| Author |
Message |
    
Claudia OKeefe
| | Posted on Monday, May 02, 2005 - 03:17 pm: | |
Just wondering what people were talking about at the Nebulas, trends in the business and so forth. Or was everyone just concentrating on having fun? ;-) |
John Joseph Adams
| | Posted on Monday, May 02, 2005 - 03:37 pm: | |
Fun? No one has fun at the Nebulas! It's forbidden in the SFWA constitution. |
Gordon Van Gelder
| | Posted on Monday, May 02, 2005 - 03:51 pm: | |
Claudia---
Attendance seemed fairly low---I think Jeffrey Liss said it was about 200 people total. Next year it's in Tempe, AZ.
Don't know what other people heard or were discussing, but Gardner, Ellen, and I did our usual State of Short Fiction panel and all made our usual comment that we're not seeing enough science fiction.
Situation Normal, as the SNAFU acronym goes. |
Adam-Troy
| | Posted on Monday, May 02, 2005 - 06:26 pm: | |
Arizona is tempting. We have a time share there. |
Claudia OKeefe
| | Posted on Monday, May 02, 2005 - 06:59 pm: | |
That's what I and some others thought when we saw the photos. Thin crowd. I'm betting Tempe brings more in.
Re: lack of short SF, I'm certain some on this board won't agree, but my feeling is that it can be traced in part to the state of science education in the schools in recent years. From what I've read, we're falling behind most other industrial nations. When I teach in the schools now it's as if there's no interest in the sciences from the students, nor any great enthusiasm from the teachers, many who strike me as being demoralized. Sometimes I think we should be offering courses on science appreciation, much the way schools used to offer art appreciation.
Another thing I wonder is if interest in science fiction is cyclical, based on the state of the culture for which it's written. Perhaps when a culture is in a positive, explorative, manifest destiny type of mood you get more SF. When those in the culture are feeling disenchanted with it, they want to express this through fantasy. It's a thought.
What I hoped might be talked about at the Nebulas is a call for more stand alone fantasy novels. I'm having a tough time finding books to read that aren't part of a trilogy or series. Not that I'm opposed to these, but I'd sure love to see more novels that are complete in and of themselves. |
Claudia OKeefe
| | Posted on Monday, May 02, 2005 - 07:31 pm: | |
JJA-- LOL! |
Gordon Van Gelder
| | Posted on Monday, May 02, 2005 - 07:53 pm: | |
Claudia---
Someone in the audience suggested the same thing, and I agree. I also said on the panel that the US seems to be lagging behind England and Australia (and Canada, David Hartwell added) in science fiction lately. I'm sure it's not purely a matter or education, but these things all play off each other. Remember how much government money was poured into education during the 1960s and '70s? Not all of it proved to be well spent (I have strong memories of being forced to watch some program in 1977 dedicated to teaching us the metric system: "By the year 2000, all of America will be metric!"), but it sure seems like government sponsorship of science eduction has petered out in the last twenty years. Corrections welcome.
I didn't hear any discussion of stand-alone fantasy novels. Perhaps that's not too surprising when one considers that Anne McCaffrey was on hand to receive her Grand Master honor. |
Thomas R
| | Posted on Monday, May 02, 2005 - 08:43 pm: | |
Eigth grade math and science scores have went up a bit in the last 8 years according to TIMSS. American kids spend more of their education time learning science than do the Australians, Irish, French, Japanese, or Dutch. When you consider how well the Japanese score at science the greater time American kids spend is maybe just a sign of not getting it. Something like 2.5 billion goes into science education and American teachers have a starting pay higher than almost any nation's.
Although the eighth grade deal wouldn't translate to much writing for in least 5 years and probably more like ten. Added to that in 1995 8th grade math scores were below Slovenia and Bulgaria I think. Finally most schoolteachers I've met don't really value science much. Although that last could be the state I live. |
Thomas R.
| | Posted on Monday, May 02, 2005 - 08:46 pm: | |
The biggest score increases was in Lithuania though, so get ready for the boom of Lithuanian SF. Algis Budrys is the wave of the future! (Although maybe he's East Prussian, I read conflicting stuff) |
Paige
| | Posted on Monday, May 02, 2005 - 09:23 pm: | |
I spent the last year tutoring mathematics and science for fourth and fifth grade students at a public school. The situation is very interesting- things have changed a lot since I was a kid in the eighties! True, there is more time being spent on math and science, but math education seems very holistic now- there is a great emphasis on "understanding concepts" and "mathematical literacy", which seems to mean dancing around actually making kids do problems. When I was a kid in fifth grade, I knew how to multiply and divide big numbers, work with fractions and decimals, and figure simple probabilities. Now, these kids can tell me what a "function machine" is, but can't add fractions. Unfortunately, all of these "concepts" are useless when the kids can't even manipulate numbers. Our kids' test scores were dismal (even though I worked really hard!). I think it's the approach that's lacking, rather than the time spent.
