Jump to content


Photo

BBC Article...

  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#1 neotesla

neotesla

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1123
  • Joined: 18 Nov 2010
  • Loc: Canada

Posted 24 October 2012 - 01:16 PM

Something for discussion... Should astronomy be a compulsory topic for education?

http://www.bbc.com/f...d-be-compulsory

#2 deSitter

deSitter

    Still in Old School

  • -----
  • Posts: 6879
  • Joined: 09 Dec 2004

Posted 24 October 2012 - 03:38 PM

I'd almost rather they remained ignorant than be browbeaten by the Kaku-ian, Greene-ian hordes of pseudo-priests teaching astronomy as a new form of closed-minded dogma.

-drl

#3 kw6562

kw6562

    Authoritative Ignoramus

  • *****
  • Posts: 796
  • Joined: 25 Jun 2008
  • Loc: MA

Posted 24 October 2012 - 10:04 PM

:roflmao:

#4 Otto Piechowski

Otto Piechowski

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1463
  • Joined: 20 Sep 2005
  • Loc: Lexington, KY

Posted 24 October 2012 - 10:13 PM

I taught with a Rico Tyler in the Kentucky Governor's Scholars Academy for about 10 years. In addition to his almost 30 years involved with the Academy and now being a university astronomy professor, he is a National Science Teacher of the Year award winner (feted and dined at the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum with President Clinton present).

Rico once pointed out to me, and it sounded convincing, that astronomy, well taught (as he always did things) is a gateway science to all other sciences; physics, chemistry, biology, mathematics.

Otto

#5 llanitedave

llanitedave

    Humble Megalomaniac

  • *****
  • Posts: 22554
  • Joined: 25 Sep 2005
  • Loc: Amargosa Valley, NV, USA

Posted 24 October 2012 - 11:24 PM

Any science, well taught, is a gateway science to all the others.

#6 deSitter

deSitter

    Still in Old School

  • -----
  • Posts: 6879
  • Joined: 09 Dec 2004

Posted 25 October 2012 - 03:26 AM

Exactly! This is precisely the sort of priestly behavior among the "astro-cognoscenti" that I was ranting against.

-drl

#7 moynihan

moynihan

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • Posts: 2315
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2003
  • Loc: Lake Michigan Watershed

Posted 26 October 2012 - 01:37 PM

Any science, well taught, is a gateway science to all the others.


:goodjob:

#8 russell23

russell23

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4453
  • Joined: 31 May 2009
  • Loc: Upstate NY

Posted 26 October 2012 - 07:23 PM

Something for discussion... Should astronomy be a compulsory topic for education?

http://www.bbc.com/f...d-be-compulsory


The introduction of Garett P. Serviss's 1888 book "Astronomy with an Opera glass" talks about how people of that time did not know the names of the brightest stars, could not recognize the constellations, and could not distinguish planets from stars. Seems little has changed for the masses.

Dave

#9 Rick Woods

Rick Woods

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 14801
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2005
  • Loc: Inner Solar System

Posted 26 October 2012 - 07:26 PM

I'd almost rather they remained ignorant than be browbeaten by the Kaku-ian, Greene-ian hordes of pseudo-priests teaching astronomy as a new form of closed-minded dogma.


Yeah, but what do you really think?

#10 deSitter

deSitter

    Still in Old School

  • -----
  • Posts: 6879
  • Joined: 09 Dec 2004

Posted 26 October 2012 - 08:23 PM

I can't, the local humble m-person will ban me :)

-drl

#11 moynihan

moynihan

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • Posts: 2315
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2003
  • Loc: Lake Michigan Watershed

Posted 26 October 2012 - 09:00 PM

What/who are "Kaku-ian, Greene-ian hordes"?

#12 deSitter

deSitter

    Still in Old School

  • -----
  • Posts: 6879
  • Joined: 09 Dec 2004

Posted 26 October 2012 - 09:14 PM

I see you don't own a televsion machine.

-drl

#13 Otto Piechowski

Otto Piechowski

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1463
  • Joined: 20 Sep 2005
  • Loc: Lexington, KY

Posted 26 October 2012 - 10:18 PM

Some years ago the state of Kentucky initiated a program called the Kentucky Education Reform Act. This program has accomplished good. For example, it has equalized school district funding.

One other thing KERA has done is to impose on all instruction government mandated standards. The result has been that the curricula of all subjects falling under the direction of the Kentucky Department of Education are quite defined, constrained, narrow, and exclusive to their own topic. This is in part due to the need to prepare students to perform well on tests. Thus, there is little or no room, in the actual high school education environment, to expand instruction much beyond topics exclusively devoted to the specific subject.

