 |
Bible-Discussion.com
Private Bible Studies and Christian Fellowship Available - Ask Nobby
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
45degreeN
King Kong
Joined: 02 Aug 2005
Posts: 2455
Location: Salem Oregon
|
 Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 4:44 pm Post subject: progressive education |
 |
|
Started from the U of Chicago. dealt the death blow to those people who demanded rote learning, since it was stultifying, we learned a lot but it was emotionally dry.
Progressive education came with the hindu philosophy that life is a series of waves and we are waves in the sea. With the idea that life is illusion rather than real and since nothing was real why bother with facts. Facts are irrelevant, process is more important than facts.
So now we have our second generation under this scheme and nobody is willing to learn the facts anymore as long as we all feel good its all good.
Beginning of the end of American education. Without educated immigrants where would we be? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 6772
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 6:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Don't go blaming it all on Hindus; fundamentalist Christians are currently doing more to damage the education system than anyone else. At least Hindus aren't against evolution...
But I agree with you; we are already at a point where almost all of the current teachers are poorly-educated. Climbing out of that hole isn't easy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
45degreeN
King Kong
Joined: 02 Aug 2005
Posts: 2455
Location: Salem Oregon
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 02, 2007 8:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
The Hindu "invasion" of America started with Ralph Waldo Emerson in the 1820's far before the failure in our education system began.
It was John Dewey at the university of Chicago 1920's who developed this mind set we currently employ in our education system. Thinking that memorizing facts was "oppressive" to the soft little minds of children, he developed what amounted to a surrender to the philosophical point of view the Hindus take. That of "immaterialism" the point of view that what we see is not real and therefore temporary. The Hindu call it Maya but it amounts to the same thing.
Ignoring the facts and focusing on the "process" of education made each and every one of the students somehow a self educator. It destroyed the concept of authority within the schools and made the teachers not imparter of facts but fellow students coming alongside the youth and leading then in the process of getting them to the point where they can "get along in the world".
In the process of this "progressive education" all truth is relative and not to be worried about so much as handled and manipulated. Creating a whole industry of "spin doctors".
It is this that has destroyed American scientific thought processes and made our immigrant scientist the leaders here instead of the native born/ taught the leaders.
I had a teacher whose PHd was in philosophy of education. Who used to rant for hours about this progressive education. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 6772
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Memorizing facts is a bad way to learn. But we just took a crappy education system and replaced it with something even crappier. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
45degreeN
King Kong
Joined: 02 Aug 2005
Posts: 2455
Location: Salem Oregon
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 02, 2007 2:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There are many other country's education systems where this is still the main form of education. While it doesn't allow for "creative" education the basics are usually well covered and then creativeness is allowed reign in the higher levels. It is these very countries who are advancing in the sciences far faster than America.
Without some basis in the fundamentals there is no real creativity, our system has cut itself off at the knees without the basics covered well. Given the pyramid shape of the "creativity chart" far fewer people are expected to have "creative positions" that even require creativity.
How much creativity must a line worker at GM or even Toyota have? None to little. We cant all be creative artistic types, that wouldn't reflect the real world demographics.
When facts are memorized they are instantly available to the one who memorized them making other tasks easier. It really is a process towards a higher goal not the goal in itself. My own education was cut short due to a lack of the rote system of education, there have been many times when I have regretted not having a better fundamental education. Now that I am 55 I find it very hard to get back into the stream and start over again. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 6772
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 02, 2007 3:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dim12trav wrote: | There are many other country's education systems where this is still the main form of education. While it doesn't allow for "creative" education the basics are usually well covered and then creativeness is allowed reign in the higher levels. It is these very countries who are advancing in the sciences far faster than America.
|
I agree that American students to very poorly in science, but to some extent you're barking up the wrong tree here. Rote learning or a lack thereof is not the main issue. If you want students to better in science, then your main gripe should be with creationists who are trying to make sure that evolution isn't taught in school. Another big problem is 'social advancement' in which kids with failing grades are passed just to be with their friends. Another problem is that inner city schools don't have any resources. Another major problem is that the vast majority of teachers are poorly-educated.
You're focusing too much on a lack of rote learning and ignoring all of these other problems.
| dim12trav wrote: |
Without some basis in the fundamentals there is no real creativity, our system has cut itself off at the knees without the basics covered well. Given the pyramid shape of the "creativity chart" far fewer people are expected to have "creative positions" that even require creativity.