I have a degree in mathematics and many of my fellow math majors were from different countries. Almost every Asian student I knew had grown up doing Kumon, a system of "mathematical workouts" designed the opposite of how we teach in America- learn to work the numbers first, then worry about the concepts. The European students had similar stories. All of these kids can soundly kick my arse in terms of pure quantitative ability. American educators will say, "Oh, but our kids know what they're doing." Ha! If I ever have kids, they are so doing Kumon as soon as they can talk. ;) |
Thomas R.
| | Posted on Monday, May 02, 2005 - 09:27 pm: | |
Good idea. Several of the nations at tops are Asian nations. I'll have to look up Kumon. Good night everyone. |
Gordon Van Gelder
| | Posted on Monday, May 02, 2005 - 09:46 pm: | |
A. J. Budrys is indeed of Lithuanian descent, as is Phil Klass (William Tenn). Judy Merril also was. |
Claudia OKeefe
| | Posted on Monday, May 02, 2005 - 10:17 pm: | |
Gordon--
You had that metric shtick, too? Too funny. I see your point about the GM angle, but still wish we'd get more stand alones. The other day I went to bn.com to search for a book to buy and it seemed like the first 50 books on the new releases list (I no doubt exaggerate) were series.
Thomas--
Do you know if the Japanese time/score ratio takes into account how much time those kids spend studying outside of class? Japanese parents encourage their kids to cram daily for their college entrance exams from the time they're six years old, the concern being that these scores will determine a child's entire lot in life.
I agree with both you and Gordon, the Japanese familial-education system aside, I don't think time is the determining factor here so much as attitude, teaching methods, and one other thing.
How much motivation is there to do well in the sciences in the U.S.? We’re a service economy nowadays. We don’t manufacture many things ourselves any longer, and more of our intellectual work is being outsourced to other countries each day. What sort of excitement is attached to the sciences in the mainstream media? Not that much. I can't decide if it's because the media believes Americans are too undereducated to understand such stories, or if they simply think science isn't sexy enough. Bottom line, now that the popular/economic culture no longer focuses much of its attention on science, I believe we're losing our edge when it comes to discovery and the search for same. That whole Kennedy-first-man-on-the-moon-Carousel-of-Progress vibe is long over.
|
Jörn Grote
| | Posted on Monday, May 02, 2005 - 10:24 pm: | |
learn to work the numbers first, then worry about the concepts.
Actually that's how I learned it, and that approach has also weaknesses, I had, when I came to university, to relearn some things in math because I did them without knowing what I did conceptually.
I think the best way is a parallel approach, introducing the theoretical concepts and then by practicing with numbers trying to internalize these concepts, because if the concepts aren't grounded in the mind through practice, they will be easily forgotten. |
Thomas R.
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2005 - 01:18 am: | |
I think I mentioned my little sister is teaching in Japan. According to her Japan has changed from the image we have, which is probably pre-recession for many of us. There was a rash of suicides and truly twisted bullying in Japanese schools. Because of that, this is going by her and mostly refers to her town, they've really lightened the workload. I think having a nation of really bitter young people who are great with science is no longer as appealing as it once was.
Although still high according to TIMSS Japanese test scores in math and science are lower than they were in 1995. This is true of fourth and eighth graders. I've seen similar results in geography and other studies.
My sister was very surprised by how nervous Japanese are their about pushing kids too hard. In least in her town they get more vacation time than in the American school we both attended. Although I have a feeling rural towns might just have naturally given more vacation time and that the old style of Japanese education is practiced in some cities. Still, even other sources I've heard say they have lightened some and are more worried about damaging kids with severity. Not just kids either. I think the Japanese nowadays take more vacations from work than Americans.
From all I know the Koreans and Taiwanese still stress their kids and overwork. Confucian influence is a bit more prevalent I think and Confucianism strongly emphasizing studying. (Oddly in Korea I get the sense some of the most strongly Confucian influenced people are Christian. Respecting elders, traditions, etc being similar) |
John Klima
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2005 - 06:00 am: | |
Another thing to consider about those grade scores is that the US is one of the few countries that reports ALL of it students. Most other countries have programs in place with different tracts of students already set to go to University, etc. and only these (i.e. already their top students) being used for reporting the academic well being of the student class. My wife recently received her Master's in Education, and this was a big topic in many of her classes. So, while other countries may appear to score higher, their numbers are not representative of the entire country.
JK |
Ahmed A. Khan
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2005 - 07:47 am: | |
Lithuanian SF. Lithuanian SF. An opportunity for a little shameless self-promotion. Ahem! My story, "The Presonic Man" was translated into Lithuanian and appeared in the last issue of the Lithuanian SF magazine, Dorados Raganos.
