Earlier quoted context omitted.
Public education should not be about making good workforce for capitalists. It has a higher purpose.
Sure, but where does math and science fit into that higher purpose? I think the focus on those is actually driven by the (futile) desire to please capitalists--because good paying jobs often require those skills. If we're talking about educating citizens, I think it'd be way more valuable to replace chemistry and physics with courses in the philosophy of science and algebra and geometry with courses in logic and stat…
Obama Pledges $4B to Computer Science in US Schools
31–40 of 152 posts
Re: Obama Pledges $4B to Computer Science in US Schools
#32People are intelligent in many different ways and I don't believe that most people have the abstract thinking skills necessary to really thrive in computer science. Forcing everybody to take part in computer science education is probably going to frustrate the hell out of most people (make them feel stupid and annoyed at having to do this stuff) and dumb down the curriculum for the small percentage of kids who would…
Isn't the same true of math, which we already teach in schools extensively?
Re: Obama Pledges $4B to Computer Science in US Schools
#33If you're going to inspire students you're going to need a lot of teachers who are experts in CS. Unfortunately, our current education system doesn't allow experts to teach so now someone who knows CS is going to have to go get an education degree as well, just to take a massive pay cut.
This is true of all subjects, though. The purpose isn't to train world class engineers out of high school, it is to expose more people to the subject and the thought processes that go into it.
No, it's not. You're not going to do better with your English degree than English teacher so there's no disincentive to becoming one. Hence, students get reasonably competent English teachers.
High School CS teachers, on the other hand, have to be completely incompetent or insane to choose to teach for $40k when they could be writing CRUD apps for $100k.
Re: Obama Pledges $4B to Computer Science in US Schools
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but where does math and science fit into that higher purpose? I think the focus on those is actually driven by the (futile) desire to please capitalists--because good paying jobs often require those skills. If we're talking about educating citizens, I think it'd be way more valuable to replace chemistry and physics with courses in the philosophy of science and algebra and geometry with courses in logic and stat…
Uhh, I don't know what planet you're living on where people don't need to use algebra. Almost everybody I know uses algebra regularly. How do you suggest we do statistics or any kind of science or teach kids anything about the world without first teaching algebra? Formal logic is essentially a more abstract and complicated algebra which isn't useful in real life. And understanding the world around you (science) and l…
Yet, only 20% of those surveyed reported using even basic algebra at work, and a lot of those were tradespeople who could have easily been taught the necessary math post-K-10. http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/04/heres-ho....
> And understanding the world around you (science) and learning the language that the world works in (math) are worthwhile in and of themselves for every student just as general human knowledge.
This is an ideological statement more than anything else. I can just as easily say it's much more important for educated citizens to learn history and philosophy, so they can understand how the social structures around them work.
> You can't say that since sometimes teaching science to kids doesn't work we should just delete it from our entire educational program and not try.
It's not clear to me that science education even works often or that adults retain anything meaningful.
> Academic studies in logic (well, formal logic) are I think overrated as far as their ability to train students to think rigorously and carefully is concerned.
I think it's a lot more useful to teach a kid that here are fallacious ways of trying to prove a point--something they can use in real life--than teaching them about the periodic table or cell division (especially since you're largely going to teach them a very dumbed down version of the latter anyway).
Re: Obama Pledges $4B to Computer Science in US Schools
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but where does math and science fit into that higher purpose? I think the focus on those is actually driven by the (futile) desire to please capitalists--because good paying jobs often require those skills. If we're talking about educating citizens, I think it'd be way more valuable to replace chemistry and physics with courses in the philosophy of science and algebra and geometry with courses in logic and stat…
So it's not in a child's interest to prepare them for jobs that pay well?
Re: Obama Pledges $4B to Computer Science in US Schools
#36People are intelligent in many different ways and I don't believe that most people have the abstract thinking skills necessary to really thrive in computer science. Forcing everybody to take part in computer science education is probably going to frustrate the hell out of most people (make them feel stupid and annoyed at having to do this stuff) and dumb down the curriculum for the small percentage of kids who would…
> People are intelligent in many different ways and I don't believe that most people have the abstract thinking skills necessary to really thrive in computer science. Isn't the same true of math, which we already teach in schools extensively?
Evidence would suggest that most people don't really have the abstract thinking skills necessary to do math either.
Re: Obama Pledges $4B to Computer Science in US Schools
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
Public education should not be about making good workforce for capitalists. It has a higher purpose.
> workforce for capitalists Regardless of the reality of capitalism, work must be done in order for people to eat. That work could be actually plowing fields and picking fruit. Preferably, it is building and configuring machines to plow and pick. Public education should be about enriching lives. A large part of that is teaching people the skills they can use to satisfy material needs. All of this remained true under…
Re: Obama Pledges $4B to Computer Science in US Schools
#38Only a tiny fraction of the population needs to understand computer science. Most people will struggle through it, learn to hate it, and immediately forget it after they graduate, just as they do with math and science. Meanwhile, college professors will have to spend inordinate amounts of time unteaching all the stupid things kids learned in K-12, because there is no way to structure these curricula in a way that ser…
Re: Obama Pledges $4B to Computer Science in US Schools
#39People are intelligent in many different ways and I don't believe that most people have the abstract thinking skills necessary to really thrive in computer science. Forcing everybody to take part in computer science education is probably going to frustrate the hell out of most people (make them feel stupid and annoyed at having to do this stuff) and dumb down the curriculum for the small percentage of kids who would…
> People are intelligent in many different ways and I don't believe that most people have the abstract thinking skills necessary to really thrive in computer science. Isn't the same true of math, which we already teach in schools extensively?