How much creativity must a line worker at GM or even Toyota have? None to little. We cant all be creative artistic types, that wouldn't reflect the real world demographics.
|
But who said that the role of education was simply to create job skills? A line worker at GM doesn't really need to know anything about literature or geography or anything like that either. In fact, he could probably get by without really having to know how to read that well, but education isn't just about giving people the skills they need to do their jobs. It's also about opening their minds and enriching their lives.
| dim12trav wrote: |
When facts are memorized they are instantly available to the one who memorized them making other tasks easier. It really is a process towards a higher goal not the goal in itself.
|
And by forcing rote learning onto the smart kids in the class, you're going to make them hate school and stifle their intellectual development. Right now America is at least still producing some of the top Ph.Ds. Reinstating rote learning would would probably hurt that.
| dim12trav wrote: |
My own education was cut short due to a lack of the rote system of education, there have been many times when I have regretted not having a better fundamental education. Now that I am 55 I find it very hard to get back into the stream and start over again. |
How do you figure that it was a lack of rote learning that cut short your education?
Also, why are you so big on rote learning? It's a terrible way to learn. I'm not saying that the system right now is any good, but there are techniques which are considerably better than either. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RevJP
Moderator
Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 6840
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 9:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
But on to more important stuff:
| P123... wrote: | | If you want students to better in science, then your main gripe should be with creationists who are trying to make sure that evolution isn't taught in school. |
You do realize that I have to point out that this is the dumbest thing you may have ever stated...
You are seriously going to try and assert that the teaching or lack of teaching of 'evolution' is the reason students don't do better in science? 
How about the lack of actual education in science and scientific methodology? A student that does not learn what science is or how it works will obviously do poor in science, it has nothing to do with teaching evolution. I understand that you feel evolution is the be all and end all of everything in this world that has meaning or should be thought about, but PLEEEAAASSEEEE
Electronics, physics, geology, astronomy, robotics, biology, nuclear physics, on and on and on.... have nothing to do with evolution. Each can be taught and studied without any reference to evolution, at all.
Teach a kid what an atom is, how it works and how to experiement scientifically - THAT will improve his performance in science, not the understanding of a theory that is, has always been, and will forever be a theory without hope of ever being demonstrated as fact. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ana
King of the Jungle
Joined: 10 Mar 2006
Posts: 1549
Location: BC
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 10:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Biology makes your list of sciences that have nothing to do with evolution, RevJP? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RevJP
Moderator
Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 6840
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 10:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Biology makes your list of sciences that have nothing to do with evolution, RevJP? |
No Ana, biology makes my list because it doesn't have to have anything to do with evolution, Biology can stand on its own with no mention of evolution. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ana
King of the Jungle
Joined: 10 Mar 2006
Posts: 1549
Location: BC
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 11:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| RevJP wrote: | | Quote: | | Biology makes your list of sciences that have nothing to do with evolution, RevJP? |
No Ana, biology makes my list because it doesn't have to have anything to do with evolution, Biology can stand on its own with no mention of evolution. |
Umm, I sense a bad attitude, and it's confusing given the content of your post.
| You wrote: | | Electronics, physics, geology, astronomy, robotics, biology, nuclear physics, on and on and on.... have nothing to do with evolution. Each can be taught and studied without any reference to evolution, at all. |
And your response to me was " No Ana, <insert my sentence here>." So your sentence says you disagree with me by saying exactly what I said you said. And you rolled your eyes at me. I'm pretty confused about this.
And yes, you can teach some biology without mention of evolution, but there's only so far you can go that way. This guy says that teaching biology without evolution is like teaching English without verbs. National Academies Press says that "To teach biology without explaining evolution deprives students of a powerful concept that brings great order and coherence to our understanding of life."