Ahmed
http://www.angelfire.com/zine2/fictiononline/myworks.html
|
Jeremy Lassen
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2005 - 02:44 pm: | |
The push for standardized testing in curriculums is sure to short circuit the actual passing on of “knowledge” and “passion” for a subject, in favor of test results. There is no metric for measuring "enthusiasm" for a subject, and thus no way to tie funding and hiring to this outcome. In an era of political grandstanding on the basis of "accountability", only things that can be measured with institutionalized metrics will be "counted".
This movement has already killed arts education in the public schools of America. "Accountability" movements invariably end up alienating students from the educational process, with the demands to focus on "results" at the expense of the "fun" stuff that engages their interest.
Another factor in people’s “disinterest” in science, as a field of endeavor and study may be that the rapid pace of technological advances, combined with the specialization of the field. Both of these are very alienating trends, in that they remove people and personalities from the process. Scientists are seen as technicians, not as great thinkers and heroic figures.
Good scientists these days are those who know how to write the best grant proposal… They’re middle managers who know how to get funding and wrangle cats (er, I mean grad students and lab techs). And NO child spends their days pining for a career in middle management. (Some of the best science fiction today actually covers this culture of science -- Kim Stanley Robinson, and Gwyneth Jones come to mind)
Go read Manly Wade Wellman’s “GIANTS FROM ETERNITY” and compare it to the above two authors view of "scientist", and scientific culture. See how the post WW2 view of technology and “scientist” stands apart from the 21st century view of said people.
The rise of computer technology has and its suffusion of popular/consumer culture has morphed yesterday’s “scientist hero” archetype into the “lone hacker/computer geek” archetype. Video killed the radio star, and all that. BioPunk and Nano-tech will likely displace the “computer geek/software hacker” archetype eventually.
The beat goes on. Hackers and computer techs will be pinning for the day when their professions were culturally relevant. |
Thomas R
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2005 - 03:09 pm: | |
I kind of doubt that's fair. If you read the stuff by scientists from the 1940s it was alot of politics and proposals even then. People just didn't know that and I'd say they largely don't know it now.
In part because it's not entirely true. I don't know about the merely good, but the great scientists these days are still great thinkers and even heroic. Or as heroic as scientists ever were. In the last ten years they've made so many remarkable discoveries, intriguing theories, and even political actions.
However it is more distanced to our lives than maybe ever. Nuclear physics was very relevant to peoples lives in the Cold War. Astronomy and planetary science mattered because of the drive to beat the USSR in space. The nature of the expansive Universe is less useful in everyday life, especially today. Hence the sciences doing best in the US are biological. They have day-to-day benefits in food or medicine. |
Jeremy Lassen
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2005 - 03:30 pm: | |
Thomas says "but the great scientists these days are still great thinkers and even heroic. Or as heroic as scientists ever were. "
I wasn't speaking to weather scientists ARE or are NOT heroic, or great thinkers, etc. I wasn't talking about what they have accomplished, or the relative merits of what they continue to accomplish every day.
I was speaking to their public perception. I offered two trends in technology (accelerated pace of discovery and increased specialization) as a possible reason for this change in perception, and I pointed to three examples from the science fiction literature that reflected this change in perception.
Sorry if I wasn't clear. My post was NOT intended as a slam on scientists, nor their importance to the culture as a whole. It is these very scientists (that I allude to in my last statement) who will make advances in bio-tech and nano-tech possible, and make these scurvy code-monkeys obsolete 
|
Thomas R.
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2005 - 05:06 pm: | |
Oh okay, sorry.
I hate saying this, but since my brother is a meteorologist this typo "I wasn't speaking to weather scientists ARE or are NOT heroic, or great thinkers, etc" kind of struck me. For a brief moment I wondered why you were specifying meteorology |
Matt Hughes
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2005 - 05:35 pm: | |
I'm feeling cranky today, so...
North American culture has traditionally been anti-intellectual. I include Canada in this generalization -- up until the early 1960s, it was the unofficial policy of successive Canadian governments to provide higher education only for the sons of the elite; we obtained most of our scientists and professionals from other countries, chiefly Britain.
The popular image of the scientist before the atomic era bounced about between the poles of the god-playing mad Dr. Frankenstein and dotty old Alfred Einstein, who, though apparently brilliant, kept spouting such ridiculous notions as the idea that there was really no such thing as a thing, rather there were only different kinds of events.
Either type was far off on the fringe of the cultural bell curve, whose center was occupied by heroes (Lindbergh, Ruth, Sergeant York) who had accomplished remarkable achievements but who had the look and sound of "regular Joes."
