Re: What to "cover"

[Hugh Haskell <hhaskell@MINDSPRING.COM>]

Tim O'Donnell wrote:

> Hugh,
> I like the European model to some degree, however it would just not
> have to be physics teachers that would have to change.  Certainly
> all the other sciences would have to change. Then all the math.
> Then English. Then etc. We would have to revamp the whole school
> curriculum which is probably not a bad idea, but what enormous
> effort and commitment and yes money would it take? We are
> presently based on an industrial model on an agrarian calendar.
> And unfortunately to a majority of society, we are nothing more than
> glorified baby sitters.  Unless something devastating takes place
> (and I really don't want that), I believe life will pretty much go on as
> it is, with a tweak here and a tweak there, but no real underlying
> changes. At least until I can retire ( Jan 2006).

I didn't say it would be easy, and I recognize that changing physics
alone would not be enough, but I was addressing just the physics part
of the question.

Not only will this not be easy, but it won't be done in one year or
probably ten. But the first thing that has to be done is to build
some kind of national consensus that there must be fundamental change
in the way our schools are structured, not just the band-aid (and
mostly contaminated band-aid, at that) fixes that have so far been
proposed. Then *someone* (here is where I run out of suggestions--I
have no idea who the *someone* ought to be) will have to put together
a workable long-term plan to make the transition from the old to the
new. The plan will have to have attainable interim goals as well as
be flexible enough to accommodate some backing and filling when
things don't work as planned. And then we have to have the national
will to be willing to wait 15 or 20 years to assess the results. We
aren't going to see results in the standardized end-of-course tests,
or other short-term goals. We will know if it succeeds by looking at
its graduates after they have had time to show what they got in the
real world.

In fact it will require a national commitment so great and so
long-lasting that I despair of our ever being able to do it.

But there are some things that could be done. Years ago, Harvard
alone was able to make physics a respectable subject for high school
simply be making it a requirement for admission. If this could be
done on a larger scale by the prestigious universities acting in
consort, and if they could agree on a curriculum that they would
accept, and then press the College Board to test to that curriculum,
so they would have some indication that students had learned that
curriculum, it would be a start. There are things like this, and
others, that could be done without having the great national debate I
envisioned, but it will require considerable political will on the
part of the university administrations, and the ability to resist the
wailing and weeping of the parents and alums who either (a) see their
precious offspring being refused admission because they couldn't
screw up the courage to take physics, or (b) see the football team
going down the drain because they assume that no self-respecting
football player will be able to pass physics, or both.

Nothing worth doing is easy.

Hugh
--

Hugh Haskell
<mailto://haskell@ncssm.edu>
<mailto://hhaskell@mindspring.com>

(919) 467-7610

Let's face it. People use a Mac because they want to, Windows because they
have to..
******************************************************