Another sign of the apocalypse

[osan]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/8081280/Head-teacher-says-schoolchildren-do-not-need-books-and-recommends-Wikipedia.html

We're doomed.

Guaranteed.

[MelissaWV]

I wonder if Mr. Buck knows what "sine qua non" even means. ;) Luckily, there is predictably a Wiki article on that.


Text books are the soup de jour, the *sine qua non*, the nut and bolts of teaching and learning in high school and college so to speak." However, he added, "just because student have a text book, doesn't mean she or she will be able to read it Additionally students can't use a text book to learn how to learn from a textbook.

"Are text books necessary? No. Are text books important? Yes. Can a teacher sufficiently teach a course without them? Yes, but conditionally."

Mr Buck went on to say that not being able to answer questions in his own school textbooks made him feel "dumb and inadequate" when he was a boy.

...

Mr Buck, a former official in the local education department, has led the school since its foundation in 2007. He was found to be the least trusted principal in Brooklyn by a New York teachers union survey the following year.

Thank goodness this person makes a six-figure salary on our dime?

I agree with the idea that textbooks will, at some point, become more and more obsolete. I disagree that Wikipedia will become an adequate replacement.

[zach]

We can change Wikipedia like "they" changed history text.

Not buying it.

[talkingpointes]

He is recommending kids learn theory in learning rather than just rote learning is what I got out of the article besides the wikipedia mention. I think that's good. Do we have any disagreement/'s?

[MelissaWV]

He is recommending kids learn theory in learning rather than just rote learning is what I got out of the article besides the wikipedia mention. I think that's good. Do we have any disagreement/'s?

I understood that to be the intent of the notice to teachers, of course. I don't think you'll find much disagreement among people on these forums that textbooks are silly in so many ways. Computerized resources can be updated with far more regularity, and they can be accessed faster by the students. You have far more access to opposing viewpoints if you are learning this way.

I do find it depressing, though, that the notice talks about how having a textbook does not necessarily mean the student can read it. As an educator, isn't that kind of his job? Beyond that, won't they also be unable to read a website?

[Cowlesy]

I'd love to see a general eighth grade exam of today versus an eighth grade exam of say, 1900, to gauge the differences in what level of knowledge would be required to pass.

[Cowlesy]

He is recommending kids learn theory in learning rather than just rote learning is what I got out of the article besides the wikipedia mention. I think that's good. Do we have any disagreement/'s?

It also sounds like the textbooks hurt his feelings because he couldn't answer some of the questions.

Aww, this guy is a Victim.

I don't blame the parents for trying to get him ousted.

[Jordan]

"Mr Buck, who is paid $130,000 (£83,000) a year"
:eek:

[oyarde]

I'd love to see a general eighth grade exam of today versus an eighth grade exam of say, 1900, to gauge the differences in what level of knowledge would be required to pass.

I saw one some time back , around 1895 from Kansas . I would say a very intelligent person today may get 50 - 60 % correct .

[MelissaWV]

I saw one some time back , around 1895 from Kansas . I would say a very intelligent person today may get 50 - 60 % correct .

In all fairness, many of the kids from 1895 Kansas would have great difficulty with the references in current word problems and essay questions ;)

[oyarde]

In all fairness, many of the kids from 1895 Kansas would have great difficulty with the references in current word problems and essay questions ;)

It had essay questions on it .

[virgil47]

I understood that to be the intent of the notice to teachers, of course. I don't think you'll find much disagreement among people on these forums that textbooks are silly in so many ways. Computerized resources can be updated with far more regularity, and they can be accessed faster by the students. You have far more access to opposing viewpoints if you are learning this way.

I do find it depressing, though, that the notice talks about how having a textbook does not necessarily mean the student can read it. As an educator, isn't that kind of his job? Beyond that, won't they also be unable to read a website?

Computer based learning is great until the power goes out then it is non existant. Books while more cumbersome and perhaps slower to utilize last and are useable for generations. Electricty is not required for text books to be used.

[virgil47]

In all fairness, many of the kids from 1895 Kansas would have great difficulty with the references in current word problems and essay questions ;)

Justly so. Those references did not exist. I dare say the students of today would have just as much trouble with the references used in word problems and essay questions that will be current in the year 2100.

[MelissaWV]

Computer based learning is great until the power goes out then it is non existant. Books while more cumbersome and perhaps slower to utilize last and are useable for generations. Electricty is not required for text books to be used.

