News:

Long overdue maintenance happening. See post in the top forum.

Main Menu

We're #3, We're #3........... in running out of smart people.

Started by GG, February 09, 2011, 06:46:53 PM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages 1 ... 8 9 10
User actions

Townsend

#135
February 16, 2011, 02:32:21 PM
Quote from: Breadburner on February 16, 2011, 02:31:15 PM
I like to call them warm pillows.....

John Candy hand warmers.

Townsend

#137
February 13, 2012, 04:15:28 PM
http://www.ktul.com/story/16925266/oklahoma-gets-f-for-science-education?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Oklahoma Gets "F" For Science Education

QuoteA study comparing science education ranks Oklahoma among one the worst in the country. Oklahoma was one of 10 states to receive an "F" by the Thomas B. Fordham Institute in Washington, D.C.

In the overview of Oklahoma's report they state that "Woefully little science content appears, and what is present is often flat out wrong, oddly worded, or not up to grade level." The report continues on to say "It is difficult to see how any curriculum that emerged from these standards would not be fatally flawed."

Oklahoma scored 1 point out of 3 on their scale for clarity and specificity, and 1 point out of 7 for content and vigor.

Other states receiving an "F" grade include Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Wisconsin and Wyoming.

Conan71

#138
February 13, 2012, 04:16:41 PM
"It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first" -Ronald Reagan

Townsend

#139
February 13, 2012, 04:18:56 PM
Quote from: Conan71 on February 13, 2012, 04:16:41 PM
We don't needs no science.  We'z got religions.

Just constant punches in the BUPA regarding anything to further this state.  I blame myself.

ZYX

#140
February 13, 2012, 04:38:04 PM
Considering my science teacher is a complete a$$ with inaccurate information, I can see how we got this ranking.

Conan71

#143
February 14, 2012, 02:43:08 PM
"It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first" -Ronald Reagan

heironymouspasparagus

#144
February 14, 2012, 03:23:25 PM
We will have to be in line at least a few down the list.  New Orleans has got to be a very close contender to Chicago.

"So he brandished a gun, never shot anyone or anything right?"  --TeeDub, 17 Feb 2018.

I don't share my thoughts because I think it will change the minds of people who think differently.  I share my thoughts to show the people who already think like me that they are not alone.

Oil Capital

#145
February 15, 2012, 07:41:03 AM
Quote from: Townsend on February 13, 2012, 04:15:28 PM
http://www.ktul.com/story/16925266/oklahoma-gets-f-for-science-education?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Oklahoma Gets "F" For Science Education


Just wanted to point out that this study is being reported as saying something it does not purport to say.  The study is of state-issued science education standards, not the actual science education delivered (or received).
 

AquaMan

#146
February 15, 2012, 10:32:20 AM
Doesn't one follow the other?

I get your point, but when you teach kids low level standards of science, it doesn't matter how good you are at delivering the science.
onward...through the fog

Oil Capital

#147
February 15, 2012, 12:49:49 PM Last Edit: February 15, 2012, 01:02:34 PM by Oil Capital
Quote from: AquaMan on February 15, 2012, 10:32:20 AM
Doesn't one follow the other?

I get your point, but when you teach kids low level standards of science, it doesn't matter how good you are at delivering the science.

I'm not sure that is necessarily the case.  If the standards are indeed bad, that may make it a bit more of an uphill climb,  but is there really any reason they would restrain a good science teacher from delivering a good science education?  (According to Oklahoma's science standards:  "The science standards are not a scope and sequence or a district curriculum guide.  They provide a framework for schools to develop and aligned science curriculum and for teachers to develop their own classroom lessons."
 

Townsend

#148
February 15, 2012, 01:16:42 PM
Quote from: Oil Capital on February 15, 2012, 12:49:49 PM
I'm not sure that is necessarily the case.  If the standards are indeed bad, that may make it a bit more of an uphill climb,  but is there really any reason they would restrain a good science teacher from delivering a good science education?  (According to Oklahoma's science standards:  "The science standards are not a scope and sequence or a district curriculum guide.  They provide a framework for schools to develop and aligned science curriculum and for teachers to develop their own classroom lessons."

They have to have their lesson plan approved.  God knows what that can be like.

The instructors have to be willing to deal with the salary and science budget.

They must be willing to deal with any parent who is displeased with the sciences.  I'd imagine that happens every so often here in Oklahoma.

Our text books are approved by the TX board of education per a news story I read a few months ago.  That board has gone quite a bit further toward bible science.

Print
Go Up Pages 1 ... 8 9 10
User actions