We had a brief spate of the scientist-as-hero after the atom bomb came along, because only our scientists could protect us from their scientists. 1950s B-movies featured square jawed researchers protecting us from mutant spiders and would-be conquerors from outer space. Plus, we had this cool space race going on against the USSR, which meant science could be popularized as a competitive sport. In the early innings, Sputnik made us the underdogs, but then we came from behind to reach the moon. But suddenly the tournament was over and there was no one left to compete against.
Meanwhile, we were rapidly giving up our status as citizens so that we could become consumers, creating a civilization whose main goal was its own entertainment and whose most powerful social force was marketing, an increasingly sophisticated matrix of techniques amorally dedicated to the cause of selling us things we didn't really need so that the people who made and sold us these things could have more money to buy things they didn't really need. This is called a services based economy and is the economic equivalent of a perpetual motion machine. Or, to put it in terms that today's unscientific youth can understand, it's like, you know, how Wiley Coyote can keep running on thin air, way out from the cliff's edge, as long as he doesn't notice there's nothing beneath him.
Marketing has pushed us steadily and naturally toward the lowest common denominator, so that the past twenty years have seen a general dumbing down of the over-all intellectual climate. We now have semiliterates graduating from high school under the impression that they are educated, and "how do you feel?" fluff-merchants who believe they are actual journalists. Instead of heroes, today we have celebrities, who are often people of no particular accomplishment who have just been very effectively marketed.
Then in recent years, America (though not Canada) has entered into one of its periodic phases of being god-struck. A politically well organized, and therefore powerful, religious minority has assumed a growing influence over education and now is extending its grasp onto popular culture. This minority is not merely uninterested in scientific pursuits, but actively hostile to those (evolution, stem cell research) that it sees as works of the devil. They have launched a successful crusade to get them out of schools and research labs (and IMAX theaters), and the effort is bound to have tarnished the image of science among people who see the world from that religion-influenced perspective.
So, now we are moving into a century in which science and technology will be key determinants of economic, social and even military success. The Chinese and the Indians and, to some extent, the Europeans are accelerating the spread of scientific knowledge in their civilizations. North Americans are trending strongly toward know-nothingism combined with mysticism, whether of the Christian or new age brands makes little difference, and craning their necks in anticipation of the next marketing blitz.
It will be very interesting to see how this all plays out over the next fifty years, but I won't be around that long.
Matt Hughes
http://www.archonate.com/ |
Byron Bailey
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2005 - 07:03 pm: | |
"I wasn't speaking to weather scientists ARE or are NOT heroic, or great thinkers, etc. I wasn't talking about what they have accomplished, or the relative merits of what they continue to accomplish every day.
"I was speaking to their public perception."
I agree with you . Neverthless, I can't help myself from hurliong a wrench by mentioning "storm chasers." |
Jeremy Lassen
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2005 - 08:17 pm: | |
what are "storm chasers"? Are they from that bruce sterling novel? |
Byron Bailey
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2005 - 08:43 pm: | |
People who chase storms, usually hoping to see a tornado. Many people do it for the fun of it but there is a segment of scientists/meteorologists who do it to get up close research data on tornadoes and tornado formation. At times, it looks like it could be a harrowing experience that requires courage if not outright heoroism. |
Thomas R.
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2005 - 09:05 pm: | |
I think there is a strong anti-intellectualism in the folk culture of North America. "Don't get smart with me" was generally a challenge or insult. Then look at many of the American folk heroes, both real and imaginary. The founding fathers were generally well-read, but the most intellectual among them were the least likely to be folk heroes. After them you mostly get semi-literate hicks or people who never graduated high school. Even the stories of inventors like Edison generally made a point of saying they received little education.
Although I don't think religion has to have anything to do with it. In fact many religions strongly encourage study, either practical or for its own sake. Many of our great Universities were built by Puritans, Quakers, Episcopalians, or Catholics. The role of Jesuits and Quakers in scientific history is generally accepted. In fact Quakers were very much overrepresented in British science until in least the 1960s.
The idea of a purely "Biblical" mindset that discourages any further study is hurting science. Liberal Protestantism in this country is in sharp decline causing Protestant America to be increasingly dominated by Fundamentalism or Pentecostalism. If their could be a Lutheran or Methodist revival in this nation I think it'd likely be better than almost anything. Because going by Europe people don't necessarily dump Christianity for a rational scientific mindset. In Britain the youth have a higher belief in ghosts and horoscopes than anything else.
