Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » Education » math-teach

Topic: Structured Programming
Replies: 103   Last Post: Mar 25, 2014 12:33 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
GS Chandy

Posts: 7,013
From: Hyderabad, Mumbai/Bangalore, India
Registered: 9/29/05
Re: Structured Programming
Posted: Mar 12, 2014 8:48 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

Robert Hansen (RH) posted Mar 12, 2014 10:47 PM (http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=9410696) - GSC's renarks interspersed:
>
<snip>
> The goal of conventional educational theory is to
> maximize each student's outcome. Not to maximize all
> student?s outcomes in any one particular subject,
> like math or programming. In other words, there are
> paths to choose from, some more compatible with each
> student?s ability and desire than others.
>

The above might have been admirable, if true. (See below, regarding some propensities you have demonstrated). "Maximizing each student's outcome" may well be the right way to go. Unfortunately, the 'outcomes' of the 'conventional educational system' - in India at least - do not stand up to scrutiny vis-a-vis the above aims.

In the USA, I have little or no personal experience of the educational system at the school level. At university level, I do have some experience of the US system (though this was quite some time ago), and I know that the US system was once the 'envy of the world'. That seems to have changed considerably over the years.

People like Diane Ravitch (and many others) seem to believe - from considerable experience - that significant change is required. It is clear they haven't adequately identified means to bring about meaningful change: though many of them do seem to have sound ideas, they rarely if ever demonstrate how to put those ideas into practice, on the ground. Discussions in various forums rarely - actually NEVER - demonstrate how to put their good ideas into practice.

The defenders of the status quo in the USA often come out with silly slogans like "PUT THE EDUCATION MAFIA IN JAIL!"; "BLOW UP THE SCHOOLS OF EDUCATION!", and the like, which they know and we all know simply will not work (in practice, on the ground; regardless how much joy they find putting forth their exhortations). Equally, the reformers do not - as noted above - seem to know how to put their ideas for reform or change into practice, onthe ground.

I am only interested to:

i) identify issues where our educational systems fail or are seriously inadequate;

ii) demonstrate practical means to accomplish worthwhile goals in complex systems. I have done that in the 'One Page Management System' (OPMS) - often to find that people like Haim and you {and your cohorts and consorts) come out with utter falsehoods to the effect that "OPMS is just list-making and nothing else!" It is not really difficult to identify a whole lot of areas where the OPMS does not adequately satisfy its ambitious goals - but it seems to satisfy some to come out with easily controvertible falsehoods. Anyone who wishes to check out that cis much more than "list-making and nothing else" needs only to look at the documentation describing the OPMS, in the attachments to my post heading the thread "Democracy: how to achieve it?" - http://mathforum.org/kb/thread.jspa?threadID=2419536.\\

Better yet, they could try to check the OPMS out on any Mission of interest to them, as the prototype OPMS software is FREELY available on request. (I observe in this context that you have come out with lies that I would "solicit funds" from those seeking to find out information about or try the OPMS)
>
> Joe seemed
> to be talking in the conventional sense. He does not
> seem to be mandating that every student learn
> programming. He doesn?t even seem to be mandating
> that every student be exposed to programming,
> although that is fine under conventional theory.
>

I know that Joe Niederberger is fully capable of putting up sound arguments to support his views - I do observe that he too has found that you seem to come out with falsehoods in support of whatver you're arguing.
>
<snip>
>
> In education, class refers to protected class, namely
> those based on race or gender.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_class
>

It will take me a while to read and adequately the references at the Wikipedia article, so I thank you for providing this reference.

I do not know how close our situation in India is to the US situation, but we do have a condition here that our 'public' educational systems do not adequately satisfy the needs of a great many (in fact, the great majority) of our citizens. Thus our Parliament has recently passed the 'Right to Education Act' (RTE; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_Children_to_Free_and_Compulsory_Education_Act). One of its provisions mandates that a percentage (I believe 10%) of the seats in private schools and colleges is 'reserved' for those who may not have the means (usually financial) for such education, and the government will reimburse the educational institutions at some rate for those students.

Despite a great many serious weaknesses in the way it has been framed - and even more deficiencies in the way it is implemented - the RTE is ostensibly intended to ensure 'equity in education'. Of course, the 'private schools and colleges' have been trying every which way to escape the provisions of the RTE (mainly because the government rates of reimbursement would not match what they can get from students belonging to the upper economic classes).