Computer-based learning doesn't require power, either. If instead of being forced to pay into the busted public school system, you could invest in tablets for your local students and they could study on battery power ;)

Of course, you could also print out materials (which would be highly recommended, as staring at a computer screen all day for schooling and then graduating to an adult life of likely staring at a computer screen a fair portion of the time... well that's no way to live!).

[virgil47]

Computer-based learning doesn't require power, either. If instead of being forced to pay into the busted public school system, you could invest in tablets for your local students and they could study on battery power ;)

Of course, you could also print out materials (which would be highly recommended, as staring at a computer screen all day for schooling and then graduating to an adult life of likely staring at a computer screen a fair portion of the time... well that's no way to live!).

If you are going to print out material you may as well use a text book. Battery power and computers will not be available in the event of a societal collapse however books will.

[oyarde]

That final exam for 8th grade from Salina Kansas in 1895 is on the web. Just google 1895 final exam eighth grade Salina Kansas and it comes up several places .

[libertarian4321]

That final exam for 8th grade from Salina Kansas in 1895 is on the web. Just google 1895 final exam eighth grade Salina Kansas and it comes up several places .

Yup, the oft quoted kansas exam is also largely bull shit in that it really shows nothing.

Check out the snopes.com article on this purported "exam."

[MelissaWV]

If you are going to print out material you may as well use a text book. Battery power and computers will not be available in the event of a societal collapse however books will.

:rolleyes:

If you are printing out material that was updated this morning, you are literally learning/teaching using information that's the latest. If you are using a textbook that, for the last few years, has been in development and being proofread and being disputed and printed and shipped and finally arrived at your door this morning... you are still using information that is several years old at best, and which has been filtered via committee. There are marked differences.

I have no idea why you keep harping on societal collapse. If society has utterly collapsed, then I don't think worrying about whether or not your child can recite the Presidents is your top priority.

Books will "be available" in small numbers to a few people. They don't exactly lend themselves toward being toted around in large numbers. They degrade and the paper starts to become illegible if they are over-handled, and the elements take their toll. If we're going to add random conditions to the OP, then consider the society "after the collapse" advanced about a century. Modern books will either need to be recopied, safeguarded jealously, or they will be in poor shape.

All of this, though, is irrelevant to what is best to use to educate yourself or children. It stands to reason that you would want the broadest variety of information possible, and the most up-to-date, to lay the foundation for any real education. I have no idea why one would ever argue that a single book on a single subject is going to be comprehensive enough to provide real perspective.

[osan]

:rolleyes:

If you are printing out material that was updated this morning, you are literally learning/teaching using information that's the latest. If you are using a textbook that, for the last few years, has been in development and being proofread and being disputed and printed and shipped and finally arrived at your door this morning... you are still using information that is several years old at best, and which has been filtered via committee. There are marked differences.

Valid point. However, both sides are overstating their positions, methinks, at least a little. Each form has its place. I like books and in some ways they are much superior to electronic methods. I've been in the computer world for 30 years and can say that, as with all other things, they are very much two-edged.


I have no idea why you keep harping on societal collapse. If society has utterly collapsed, then I don't think worrying about whether or not your child can recite the Presidents is your top priority.

Yeah. In such a circumstance we will be lucky if we still have letterpress technology available to us.


Books will "be available" in small numbers to a few people. They don't exactly lend themselves toward being toted around in large numbers. They degrade and the paper starts to become illegible if they are over-handled, and the elements take their toll. If we're going to add random conditions to the OP, then consider the society "after the collapse" advanced about a century. Modern books will either need to be recopied, safeguarded jealously, or they will be in poor shape.

This is really not so valid. Books have survived many centuries. They would continue to survive as they always have, unless we nuke the entire planet, which is not quite out of the realm of possibility these days.


All of this, though, is irrelevant to what is best to use to educate yourself or children. It stands to reason that you would want the broadest variety of information possible, and the most up-to-date, to lay the foundation for any real education.

This is not necessarily so. It depends largely on the nature of the matter being studied. Some subjects are of a very changing nature. Others are not. Euclidean geometry, for example, is pretty much established in stone now. There is no "up to date" issue there, but there most certainly is a quality issue to be considered. Quality of the content and of the presentation. I've seen great calculus texts and more than a few very poor ones.


I have no idea why one would ever argue that a single book on a single subject is going to be comprehensive enough to provide real perspective.

Depends on the subject under consideration.

Computer technology is cool in some ways and really shitty in others. I believe study from physical books is healthier than staring at the tube all day. To my way of seeing, the computer is something that should be used judiciously and somewhat sparingly.

[virgil47]

Valid point. However, both sides are overstating their positions, methinks, at least a little. Each form has its place. I like books and in some ways they are much superior to electronic methods. I've been in the computer world for 30 years and can say that, as with all other things, they are very much two-edged.



Yeah. In such a circumstance we will be lucky if we still have letterpress technology available to us.



This is really not so valid. Books have survived many centuries. They would continue to survive as they always have, unless we nuke the entire planet, which is not quite out of the realm of possibility these days.



This is not necessarily so. It depends largely on the nature of the matter being studied. Some subjects are of a very changing nature. Others are not. Euclidean geometry, for example, is pretty much established in stone now. There is no "up to date" issue there, but there most certainly is a quality issue to be considered. Quality of the content and of the presentation. I've seen great calculus texts and more than a few very poor ones.



Depends on the subject under consideration.

Computer technology is cool in some ways and really shitty in others. I believe study from physical books is healthier than staring at the tube all day. To my way of seeing, the computer is something that should be used judiciously and somewhat sparingly.

I agree with you. Computers while nice educational tools are just that ... tools. They are tools that are best utilized by an educated mind and they do have their place but are not the end all be all that many believe.

[MelissaWV]

This is really not so valid. Books have survived many centuries. They would continue to survive as they always have, unless we nuke the entire planet, which is not quite out of the realm of possibility these days.

Modern books don't seem as hardy as older ones. I submit that, after 100 years, the textbooks we have circulating right now would be utterly useless unless cared for in a very specific way. Since the poster in question was discussing a scenario where there was no electricity anywhere, I figure that caring for books would not be the common person's topmost priority, either.

The reason I rolled my eyes at the start was that somehow we got from my original responses in the thread...


I agree with the idea that textbooks will, at some point, become more and more obsolete. I disagree that Wikipedia will become an adequate replacement.

...

Computerized resources can be updated with far more regularity, and they can be accessed faster by the students. You have far more access to opposing viewpoints if you are learning this way.

...to talk about education in a post-apocalyptic wasteland. Textbooks will be around in common use, but even math which has been around for centuries needs to be written in a way that you/your child can understand. Not everyone learns the same way. This is where computers become an incredibly useful tool: not necessarily for the material being updated, but the methods.

Compare this to a textbook, which is one-size-fits-all, and which has gone through so many review processes before it ever got to the students in question. The textbook seems inferior unless the size really does fit you, which happens.

On the flipside, however, I've always preferred actual books for reading something which will never change at all. Novels are better in my hand with real pages than on some Kindle or similar device, at least in my opinion. I can sympathize with the argument that textbooks should be the same, but try to read a textbook on English grammar (and we still speak English) from 1910 and let me know whether or not you learn more easily using that than you do having access to a multitude of resources and methods. I might also remind you that the 1910 textbook is included among the multitude of resources you have at your disposal ;)

[osan]

Modern books don't seem as hardy as older ones. I submit that, after 100 years, the textbooks we have circulating right now would be utterly useless unless cared for in a very specific way. Since the poster in question was discussing a scenario where there was no electricity anywhere, I figure that caring for books would not be the common person's topmost priority, either.

The problem with most modern books is the acidic paper, which deteriorates much more rapidly than non0acid papers. That is EASILY remedied.

[MelissaWV]

The problem with most modern books is the acidic paper, which deteriorates much more rapidly than non0acid papers. That is EASILY remedied.

Right, but that assumes we'd fix the problem before this disasterrific apocalypse.

I'm not saying it can't be fixed, but just the basis for why I said that books would be rarer and rarer after that first 100 years in the wasteland.

But... yeah... I still don't know how we got to this as a subject. :p

[CaseyJones]

The problem with most modern books is the acidic paper, which deteriorates much more rapidly than non0acid papers. That is EASILY remedied.

Hemp!! FTW!!

[virgil47]

Hemp!! FTW!!

Indeed! Hemp was the paper of choice for many years. Most if not all of the classics were originally printed on hemp paper. Due to its lack of acid the books using hemp paper are almost timeless.

[Travlyr]

Indeed! Hemp was the paper of choice for many years. Most if not all of the classics were originally printed on hemp paper. Due to its lack of acid the books using hemp paper are almost timeless.
Hemp clothes lasted longer too... Levis used to be made from hemp fibers.