From: lal@cs.arizona.edu (The Morning Sun)
Newsgroups: sci.math,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.bio,sci.chem,misc.education
Subject: Re: What can we have for an educational system?
Date: 16 Nov 92 07:17:45 GMT
Followup-To: sci.math
Organization: U of Arizona CS Dept, Tucson

In article <BxrGCs.4tp@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes:
>

[stuff deleted]

>
>There are several problems, but I have to agree that those students who
>are not motivated to learn, or are incapable of learning, are not worth
>spending money on education as distinct from training.  I am not talking
>about those who do not put in the effort because of boredom, but the 
>educationists have insisted that those who cannot understand still be
>advanced.  When I get these students at the university, I cannot teach
>the subject matter and also teach them to think in the time allotted.
>
>Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399
>Phone: (317)494-6054
>hrubin@snap.stat.purdue.edu (Internet, bitnet)  
>{purdue,pur-ee}!snap.stat!hrubin(UUCP)

I completely and absolutely agree with Mr. Rubin.
	I went through Junior College in Singapore. In Singapore there are 
only two universities. Most people do not even go to Junior College. Instead
they go to a polytechnic or something for technical training. Even most
of those who finish Junior College do not go to university. Either that
                                               ^
                                               a

is the end of their education, or they go on for a technical diploma course.
	Keep in mind that Singapore has the BEST technicians in the world.
< In terms of productivity - this result is off an American survey >
	In this way resources are not wasted in sending to University
                                                          ^
            	 					  a

those who are only capable of being technicians.
	Also to go to  University in Singapore, you must finish your
                     ^ ^
                     a u

A - levels. I did mine in Physics, Mathematics, and Computer Science.
                          ^        ^                ^        ^
After coming to University in the U.S my first mathematics course was
               ^^
differential equations, my first physics - a 3rd year course "Structure
of Matter". So you see no one from a U.S. High school would have an
education to qualify for entrance to a Singapore University.
	I believe everyone does not have the right to a University education.
                                                        ^
It is a privelege. It is riduculous how poorly prepared students are in
mathematics from high school. At chabot college I worked as a tutor, tutoring
                                 ^      ^
                                 C      C
students in first and second year mathematics, physics, and computer science.
It was shocking how unprepared these students were!! If these students
are not willing to study in high school, university should be denied to
 ^                                      ^          ^
were                                    a       education

them.
	I was suprised that with only a pre-University education I was
able to tutor students for their University courses.
	I would recommend that Students who do not have proficieny in
mathematics and english not be allowed to go to University. If they are
                ^                               ^

  HOW DID SOMEONE WITH YOUR MEAGER LANGUAGE SKILLS GET INTO COLLEGE! YOUR
POSTING IS BADLY RIDDLED WITH BASIC ERRORS OF GRAMMAR. I JUST THOUGHT I
WOULD CORRECT A FEW.

interested perhaps they should have learnt what they are supposed to in 
high school.
	I also believe that calculus, physics and computer science should be
studied for upto two years in high-school by everyone interested in
majoring in engineering.
	To much time is wasted in University teaching the basics, which
should be covered in High School. Of course many fewer students will
make it to a University Engr. program, Which is good. Because mostly
the students even at Arizona here, are only capable of being technicians
 - it is a waste of the taxpayer's money to educate them. They are really
not interested in the subject. They learn by rote, and memorization.
They have no creative abilities. It would be better if they enrolled
in a technical diploma program. It is no use teaching all this theory,
when they don't really *understand* it.
	If my suggestions are followed, 3 physics courses, 3 mathematics
courses, and 3 computer science courses <approximately> will be dropped
from the program, as the material is covered in High School. First year
english composition should also be covered in High school.
	This will enable the Engr./Sciences program to be improved in these
ways. Add these courses:
	<1> A course in modern physics
	<2> Advanced course in applied physics specific to the major
	<3> A course in mathematical physics / applied maths 
	<4> Advanced mathematics analysis/methods  course specific to the major
	<5> A course in software tools used specific to that major
	<6> Courses in Speech & communications
	<7> Courses in Speech & communications
	<8> Advanced course in research methodology
	<9> Advanced course in non-fiction <technical report, article> writing
	<10> Courses in Analysis & Design of complex systems <non-mathematical> 
	<11> Courses in Analysis & Design of complex systems <non-mathematical>

	The current engineering program is so boring that I am not suprised
by the lack of interest by the students and the professors. I speak from
personal experience. I was studying engr. at Cal. State Sacramento, but
I was suprised to find a lack of interest in the subject matter by all, and
a boring curriculum, so I transferred to here. Some improvement here but
not much. I entered university to learn to be an Engineer not a technician.
 I am hoping to finish my B.S. quickly and have decided not
to pursue a graduate education in Engr.
	I would like to say more about the high school program, but my
knowledge of the American High School is restricted to what I have learnt
from tutoring kids at College. I think part of the problem is the fact
that it is so easy to get into university in USA, even if you don't
learn your high school maths and english you can still enter University
and catch up during your first year in University.	
	These kind of kids will be better off going into a two year
diploma program, or some some sort of apprentice-ship. I know that
the Associate of Arts/Sciences are offered by colleges, and perhaps
more students should be doing that.
	Making entrance to 4 year university programs more difficult
is actually enivatable as fate would have it. This is not a bad thing
as many would think, but actually a good thing. There is not enough
money to be spent on education, so universities will have to cap
their enrollment, leading to the raising of admission standards.

THE PROBLEM IS THAT HIGH SCHOOLS IN THE U.S. ARE OF VERY POOR QUALITY.
UNFORTUNATELY, FOR MANY THEIR EDUCATION BEGIN UNTILL THEY REACH COLLEGE.

	Thanks for listening to my views.

A. Lal
	 
Xref: sparky sci.chem:4769 rec.pyrotechnics:3816