Though it is true to say all science subjects can serve as gateways to all other sciences subjects, it is difficult to imagine how biology, chemistry, and physics courses could incorporate much of the other sciences beyond a cursory treatment in today's actual education environment.

Astronomy has, as yet, been able to fly under the radar, perhaps because few who craft the government/education department curricular requirements consider it to be a real science. Though there are elements of mathematics and physics in astronomy course requirements; much of it is show and tell as is evidenced by the fact that astronomy, if it is taught in a school at all, is often taught by persons whose specific training is some other subject; sometimes not even a science.

Astronomy still possesses an innocence, relatively untouched by government/education department mandates, which can allow the dedication of instructional time needed to allow it to be a gateway.

How long this opportunity will last, no one can say.

Otto

#14 DarkSkys

DarkSkys

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 552
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2010
  • Loc: In the dark desert of Eastern WA.

Posted 27 October 2012 - 02:41 AM

Some years ago the state of Kentucky initiated a program called the Kentucky Education Reform Act. This program has accomplished good. For example, it has equalized school district funding.

One other thing KERA has done is to impose on all instruction government mandated standards. The result has been that the curricula of all subjects falling under the direction of the Kentucky Department of Education are quite defined, constrained, narrow, and exclusive to their own topic. This is in part due to the need to prepare students to perform well on tests. Thus, there is little or no room, in the actual high school education environment, to expand instruction much beyond topics exclusively devoted to the specific subject.

Though it is true to say all science subjects can serve as gateways to all other sciences subjects, it is difficult to imagine how biology, chemistry, and physics courses could incorporate much of the other sciences beyond a cursory treatment in today's actual education environment.

Astronomy has, as yet, been able to fly under the radar, perhaps because few who craft the government/education department curricular requirements consider it to be a real science. Though there are elements of mathematics and physics in astronomy course requirements; much of it is show and tell as is evidenced by the fact that astronomy, if it is taught in a school at all, is often taught by persons whose specific training is some other subject; sometimes not even a science.

Astronomy still possesses an innocence, relatively untouched by government/education department mandates, which can allow the dedication of instructional time needed to allow it to be a gateway.

How long this opportunity will last, no one can say.

Otto


During my entire time in school, we had 2 weeks of astronomy total, it dident even qualify as a " curosry glance", we basicaly covered that the earth is a planet, we have the moon, and there were 9 planets going around the sun, plus some rocks and gas and stuff. oh and the sun is a star.

That may acutaly be more in depth than what we acutualy went over, being that I was 12 when we went over it. It seems it wasnt deemed important enough for a standardized test, so it must not have been worth learning in there minds.

We had years of earth sciences( hydro cycle, volcanism, atmospheric science), chemistry, very basic physics*, and a few other I am sure I am missing.

* there were 2 more advanced physics classes, but they would only allow the "annointed few" who were deemed worthy into it, and the most advanced class only happened every other year, and you had to be in advanced calculus and have taken every other science class to get into it, I don't think I knew of them ever picking enough kids to acutaly have the class.

There was a class were all you did was watch movies though. :o

#15 Skip

Skip

    Starlifter Driver

  • *****
  • Posts: 3940
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2008
  • Loc: Fort Worth, Texas, USA

Posted 27 October 2012 - 10:19 AM

Yeah, and they were probably Kaku-ian and Greene-ian movies. A plethora of them on TV nowdays.

Oops, sorry. I don't know how old DarkSkys is but what he's talking about may be before Kaku and Greene. I know my time in school was WAY before them! :gramps:

#16 Otto Piechowski

Otto Piechowski

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1463
  • Joined: 20 Sep 2005
  • Loc: Lexington, KY

Posted 27 October 2012 - 11:44 AM

Guys/gals....I am not familiar with what you are calling Kakuian and Greenian movies. What are those? And, why are they not considered to be good?

Otto

#17 llanitedave

llanitedave

    Humble Megalomaniac

  • *****
  • Posts: 22554
  • Joined: 25 Sep 2005
  • Loc: Amargosa Valley, NV, USA

Posted 27 October 2012 - 11:51 AM

I can't, the local humble m-person will ban me :)

-drl


Twice.

#18 russell23

russell23

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4453
  • Joined: 31 May 2009
  • Loc: Upstate NY

Posted 27 October 2012 - 03:39 PM

Guys/gals....I am not familiar with what you are calling Kakuian and Greenian movies. What are those? And, why are they not considered to be good?