Per capita the most scientifically inclined belief communities I think are Zoroastrians, Quakers, Bahai, Unitarians, and Deists. Zoroastrians reject converting anyone and also mixed marriage. Quaker growth is kind of limited by their need for concensus and strict pacifism. Bahai, Unitarians, and Deists would all be possible. Although an increase in those would be none of my business. (Jesuits are not a religion itself, well not officially many Jesuits are basically not Catholics and never were, but an order within a religion) |
James M. Pfundstein
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 04, 2005 - 03:37 pm: | |
The best things in this thread are the heroic weather scientists and the "hurliong," surely a wonderful word.
At first I thought: Hurliong-- a secret city of the night where an indifferent Yog-Sothoth is worshipped with rites of eldritch horror?
Then it seemed more like a new subnuclear particle. "My God-- we've got to get him out of there! He's being bombarded with hurliongs!"
JM("Meteor")P |
Sue
| | Posted on Thursday, May 05, 2005 - 05:09 pm: | |
quote:Meanwhile, we were rapidly giving up our status as citizens so that we could become consumers, creating a civilization whose main goal was its own entertainment and whose most powerful social force was marketing, an increasingly sophisticated matrix of techniques amorally dedicated to the cause of selling us things we didn't really need so that the people who made and sold us these things could have more money to buy things they didn't really need. This is called a services based economy and is the economic equivalent of a perpetual motion machine. Or, to put it in terms that today's unscientific youth can understand, it's like, you know, how Wiley Coyote can keep running on thin air, way out from the cliff's edge, as long as he doesn't notice there's nothing beneath him.
Most brilliant bit of analysis I've read in a long while.
Just turn on the television and see what's playing. Fake reality television. Paris Hilton. Televangelists. Viagra adverts.
Pretty easy to understand why there is so little science fiction out there.
|
Matt Hughes
| | Posted on Thursday, May 05, 2005 - 05:15 pm: | |
Gosh. Thank you, Sue.
Matt Hughes
http://www.archonate.com/ |
James M. Pfundstein
| | Posted on Thursday, May 05, 2005 - 10:05 pm: | |
I have to say that this cultural kvetching isn't too shrewdly observed. Few figures have combined, in the public imagination, moral and intellectual authority the way "dotty old Alfred Einstein" did (even before they dropped the big one). More recent scientist hero-figures might include Steven Hawking, Jane Goodall, Richard Feynman, Carl Sagan, Steven Jay Gould. That's not even mentioning buckets of heroic scientists from fictional sources.
The two US Founding Fathers who loom largest in the public mind, after Washington, are unquestionably Franklin and Jefferson. These aren't role models for anti-intellectuals. American Presidents like TR, FDR, & JFK didn't just fall off some turnip truck. Their intelligence and culture was part of their legend and their authority. Nor is the legend of the largely self-educated Lincoln a testimony to American anti-intellectualism; quite the opposite.
What is perceived as anti-intellectualism is often merely hostility toward pretension. This can be a good thing, in moderation.
It's a mistake to demonize (or deify) the marketplace. It has good effects and bad effects; it's always been there; it will change but it will never go away. But this much is clear: a market as diverse as the current one allows for different interests to flourish. It does not press us all down to the lowest common denominator (unlike, say, the mass media of the '50s and '60s); media are fracturing and dissenting voices are more easily and widely heard than they once were.
As to Paris Hilton etc: eh. You can't judge a culture by its circus geeks.
I'm not saying that there are no problems anywhere and that what we need are bigger and better Pollyannas. But I think our Jeremiahs need to be better observers, or their Jeremiads will go unregarded.
JM("Midnight Muttering")P
|
MarcL
| | Posted on Thursday, May 05, 2005 - 10:18 pm: | |
You know, JMP, I keep thinking what great use Milton could have made of that word "hurliong."
Check it out:
Him the Almighty Power
Hurlilong flaming from th' ethereal sky
With hideous ruin and combustion down
To bottomless perdition, there to dwell
In adamantine chains and penal fire,
Who durst defy th' Omnipotent to arms.
Why use two words when one would suffice? Plus, it would have saved him five entire characters and a space.
|
Claudia OKeefe
| | Posted on Friday, May 06, 2005 - 03:01 am: | |
Meanwhile, we were rapidly giving up our status as citizens so that we could become consumers, creating a civilization whose main goal was its own entertainment and whose most powerful social force was marketing
Just came back from a state conference for secondary school educators, with an emphasis on embedding science, math, and literacy skills in after-school programs. This is precisely the topic about which the attendees were most vocal. While the majority agreed that consistent academic standards and testing are important to assessing our competitiveness in the global market place, they felt the No Child Left Behind Act (which is primarily about testing to the exclusion of funding other facets of education), in concert with corporate media agendas, have one main objective: turn out cookie cutter high school graduates with little love for academic exploration, reading or science, but a huge desire to consume and be happy in that consumption.
