NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #26/NN_1992_26.iso/spool/sci/math/14452

Internet Message Format | 1992-11-06 | 4.8 KB

Xref: sparky sci.math:14452 misc.education:4151
Newsgroups: sci.math,misc.education
Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!att-out!cbfsb!cbnewsg.cb.att.com!dal3
From: [e-mail] (dale.e.parson)
Subject: Re: Is Math Hard?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: AT&T
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 18:42:39 GMT
Lines: 81

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Herman Rubin) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Hal F Lillywhite) writes:
>>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Stan Ryckman) writes:
>>>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Hal F Lillywhite) writes:
>>>>Of course we should also listen to the experts in deciding what is
>>>>taught but that does not mean giving them a free hand in the matter.
>>>>We should take what they say into account then apply our own
>>>>intelligence to the matter.  Otherwise we risk paying for people to
>>>>teach our children the economic theories of Angela Davis or the
>>>>genetic ideas of William Shockley.
>
>>>Or, (gasp!) Charles Darwin.
>
>>>Just how do we "take what they say into account and then apply our
>>>own intelligence?"  A vote?  I bet creationism still would win out
>>>in a fair portion of the U.S.
>
>
>>Well, yes we do it by vote.  The only other choice available to us
>>is some form of dictatorship.  The question is not if we should vote
>>on the matter.  In any form of democratic society that is ultimately
>>how the decision will be made.  The question is what do we consider
>>in casting those votes.  Do we consider only the "experts" or do we
>>apply our own intelligence to the matter?  (Please note, I said
>>"intelligence," not "prejudices.") My point is that so-called experts
>>can be wrong, often flagrantely so.  Furthermore they are not immune
>>to their own prejudices.
>
>>Blind obedience to authority is dangerous, regardless of whether
>>that authority occupies a pulpit, a government office or a
>>university chair.
>
>In the matter of deciding how people are to be taught, making any
>decision other than anarchy is the mistake.  It is making a decision
>for others which is the horrible mistake.
>
>It is not blind obedience to authority which is dangerous, but even
>the existence of an authority which can compel obedience.
>
>Right now we have the authority which is essentially from the schools
>of education.  They have no legal power, but they have essentially
>monopolized the production of those in the public schools.  In most
>states, one cannot teach there without (in)appropriate credits from
>such schools.
>
>It is even the existence of authority here which is bad.

Except for us homeschoolers, of course. Home learning as currently practiced
by some is a spearhead. We are doing some anarchic educational R&D.
(I prefer to think of it as organic rather than anarchic, but healthy
organisms are uncontrollable in many important respects, so perhaps chaotic
is an acceptable middle ground characterization.)

The question for home learning as an R&D process, then, is how applicable
are the findings to mass learning? It definitely requires a stable domestic
situation, for starter no shootings in the back yard. Then it requires
a level of parental commmitment in TIME that is difficult to come by for
a) people who must spend most of the total parental time earning money, and
b) people who want to spend most of the total parental time earning money.
The question of worthiness of time spent is an interesting one for the
latter group; how worthwhile is it to rescue your kid from the institutional
wasteland and help them through a childhood that can be a wonderland?

I believe home based learning can be economically feasible for most U.S.
families right now, & could be made economically feasible for many others.
I have no doubt that it is intellectually and spiritually superior (and no,
I am not a fundamentalist Christian) to any institutional based education.
The major impediment is a mind set that equates learning with confinement
that has been foisted upon the current generations of humans on this planet
to such an extent that they cannot even imagine genuine alternatives.
Good luck figuring out the proper way to build the cages.

Dale Parson, Bell Labs, [e-mail]

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------
|    "These words are too solid, they don't move fast enough           |
|     to catch the blur in the brain that flies by, and is gone..."    |
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------
|     Suzanne Vega                                                     |
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------