Otto


I think it would be reference to Michio Kaku and Brian Greene both of whom popularize astronomy and science through books.

Dave

#19 DarkSkys

DarkSkys

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 552
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2010
  • Loc: In the dark desert of Eastern WA.

Posted 28 October 2012 - 08:57 AM

Yeah, and they were probably Kaku-ian and Greene-ian movies. A plethora of them on TV nowdays.

Oops, sorry. I don't know how old DarkSkys is but what he's talking about may be before Kaku and Greene. I know my time in school was WAY before them! :gramps:


Nah, I've only been outta H.S. for 1.5 years now, them guys have been around way longer than that.

#20 JKoelman

JKoelman

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 679
  • Joined: 15 May 2011
  • Loc: Bangalore, India

Posted 11 November 2012 - 01:52 PM

Guys/gals....I am not familiar with what you are calling Kakuian and Greenian movies. What are those? And, why are they not considered to be good?

I think it would be reference to Michio Kaku and Brian Greene both of whom popularize astronomy and science through books.


I like Brian Greene's books, less so Michio Kaku's science popularizations. But all of this is personal taste.

It comes across like there is a consensus here that both pop-science authors generally do a lousy job. No idea what would be the basis for that. Maybe because both authors strongly defend string theory?

#21 FlorinAndrei

FlorinAndrei

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 867
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2010
  • Loc: California

Posted 11 November 2012 - 06:36 PM

It comes across like there is a consensus here that both pop-science authors generally do a lousy job. No idea what would be the basis for that. Maybe because both authors strongly defend string theory?


Yeah, it is apparently fashionable in certain circles to just pick some random theory and bash it till kingdom come, along with everyone supporting them. High school never ends, I guess.

Both Kaku and Greene are doing an awesome job popularizing science. Neil deGrasse Tyson is another example.

#22 simpleisbetter

simpleisbetter

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1848
  • Joined: 18 Apr 2011

Posted 11 November 2012 - 06:51 PM

My first instinct is to say I agree with deSitter wrt Kaku-ian and Greene-ian thought.

My second thought and more reasonable suggestion is to say I agree with deSitter. I see no reason this subject is any more important than the other physical sciences that it shouldn't continue to be taught as a part of High School Physics.

#23 llanitedave

llanitedave

    Humble Megalomaniac

  • *****
  • Posts: 22554
  • Joined: 25 Sep 2005
  • Loc: Amargosa Valley, NV, USA

Posted 11 November 2012 - 07:49 PM

Is string theory part of the standard high school curriculum? I wouldn't have thought so.

#24 simpleisbetter

simpleisbetter

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1848
  • Joined: 18 Apr 2011

Posted 11 November 2012 - 08:24 PM

Edit - deleted first paragraph here as I now see the post you were referring to Dave, sorry. :)

I personally don't see Astronomy any more important than the other physical sciences, that it should take an entire separate class, rather than being taught as part of High School Physics. There are many far more important things for us to deal with, and Astronomy pales in comparison.

As for the people mentioned above, when talking to many of my friends and acquaintances outside this hobby or science, even some school teachers, they are completely turned off by what they perceive as the blind arrogance and false self-confidence of Kaku, Tyson, Greene, Hawking, and other contemporaries. More specifically, their responses to mention of those media scientists usually include blow-hards. As one who has a life outside of science and having less and less time in this hobby each day, I can see and understand their viewpoints and concerns.

#25 moynihan

moynihan

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • Posts: 2315
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2003
  • Loc: Lake Michigan Watershed

Posted 11 November 2012 - 09:13 PM

I think the phrase "string theory" is a popular misnomer. It should be called the string hypotheses. There are more than one string ideas, hence the plural.

A scientific theory is "a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment." (NAS 1999)

As far as i know there are no experiments or observations confirming it to date.

A hypothesis is a statement that explains or makes generalizations about a set of facts or principles, usually forming a basis for possible experiments to confirm its viability.

Hypotheses provides a suggested solutions based on the evidence. Experimenters may test and reject several hypotheses before solving the problem. http://en.wikipedia....ific_hypothesis

A hypothesis that survives for decades without experimental or observational evidence is still a hypothesis. Large amounts of funding do not make it a theory.

I am not saying that the string hypothesis (assuming only one variant could be correct)is wrong. I am just saying it is technically, not a theory. I do find the fact that the science press is sloppy in its verbage, to not be amusing though.






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics