From: rhs@world.std.com (Richard H Schwartz)
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
Subject: Re: Student: Teach Thyself
Date: 19 Aug 92 14:53:37 GMT
Article-I.D.: world.Bt8K1E.6sq
Distribution: na
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA

werme@alliant.com (Ric Werme) writes:

>>
>>Schools do not teach this.  Parents who subject their children to reward
>>or punishment based on their test grades and report cards do. 

>I don't see how encouraging children to score well on tests encourages
>students to do anything but cram for tests.

I suppose schools could encourage students *not* to do well on tests in
order to discourage cramming.  

Seriously, how do you expect schools to do it?  De-emphasize testing?  (In
favor of what?)  Testing only on an un-announced basis?  

>Hmm.  Can't think of anything good right offhand.  Mensans (et al!): any
>ideas?  Ah - just remembered.  The school is into integrating various
>subjects.  There's a senior seminar that involves biology and english.
>It will cover enviromental literature.

And you say that history was too political! :-)

>I'm not suggesting a large percentage, but I do think > one assignment
>per four years is not too much to ask.  If it can be used to encourage
>students to get more interested in classical literature, that might be
>a good approach.  What was Pournelle/Niven's takeoff on Dante's
>Inferno?

Several of Pournelle's monthly columns in Byte have approached it :-)

>>>If people protest that you are not learning the
>>>teamwork skills often touted for the athletic program, point out that
>>>other activities like Odessey of the Mind or Dungeons and Dragons teach
>>>teamwork better. 
>>                                              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>                                              Where's the smiley?
>>                                              You must be kidding about
>>                                              about this, aren't you?

>No smilely.  Perhaps I'm overreaching my background, never having been
>part of a football team or D&D group.  Given the contents of some of the
>pep talks I've heard about before football games, I'd think D&D is okay.
>Actually, I included D&D as a dig at the school's superintendent.  A
>few years ago he squelched an after school D&D group because it promoted
>violence and killing.

I wouldn't go so far, but I do think that teamwork per se is not promoted.
Alliance is the the word I would use.  The crucial difference being that
alliance is fluid.  Sometimes alliances break naturally when an objective
is achieved (or not).  Sometimes they break due to backstabbing.  While
this may be a more realistic world-view than traditional teamwork (geez,
mixing "D&D" and "realistic" in the same thought, I never thought that 
would happen... :-), it is not "better" or even equivalent.

>Oh no!  Go read that article in misc.education I mentioned in a previous
>post.  Doing away with ability grouping is in vogue today!  

Doing away with, or limiting?  My understanding of what's in vogue is that
ability grouping for some subjects and in upper grades is still considered
permissable.  And it is just plain common sense that heterogenous grouping
can not be successfully imposed on students in upper grades who have 
already been ability-grouped in lower grades.  I would read anything that
advocates across-the-board implementation as being politically (and
probably budgetarily) motivated.

>The budget is a little tight, but they had a surplus after hiring the teachers
>and used that to high a trainer for the athletic department.

A very politically popular decision, I'm sure.  

-rich


-- 
             Richard H. Schwartz, Scheduling Systems Inc.,
            1000 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA  02138
                  (617) 864 8330; FAX (617) 864 8377
                          rhs@world.std.com