Evolution is the unifying factor in biology, and it's responsible for a lot of recent scientific advances, particularly in genetics and medicine. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 6772
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 1:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RevJP wrote: | You do realize that I have to point out that this is the dumbest thing you may have ever stated...
|
Yes, I now realize that you have to point this out. 
| RevJP wrote: |
You are seriously going to try and assert that the teaching or lack of teaching of 'evolution' is the reason students don't do better in science?
|
No, evolution is just symptomatic. There are hard-core elements within the Christian right in America who absolutely hate science, and not just evolution. Some of them are Young Earth Creationists who obviously are against evolution, but in order to support their claims that the Earth is 6000 years old, they have to reject basically all of the fundamentals of astronomy, biology, atomic physics, geology, genetics, and the list goes on. This is a serious assault on science, and it is definitely hurting children's educations. So certainly evolution is not the only thing.
But I think evolution is a telling example. What message does it send kids when you teach them creationism in their science class right beside evolution? It must completely confuse them as to what is and what is not science.
The most extreme example is home schooling. About 75% of home-schooled kids in America are Evangelical Christians. I wonder how many of them are being home-schooled just so that they don't have to learn about evolution in school... I'd really like to see some numbers on what percentage of them end up going on and getting science degrees in university. I bet it's CONSIDERABLY lower than in the rest of the population.
Last edited by P1234567890 on Wed Jan 03, 2007 1:21 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RevJP
Moderator
Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 6840
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 1:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| blah blah blah, yadda yadda yadda |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RevJP
Moderator
Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 6840
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 1:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | Biology
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Biology (from Greek Βìο meaning life and Λoγος meaning the study of, see below) is the study of life. It is concerned with the characteristics, classification, and behaviors of organisms, how species come into existence, and the interactions they have with each other and with the natural environment. Biology encompasses a broad spectrum of academic fields that are often viewed as independent disciplines. However, together they address phenomena related to living organisms (biological phenomena) over a wide range of scales, from biophysics to ecology.
Escherichia coli Tree fern
Goliath beetle Gazelle
Biology studies the variety of life (clockwise from top-left) E. coli, tree fern, gazelle, Goliath beetle
Biology provides scientific explanations for phenomena such as birth, growth, aging, death and decay of living organisms, similarities between offspring and their parents (heredity), and the flowering of plants. Other phenomena, such as lactation, metamorphosis, egg-hatching, healing, and tropism are also explained in biology. On a macro level, biologists have applied the scientific method to the study of animal and plant domestication, the variety of living organisms (biodiversity), generational changes of populations(evolution), extinction, speciation, social behavior among animals, etc.
While botany encompasses the study of plants, zoology is the branch of science that is concerned about the study of animals and anthropology is the branch of biology which studies human beings. However, at the molecular scale, life is studied in the disciplines of molecular biology, biochemistry, and molecular genetics. More fundamental than these fields is biophysics which deals with energy within biological systems. At the next level, that of the cell, it is studied in cell biology. At the multicellular scale, it is examined in physiology, anatomy, and histology. Developmental biology studies life at the level of an individual organism's development or ontogeny. Moving up the scale towards more than one organism, genetics considers how heredity works between parent and offspring. Ethology considers the behaviour of organisms in their natural environment. Population genetics looks at the level of an entire population, and systematics considers the multi-species scale of lineages. Interdependent populations and their habitats are examined in ecology and evolutionary biology. A speculative new field is astrobiology (or xenobiology), which examines the possibility of life beyond the Earth, and contains the field of Gravitational biology, which is the study of the effect of gravity on living organisms.
|
I see that evolution is one small part of biology, and that the wealth of biology that one would learn in grammar through high school could easily be absent of evolution and not cause a problem. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 6772
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 1:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RevJP wrote: | | No Ana, biology makes my list because it doesn't have to have anything to do with evolution, Biology can stand on its own with no mention of evolution. |
Rev, do you realize that I have to point out that this is the dumbest thing you may have ever stated...
Evolution is the single most important topic in biology. It completely unifies and explains all other biological areas of study. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 6772
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 1:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RevJP wrote: | | I see that evolution is one small part of biology, and that the wealth of biology that one would learn in grammar through high school could easily be absent of evolution and not cause a problem. |
It would cause a MAJOR problem in understanding and unifying all of the other areas of biology. Evolution is the single most important area of biology. It makes all of the other areas make sense.
Go back to the Wikipedia article and just count how many times the word 'evolution' is mentioned. Notice how it's mentioned all over the place in many different sections.
If you cut evolution out of biology class, you cut out the single most important unifying theme. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Make a Donation 
Usergroups 
Contact
Register
Submit Articles 
Log in to check your private messages 
