Re: ... then put your tail between your legs (last response)

Posted by Dale on Feb 05, 2002 at 08:48 (

Re: ... then put your tail between your legs (last response) (Natalie L. Smith)

any school system worth it's salt needs to spell out what they consider to be the necessary information and theories they want included in the standard curriculum. If you don't have a standard curriculum, believe me, there will be some classes with some teachers that will not get the students far enough along to be able to function in any higher education or know the minimum amount to be considered a "graduate" with any honor in the word.

Let me go back and quote what I said on my first comment in this thread.

“Students should have SOME input into what is taught. If they want to be taught creationism, who are you to say they are wrong? The administration (read experts) should set a minimum curriculum but allow for a “minor” in witchcraft if that is what a student wants to learn.”

The experts get their say in what must be taught and the students get their say in what they want to learn. It is not the experts NOR the students right to determine what will NOT be taught.

time constraints will definitely limit the degree to which any class can operate on some kind of free-for-all, "let's investigate whatever strikes our fancy" philosophy.

I don’t recall any class I have ever taken or taught where there wasn’t SOME time to spare. I always believed in “Tell ‘em what you’re going to tell ‘em – tell ‘em – tell ‘em what you told ‘em.” To gain time you change that to “Tell ‘em what you’re going to tell ‘em – tell ‘em to listen up because I’m not going to repeat this but you will be tested on it – tell ‘em.” Typically you should now have 25% more time than you had before. There will be a larger difference between the highest and lowest scores on the test but even the lowest scorer will have more total knowledge.

And before you say this won't work, I once had a graduate course where the instructor started the first day with "This is the text for this course. You are expected to read it and you will be tested on its contents. I will not be using it for my lectures. I will be discussing what is not in this book and you will be tested on that also.” We covered more than twice what would have been covered in a “normal” class. You just trade class time for homework time.

But if time is really a problem then let’s get rid of the 3 month annual vacation.

If you have any kind of official curriculum at all (and, trust me, if you don't there will be some classes which will spend the lion's share of the time playing paper football and talking about the latest videos on MTV and who just broke up with whom...) you need to decide who controls it.

Yes, we need a MINIMUM curriculum. What we do not need is a dictatorship where the state controls what can and can NOT be taught. It is good that the state determine that you must teach evolution (or creationism or astrology). It is not good for the state to determine that one or more of these three are not allowed to be taught.

Again, scientists should control science curriculum.

If you had said minimum science curriculum I would totally agree just as practicing witches should determine any minimum witchcraft curriculum (if we ever degenerate so far as to demand a minimum witchcraft curriculum). Obviously the experts in a field of study should set the minimum requirements for a knowledge of that subject. They should NOT be allowed to declare that other areas of knowledge can not be taught because they don't personally believe them.

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup



[ Forum ] [ New Message ]