I already knew that many educators dislike NCLB. Still it was startling to be in a room with hundreds of others who expressed these opinions so freely and loudly without fear of being called anti-American or the "L" word (and I'm not talking about sexual orientation). |
Gordon Van Gelder
| | Posted on Friday, May 06, 2005 - 04:52 am: | |
Claudia---
Do people really call you anti-American for questioning the No Child Left Behind act? If so, then things have gotten much too politicized. I mean, I remember expressing doubts about Wendy Kopp's Teach for America program (http://www.teachforamerica.org/tfa/flash_movie.html) fifteen years ago, but no one called me anti-American for doing so. Admittedly, Teach for America wasn't the President's own program, but isn't it possible to discuss the program without having it be an assault on the whole nation? |
Matt Hughes
| | Posted on Friday, May 06, 2005 - 06:18 am: | |
JMP:
"It's a mistake to demonize (or deify) the marketplace"
The problem is not the marketplace, which has always been with us; it is marketing which, in its modern strength and sophistication, is an immense force that surrounds us as completely as water surrounds a fish.
Matt Hughes
http://www.archonate.com/
|
Claudia OKeefe
| | Posted on Friday, May 06, 2005 - 08:47 am: | |
Gordon--
Actually, they call you liberal more often than anti-American, as if liberal has become a four-letter word, but yes, I've been called anti-American for questioning No Child Left Behind.
My feeling is the rationale for name calling is based more on the spin these people have heard about NCLB in news broadcasts than anything else. By questioning the motives behind and effectiveness of the act, some instantly conclude that you don't believe children deserve a quality education in America, that your "attitude" will lead to decreased competitiveness in the global market place when these children become adults, thus increasing the security threat to the nation. As if NCLB is the only answer to turning around education in the U.S.
Admittedly, I've encountered this anti-American rhetoric most often in non-SF online political forums with some pretty loud-mouthed conservatives, and also in areas with large populations of Christian conservatives, where I've heard Bush spoken of in Messianic terms. However, IMHO the media is doing a great job these days of reinforcing a red state-blue state, black-and-white, one-way-or-no-way world.
In case anyone is wondering, I'm an Independent. |
Paige
| | Posted on Friday, May 06, 2005 - 09:30 am: | |
I have to say, as a member of "today's unscientific youth" (ouch!) that I find a lot of this discussion more a matter of the generation gap than whether or not today's climate is anti-intellectual. For example, Jeremy considers the "lone hacker/computer geek" to not be a scientist-hero. From my perspective, computer science is as much a science as any of the traditional scientific disciplines- the difference being that computer science is a man-made science as opposed to a natural one. Computer scientists (many, many of whom are hackers and geeks) contribute tons to our society. Is Bill Gates not a modern-day scientist-hero? Or Steve Jobs? Lots of kids are being inspired by their favorite game designers/hackers/crackers/scurvy code monkeys to go into computer science and mathematics. I don't think we can dismiss the influence of computer science and technology on science. I think it's just a modern take on the "scientist as hero".
Of course, I am a 23-year-old former code jockey who is headed to medical school and grew up reading SF. And thinks Paris Hilton is really funny. And shops a lot. What's so wrong with that, anyway? ;-) |
James M. Pfundstein
| | Posted on Friday, May 06, 2005 - 09:37 am: | |
MarcL: I liked the Milton. If we can intrude a few more of these portmanteau-words into his text, someone will inevitably come along attempting to prove that Paradise Lost was forged by Lewis Carroll. This will be entertaining for us and will provide a dissertation topic for some hapless Ph.D. candidate. (Satan Was a Boojum: Intertextuality Between Dodgson and Milton by A. Bellman, jr.)
But I was thinking more about "hurliong" and wondering whether it wasn't a unit of distance (like a furlong): say, the length (or breadth) of Elizabeth Hurley.
"The wounded man staggered on for a hurliong and fell dead, his eyes as blank as Paris Hilton's."
I realize this is more in the "lead Miltown" genre than the Miltonic. But I must sing as the Muse prompts me.
JM("Musing Ourselves to Death")P |
Claudia OKeefe
| | Posted on Friday, May 06, 2005 - 10:34 am: | |
Three interesting links. I post these not as arguments for or against anything said on this board, only for informational purposes.
Bill Gates Calls Today's High Schools Obsolete
Editorial in Oregonian about Bill Gate's comments
Thomas Friedman of the New York Times comments on Gate's Speech
Incidentally, both Bill Gates and Steve Jobs will be 50 this year. |
MarcL
| | Posted on Friday, May 06, 2005 - 11:17 am: | |
Hurley the Almighty Paris
Hurled headlong flaming from th' ethereal Hugh
With hideous ruin and combustion down
To multi-furlong-deep perdition, there to dwell
In restaurant chains including Desert Fire,
Who durst defy Thom Jones' potent shortarm.
|
Paige
| | Posted on Friday, May 06, 2005 - 11:24 am: | |
Verrrry interesting. I liked Gates' speech somewhat. I agree with him that in the vast majority of public schools in low-income districts, low-income students and especially low-income minority students are not given the tools they need to suceed. I attended one such school, and I certainly can vouch for the fact that we were absolutely underprepared for college and the workforce. I don't know how to fix it- that's why I'm going to be a doctor and not an educator!- but I agree with Gates on that point.
