From: "JACK L. URETSKY (C) 1996; HEP DIV., ARGONNE NATIONAL LAB, ARGONNE, IL 60439" <JLU@hep.anl.gov>
Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 17:34:56 -0600
Hi all-
Mark writes:
***************************************************************
Following up on Jane's postings on WWK, I would like to make the
following observations...and maybe to start a bit of a debate on the
rapidly expanding "constructivist orthodoxy" that seems to be taking over
the schools of "education".
First, I want to challenge the assumption that the primary reason
for the low participation of women in majors like engineering, physics,
and math is because of the way these disciplines are taught. If this were
so, then we would expect to see similarly low rates of participation in
these majors everywhere that they are taught. However, it is not
universally true that there is a low participation by women in these
majors. In some countries, such as France and Hungary, the participation
by women in these majors is much higher than it is in the United States.
In France the percentage of women who are professional physicists is about
25% and in Hungary the percentage of women who major in math exceeds 50%.
This suggests that the low percentage of women majoring in these
disciplines in the U.S. (and many other countries) is the result of the
way young women are socialized before they reach college. While I would
agree with Jane that better teaching and a more supportive atmosphere in
our college level courses will help to attract more women to physics, I
also feel that to a large extent the game has been lost before this cohort
of the population ever reaches college.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Well, here are two competing viewpoints. Can both be right? I
Or is there some way to decide which one is right? Is it true that
constructivism is just another religion, like, for example, totem worship?
Or are schools of education truly modern day manifestations of
Luddism?
Choose your weapons, everybody, and let's have at it.
Regards,
Jack