The government 'instruments of education (government education departments, and the like)' have been ostensibly seeking to enforce the RTE - but in fact what has been happening is mainly that many of the people in those educational departments have seen this as an opportunity to extort bribes from the private educational institutions that wish to evade the RTE.

And so it goes: our societal instruments - the government, etc, as well as our 'private' education system - ALL function ineffectively in respect of the 'aims of education' instead of doing what is required to design and implement an effective education system!! (Societally, we all do seem to have a propensity to evade the issue of taking *effective* action to resolve the societal issues and problems that confront us).
<snip>
>
> In conventional educational theory, what constitutes
> the *subject* and the height of the bars in the
> subject, what determines a grade of A, B, C, etc is
> chosen without regard to class. In political
> educational theory what constitutes the *subject* and
> the height of the bars is chosen with regard to
> class. For example, if setting the passing score for
> a test at a particular point would result in a
> disproportionate failure rate in a protected class,
> then the passing score is lowered. Or if particular
> types of problems are more difficult for a protected
> class then they are removed. Another version, as is
> practiced in college admissions, is having two
> standards, one for class A and a different one for
> class B. All of this deemphasize many of the elements
> that are critical and crucial to these fields of
> study.
>
> Bob Hansen
>

See above.

In any case, how do any of your above arguments square up with your 'educational philosophy' that "Children must be PUSHED (or GOADED) to learn math!" (and coubtless everything else)?? It would really not be very difficult to demonstrate that your 'philosophy' runs counter to the way any human being actually 'learns', but we'd need to use 'prose+structural graphics' [p+sg]. (PUSHING and GOADING *may* work with circus animals - but certainly it is inappropriate for human children).

How do any of your arguments support the falsehoods that you've been coming out in your discussions with me (and, for all I know, with others at this forum)?

GSC
(Still Shoveling! Not PUSHING!! Not GOADING!!!")


Date Subject Author
3/6/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
kirby urner
3/6/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/7/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Louis Talman
3/7/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
kirby urner
3/7/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/7/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Joe Niederberger
3/8/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Joe Niederberger
3/9/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/9/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
GS Chandy
3/9/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
GS Chandy
3/9/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
GS Chandy
3/10/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
kirby urner
3/9/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
GS Chandy
3/10/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
kirby urner
3/11/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Louis Talman
3/11/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/11/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
kirby urner
3/12/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/12/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
kirby urner
3/9/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
GS Chandy
3/10/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
GS Chandy
3/9/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
GS Chandy
3/9/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
GS Chandy
3/9/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
GS Chandy
3/10/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Joe Niederberger
3/10/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/11/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/10/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
GS Chandy
3/12/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
kirby urner
3/11/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
GS Chandy
3/12/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
GS Chandy
3/12/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
GS Chandy
3/11/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Joe Niederberger
3/11/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/11/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Joe Niederberger
3/11/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
GS Chandy
3/12/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Joe Niederberger
3/12/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/12/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
GS Chandy
3/12/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/12/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
GS Chandy
3/12/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
GS Chandy
3/12/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
GS Chandy
3/12/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
GS Chandy
3/12/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/12/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/13/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
GS Chandy
3/13/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
GS Chandy
3/13/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/13/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Joe Niederberger
3/13/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Joe Niederberger
3/13/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/13/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
GS Chandy
3/13/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/13/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Joe Niederberger
3/16/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/15/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
GS Chandy
3/13/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
GS Chandy
3/14/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
kirby urner
3/14/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
GS Chandy
3/15/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
kirby urner
3/16/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/16/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
kirby urner
3/16/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/16/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
kirby urner
3/16/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/17/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Joe Niederberger
3/18/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/18/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/18/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Joe Niederberger
3/18/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/18/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Joe Niederberger
3/18/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/18/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/18/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
kirby urner
3/18/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/18/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Joe Niederberger
3/18/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/18/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
kirby urner
3/18/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/18/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
kirby urner
3/18/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/18/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
kirby urner
3/18/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/18/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
kirby urner
3/18/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/18/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
kirby urner
3/18/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/19/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
kirby urner
3/18/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Joe Niederberger
3/18/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/18/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/18/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Joe Niederberger
3/19/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/20/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Louis Talman
3/20/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/20/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Louis Talman
3/18/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Joe Niederberger
3/19/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Joe Niederberger
3/19/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Robert Hansen
3/20/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Louis Talman
3/19/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
Joe Niederberger
3/25/14
Read Re: Structured Programming
GS Chandy

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.