****************************************************************************
Martin,
Thanks for posting. It is a bleak report on our educational standards.
One thing that strikes me, is that we encourage and foster the mastery of automatic behaviors with respect to subject areas like arithmetic and then treat other equally automatic processes as if they're not.
We all know and understand the benefits of having memorized our times tables, and trusting the power of mathematical expressions to reflect physical reality, yet those same agreed upon principles evaporate across their application to other areas of inquiry. Without the solid foundational underpinnings required for basic arithmetic manipulations, higher math would be impossible,yet that's the burden frequently placed upon students in the life sciences.
C
Sent from Charlie's iPad
Berkeley, CA
Mobile 510-499-8086
Skypein: (510) 984-3543
[log in to unmask]
Exploratorium
3601 Lyon St.
San Francisco, CA 94123
On Nov 17, 2012, at 7:59 AM, Martin Weiss <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> ISEN-ASTC-L is a service of the Association of Science-Technology Centers
> Incorporated, a worldwide network of science museums and related institutions.
> *****************************************************************************
>
> This morning I came across a report on science standards in the US in a
> post by Jerry Coyne an evolution biologist at University of Chicago in his
> Why Evolution is True blog. The excerpt below gives a sense of the report.
>
> The posting is at:
> http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2012/11/16/u-s-school-science-standards-pronounced-dismal/
>
> The reports are linked in his posting but a blog about them is at:
> http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/budding-scientist/2012/02/01/u-s-state-science-standards-are-mediocre-to-awful/
>
> and the report is at:
> http://www.edexcellence.net/publications/the-state-of-state-science-standards-2012.html
>
>
> - Why is the U.S. doing so poorly? The authors single out five problems
> with state standards:
>
>
> 1. *The undermining of evolution* through a variety of methods, both
> involving the legislature (as in Louisiana's "academic freedom" act that
> allows the teaching of intelligent design creationism) and more subtle
> incursions, like Colorado and West Virginia's mandate that the "strengths
> and weaknesses" of evolution be discussed, while of course other "theories"
> don't come in for such treatment.
> 2. *Vague standards that give teachers little guidance.* The report
> mentions, as two examples, "A middle school teacher in New Hampshire, for
> example, will come face to face with the following: 'Identify energy as a
> property of many substances.' Pennsylvania offers the equally baffling
> 'Explain the chemistry of metabolism.' Such empty statements can do little
> to inform curriculum development or instruction, and give no guidance
> to assessment developers."
> 3. *The promotion of "inquiry based learning" without any guidance to
> teachers how to implement it*. The report notes, "Iowa
> schoolchildren are directed to: '*Make appropriate
> personal/lifestyle/technology choices, evaluate, observe, discuss/debate,
> recognize interactions and interdependencies at all levels,
> explain, describe environmental effects of public policy,
> choose appropriate course(s) of action.*' Such statements are devoid of
> any teachable content and leave teachers with no guidance as to how they
> can incorporate genuine scientific inquiry skills into their instruction."
> Further, many states say nothing about the history of science, which is
> essential for teaching students how science works and how to be critical.
> 4. *There's not enough math.* As the report notes, things are far too
> qualitative, perhaps catering to students' "mathophobia": "Mathematics is
> integral to science. Yet few states make the link between math and science
> clear—and many seem to go to great lengths to avoid mathematical
> formulae and equations altogether. The result is usually a clumsy mishmash
> of poor writing that could much more easily and clearly be expressed in
> numbers."
>
> It's no surprise, then, that among 15 year olds tested in 65 countries,
> U.S. students ranked 23rd in science proficiency, while only 21% of U.S.
> twelfth-graders (17 and 18 year olds) are at or above the "proficient"
> standard in science.
>
> This is a very thorough report: the most thorough I've seen from any
> organization. There are an average of 3.5 pages of evaluation for *each* of
> the U.S.'s 50 states. If you're a parent, or simply a citizen concerned
> about the condition of American science education, look at your state's
> standards and, if so moved, complain!
>
> (There is a ) U.S. map with each state's grade. Note that although the
> South is low as expected, the midwest, along with Oregon and Idaho, rank
> even lower. And an F for Wisconsin? This was a surprise to me. Read the
> state-by-state evaluations to see why.
>
>
> Martin
>
> <http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2012/11/16/u-s-school-science-standards-pronounced-dismal/screen-shot-2012-11-15-at-8-04-35-pm/>
> *whyevolutionistrue<http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/author/whyevolutionistrue/>
> * | November 16, 2012 at 5:23 am |
> Categories:education<http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/?cat=1342>
> , Science <http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/?cat=173> | URL:
> http://wp.me/ppUXF-jLq
>
>
> --
> –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
> Martin Weiss, PhD
> Senior Scientist
> New York Hall of Science
> mweiss at nyscience.org
> cell 347-460-1858
> desk 718 595 9156
>
> --
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
>
> This message is intended solely for the addressee(s) in the first instance
> and may contain confidential information. Please do not forward this email
> without the consent of the sender.
>
> ***********************************************************************
> For information about the Association of Science-Technology Centers and the Informal Science Education Network please visit www.astc.org.
>
> Check out the latest case studies and reviews on ExhibitFiles at www.exhibitfiles.org.
>
> The ISEN-ASTC-L email list is powered by LISTSERVR software from L-Soft. To learn more, visit
> http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html.
>
> To remove your e-mail address from the ISEN-ASTC-L list, send the
> message SIGNOFF ISEN-ASTC-L in the BODY of a message to
> [log in to unmask]
***********************************************************************
For information about the Association of Science-Technology Centers and the Informal Science Education Network please visit www.astc.org.
Check out the latest case studies and reviews on ExhibitFiles at www.exhibitfiles.org.
The ISEN-ASTC-L email list is powered by LISTSERVR software from L-Soft. To learn more, visit
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html.
To remove your e-mail address from the ISEN-ASTC-L list, send the
message SIGNOFF ISEN-ASTC-L in the BODY of a message to
[log in to unmask]
|