I think the Oregonian guy kind of misses the point- these kids with terrible home lives NEED to have great educational facilities and to get the preparation they need to succeed from their schools as opposed to their homes.
Also, Gates and Jobs (and Wozniak, and Bjarn Sousstroup, and all my teenage-year heroes...) are indeed middle-aged. However, I would say they have a much greater influence over people my age than older people. I grew up dreaming of coding some awesome piece of software in my basement, just like Bill Gates! ;-) |
Claudia OKeefe
| | Posted on Friday, May 06, 2005 - 01:32 pm: | |
Paige--
I agree with you that at-risk kids, as this segment of the public school population is called, indeed need more resources. However, I also see the Oregonian writer's point. While the inadequacy of the No Child Left Behind Act was the most noticeable topic of conversation at the conference I just attended, the problem of how to get parents more involved came in a close second.
The perceived inability/unwillingness/failure of many American families to support their children's development both academically and socially is a HUGE area of controversy among today's educators. Everyone talks, but no one seems to be able to come up with an adequate or even near adequate plan. Influences blamed are varied, everything from the stressed financial state of the middle class in America, the surge in two parent earner households since the Nixon Era, the relentless drive for productivity in the workplace which exhausts parents and keeps them away from their kids, video games, drugs, and the fraying of America’s social contract, to the fact that we are now moving into our third generation of latch key kids (who are being raised by former latch key kids themselves).
The point the Oregonian writer was making is that the kids who faired poorly in school came to school unprepared to learn. Many educators say that this is not entirely their responsibility, should not in fact be their responsibility, because it steals time from academics when they have to deal with numerous behavioral issues.
This becomes an even more onerous situation when you factor in the reluctance, verging on paranoia of schools to discipline disruptive students. In one school where I taught as a guest writer last year, 8th and 9th grade students habitually shouted obscenities in their teachers faces without fear of reprisal. In another school, a 9th grader grabbed me in front of the rest of the class and attempted to wrestle me to the ground, not out of violence, but because he thought it would be funny. Since I was warned beforehand that this particular district had a no-touching policy, meaning at no time were you to touch a student for any reason, I wasn't certain what to do. I wasn’t hurt, just embarrassed, especially since I was dressed in non-wrestling friendly skirt and heels.
Incidents like this definitely undermine learning, as they did with my class that day.
|
Claudia OKeefe
| | Posted on Friday, May 06, 2005 - 01:34 pm: | |
Here’s a very weird and extreme story about school officials who felt backed into a corner, literally, by an out of control kindergartener.
Police handcuff 5-year-old girl after she destroys principal’s office.
|
Paige
| | Posted on Friday, May 06, 2005 - 01:46 pm: | |
Oh, I fully agree that kids are coming to school unprepared to learn. I am also well aware of the reluctance to discipline students. I went to one of the most "problem" public schools in my state (my parents don't believe in private schools). I distinctly remember being in fifth grade and seeing one of my classmates punch a teacher and attempt to pin her to the ground. Of course, he wasn't really disciplined- I think he had to sit in the principal's office for a day or something. Yes, I agree that this disrupts learning, creates a negative atmosphere, and scared people- I was terrified! Obviously, though, this poor kid had severe behavioral problems which it IS the school's responsibility to both understand and fix. As it is, they are indeed reluctant to punish and reluctant to get as involved as they should with students.
That being said, I think there are various ways that schools can help these at-risk youth. For example, my mum teaches kindergarten at the same school that I attended (though, she has never had a student handcuffed! ;-) ) and they have recently instituted a breakfast program, as well as many community projects to try to involve parents. She's also extremely understanding- when I was there, I was acutely aware of covert racism by teachers. She and other teachers try to take an active role in the kids' lives outside of school. That's where I think the Oregonian guy is off- schools can and should take responsibility for promoting mental well-being and providing some sort of stability. If it's lacking at home, why not try to fix it rather than throwing up your hands and saying, "Garbage in, garbage out?" |
Thomas R.
| | Posted on Friday, May 06, 2005 - 02:45 pm: | |
However, IMHO the media is doing a great job these days of reinforcing a red state-blue state, black-and-white, one-way-or-no-way world.
TR: No matter how they'd side that would be in their self-interest. Drama generally comes from conflict. If Republicans and Democrats around the country calmly debated the role of government over glasses of sherry the news wouldn't be exciting enough for their purposes. Even in the bland old Clinton years they tried to encourage heat on the Clinton-haters vs Clinton-lovers. During the first Bush they focussed on Quayle.
Kind of always been that way though for the press. The Hartford Courant said of the election of Jefferson.
quote:--if hostility to the Christian system should be encouraged and mad and immoral philosophy should extend its influence--if without regard to the balance of power, we should be drawn closer and closer to France and spurred on to war with Great Britain--if these things should take place, then, federalists, what you dreaded from the change will be fast hastening on and almost arrived. Then, virtuous Republicans, you will be on the point of losing the substance in search of the shadow--then will "the sovereign authority be destroyed and the union dissolved"--then, the great pillars of society having been thrown down, the edifice will crush millions in its fall--the chariot of the sun of liberty being [copy illegible] driven far below the safe, the middle circle, the North and the South, the East and the West will be all in flames.
|
James M. Pfundstein
| | Posted on Friday, May 06, 2005 - 03:36 pm: | |
Short-arms and the man, I sing, who first pricked over the plain
(heart filled with hurlionging for unGranted gifts)
and submitted a Trojan sheath to the placable judgement of Paris.
JM("Maro")P |
Claudia OKeefe
| | Posted on Friday, May 06, 2005 - 04:30 pm: | |
Paige--
I see what you're saying, but I can also understand the Oregonian writer's frustration. As harsh (and to some degree insensitive) as his words were, I've spoken to a number of experienced teachers who voice much the same opinion, not, I believe, out of racism, but rather emotional fatigue after spending day after day dealing with behavioral issues which take a significant amount of time away from teaching.
While I agree with you that it is a school's responsibility to note and report behavioral problems, as well as work in partnership with parents to help a problem child, I strongly disagree that it is the school’s responsibility to fix that child’s behavioral issues. Teachers aren't normally psychotherapists, nor are they paid to be. They may be parents themselves, but they aren't that child's legal guardians. Nor should they be considered babysitters. I continually hear this from dedicated, caring teachers, “Parents think my main function is babysitter.”
Educators are there to educate.
Do you not agree that parents should be encouraged to be accountable for at least a portion of their children's development, the manner in which their children treat their teachers, fellow students and human beings? I believe this is what the vast majority of teachers would like to see happen with at-risk students, parents becoming more accountable and involved. Or should we just let the whole thing slide until parents are removed from the equation completely and public education becomes like the decanting factories in Huxley's Brave New World?
|
MarcL
| | Posted on Friday, May 06, 2005 - 04:38 pm: | |
It was a sad day for etymologists when the hughliong and the hurliong came to that fork in the road; and now, though thoroughly forked, they only share a root, and not even a forked root at that. That's what happens when you're subject to four wettings in a urinal. |
Claudia OKeefe
| | Posted on Friday, May 06, 2005 - 07:53 pm: | |
One last mention. The school I'm working with now is incredible. It's in the poorest county in my state, but many consider their after-school program to be the finest, and some think it should be a model for similar programs nationwide. As far as I can tell the kids love it and I haven't had a single problem with any of my students. They're a dream to teach. One of the major components of the program is tapping parents as a resource to run it, and for those who can't actively participate because of job obligations, special open houses are held twice a year that are very well attended. Every child receives a large, healthy after-school snack and at the end of each semester kids with 80% attendance are taken on a field trip to dinner and a game at a major sports stadium. |
MarcL
| | Posted on Friday, May 06, 2005 - 08:35 pm: | |
I hope the kids get to attend the track and field event, especially hurliong the javeloin. |
Wacky Newscaster
| | Posted on Friday, May 06, 2005 - 09:55 pm: | |
Preacher Tosses Democrats Outta Church |
Thomas R.
| | Posted on Friday, May 06, 2005 - 10:28 pm: | |
Sounds like he mandates that they support Bush as well. Kicking out Democrats itself is rather odd, but specifically mandating they support someone is a bit weirder. His church should probably lose tax exempt status. |
MarcL
| | Posted on Friday, May 06, 2005 - 11:32 pm: | |
I wonder if he hurlionged them from the church. Total agreement on the tax thing; I've said it myself.
|
Thomas R.
| | Posted on Saturday, May 07, 2005 - 12:07 am: | |
It's rare I'd say such a thing. I'm not a laicist so I think it's fine for ministers to express political opinions. To even take one that's fairly consistent in being liberal or conservative. I wouldn't think that's enough to end tax exemption. Requiring support for specific candidates is just too far. |
R.Wilder
| | Posted on Saturday, May 07, 2005 - 08:38 am: | |
Is that preacher saying he wants his congregation to vote for Bush in the next election? And if so, does he know something that the rest of us don't? |
|
