|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
10:06 AM - What’s in a Report Card? MikeGene has attempted a simple test of the hypothesis that "excellent science standards in an educational system will produce students with a better understanding of science" by comparing state ACT scores to state ratings from the Fordham Foundation's State of State Science Standards report. While I truly appreciate any effort to "approach the problem like scientists" this analysis fails to address the actual problem at hand... ...that is, the concerns expressed by some leaders "that the failure to produce students well-prepared in science is undermining the country’s production of scientists and engineers and putting the nation’s economic future in jeopardy." As it happens, our "country’s production of scientists and engineers" draws quite heavily (though not exclusively) upon those students who get rather higher than average science ACT scores, the key metric which MikeGene used as his benchmark. Mean ACT scores are correlated with (and causally dependant upon) various socioeconomic factors apart from formal education, but the real concern here not how average students are doing, but rather what particular conception of science is being systematically inculcated into those children (like myself) who ate science for breakfast, aced the ACT science test, and went on to major in hard sciences and obtain advanced degrees in science or engineering. The kids who remained awake, alert, and attentive in science classes are those most directly affected by state science standards and curricula, most especially by the results of glaring omissions such as those of my home state. (
|
|||||||||
: