[Edu-sig] Edu-sig Digest, Vol 156, Issue 1

[Peter Farrell]

Very good points, Kirby!

I heartily agree with your assessment of, well, assessments. I'll go on
record as saying the cult of standardization and curriculum reeks of fear.

Peter

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:00 AM, <edu-sig-request at python.org> wrote:

> Send Edu-sig mailing list submissions to
>         edu-sig at python.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         edu-sig-request at python.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         edu-sig-owner at python.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Edu-sig digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: Let's dump the Graphing Calculators! (kirby urner)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 10:06:49 -0700
> From: kirby urner <kirby.urner at gmail.com>
> To: edu-sig <edu-sig at python.org>
> Subject: Re: [Edu-sig] Let's dump the Graphing Calculators!
> Message-ID:
>         <
> CAPJgG3QHYsiUnMFrpz95v7Tb86TXva02TTuypswBeWw0juO6dw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 3:01 AM, Jason Blum <jason.blum at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Interesting article about the whole Texas Instruments Graphing Calculator
> > scam:
> >
> >
> https://mic.com/articles/125829/your-old-texas-instruments-graphing-calculator-still-costs-a-fortune-heres-why
> >
> >
> Excellent article, thanks.
>
> Whereas I have love and respect for the BBC, I've been a past
> advocate of the Boycott Pearson campaign, precisely for the
> reasons mentioned above.
>
> I think Pearson has some better practices in the pipeline by now,
> and dropped my campaign awhile back, but I'm still rhetorically
> resisting the oppressiveness of big publishing in general (I used
> to work at McGraw-Hill and understand how what's profitable is
> to recycle the past with window-dressing changes).
>
> The Common Core is mostly for big publishing's convenience, as
> marketing to individualized curricula developed by faculty would
> be a real pain. Exactly right, it would be.  The big publishing
> textbook business model is itself what's out of date -- we neither
> need nor want uniformity of that kind.
>
> Teachers want more pay and respect, and Jorge is a great role
> model for why they'd deserve both if allowed to innovate in the
> way Jorge has.  But most are on a very short leash and have to
> do Pearson's dirty work as mind-killer slaves.
>
> Hah hah, there's more of my rhetoric showing.
>
>
> > Meanwhile you get ten times the functionality for free on
> > https://desmos.com/:
> >
> >
> https://edsurge.com/news/2015-04-30-texas-district-pilots-desmos-as-alternative-to-graphing-calculators
> >
> > But +1 on approaching math programmatically with Python.
> >
> >
> >
> Or with J and/or JavaScript and/or.... so many ways to go once the
> creativity is unleashed.
>
> But that's the fear:  non-standardized and diverse approaches to the
> future, meaning college admissions offices would have to really think
> about their jobs again instead of just using algorithms and cookie
> cutters.
>
> We've swallowed the bogus argument that wholesale uniformity and
> "every one on the same page" has something to do with "fairness".
> If junior moves from military base A in Texas to military base B in
> Alabama, we don't want to upset her with some different content,
> something place-based or homegrown.  The transition should be as
> smooth as just turning the page, as everyone is in lockstep, always
> the factory-minded ideal.  One size fits all etc.
>
> Congratulations to those behind this "fairness = uniformity" deception,
> as it has worked very well for them.  The gullible public has bought
> in to this premise.
>
> In the meantime, those very few schools who dare to break the
> mold are in a position to hugely advantage their students.  There's
> nothing like shackling everyone else to TI calculators to help a
> lucky few stand out thanks to their school's bravery.
>
> What I don't get is why organizations like the IEEE or even the
> NCTM itself don't raise a fuss or in any way to insist on educational
> freedom.  Don't teachers want any freedom?  (Answer:  many
> don't).
>
> NCTM and IEEE do not seem to understand how they're digging
> their own graves with their silence and that, looking back, they're
> going to seem awfully stick-in-the-mud as in "gee, look at these
> interesting fossils".  You'd think at some point a sense of self-
> preservation, of wanting to survive, would kick in.
>
> Kirby
>
> Related polemics (hey, I'm a spin doctor too):
>
> http://mathforum.org/kb/thread.jspa?messageID=9796755#9796755
> https://goo.gl/dajqz0  (based on today's correspondence)
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/edu-sig/attachments/20160630/3b6b8a1d/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> Edu-sig mailing list
> Edu-sig at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Edu-sig Digest, Vol 156, Issue 1
> ***************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/edu-sig/attachments/20160701/c0353364/attachment-0001.html>