От Александр Ответить на сообщение
К CКЕПТИК Ответить по почте
Дата 18.10.2000 07:08:00 Найти в дереве
Рубрики Прочее; Версия для печати

И я нашел симпатичный примерчик.

Из цикла "Поможем бедным... остаться бедными"

Может кто скажет что это и не манипуляция вовсе, а обман. Я бы всетаки назвал это манипуляцией. Потому что если авторы и не заставят вас хотеть "помочь бедным" то уж по крайней мере расчитывают заставить критиков заткнуться при помощи наглого морализаторства и уж в крайнем случае прикрываются своим "совещательным" статусом. В духе "а мы не заставлялиб а мы манипулировали!"

Действующие лица и исполнители:

Федеральный департамент образования США.

Группа из 200 ведущих ученых США, включающая двух математиков награжденных "Fields medal" (высшая награда в математике) и 4 Нобелевских лауреата по физике.

Место действия: перебранка происходит в американских СМИ. Молчать было нельзя - ученишки нашли спонсора который отвалил 15 000$ за полностраничную рекламу в Вашингтон Таймс.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- In MathLand lessons, kindergarten children
learn to count with calculators. Older children count a million
birdseeds to fully understand the concept of such a large number.
No textbooks are used as children get ``classroom manipulative
kits'' with pattern blocks and cubes.
To the Education Department, the package of elementary school
lessons is a ``promising'' program proven to help a variety of
children learn math. To more than 200 mathematicians and other
scientists, MathLand and nine other math programs that recently won
departmental endorsement are neglecting important skills such as
dividing fractions and multiplying multidigit numbers.
These skills, the lessons' critics say, are essential to
students mastering advanced concepts such as algebra, calculus and
physics, which in turn lead to high-performance in engineering and
other skilled fields.
``Many of us felt they were among the worst programs in
existence,'' said David Klein, a math professor at California State
University at Northridge.
In a letter and a full-page advertisement in The Washington
Post, Klein and other scholars urged Education Secretary Richard
Riley to stop endorsing the school mathematics programs. They also
urged school districts to ignore the endorsements and choose math
programs with ``caution.''
The department says Congress requires that it recommend
``promising'' or ``exemplary'' programs in a handful of subjects.
``We simply report the findings of an independent panel of
experts,'' Riley said. ``The local decision is what is most
important. The local school board is not in anyway bound to use
what we've recommended.''
By law, the department cannot to tell the nation's nearly 16,000
school districts what to teach. But in 1994, lawmakers sought to
improve the way the agency helps districts sort out good learning
programs. It required an expert panel to review programs in math,
science, school safety, technology and gender equity. The mandate
is up for renewal in the coming year.
Riley said that the panel of experts was chosen carefully. He
has no intention of withdrawing the recent report on the panel's
recommendations.
The department's recommendation system is intended to guide
districts through the many commercially available lesson packages.
But it also could find itself in a curriculum debate between the
traditional and the experimental.
In the last several years, educators have sought to improve the
nation's lackluster math test scores. This week's release of a
national report and the launch of a family math education campaign
will underscore that middle schoolers, in particular, are lagging
in math skills.
Connected Mathematics, one of the programs called exemplary, was
rejected in California. Mathematicians who reviewed the middle
school program complained that it contained errors and omitted the
division of fractions and other concepts.
Amid the growing popularity of innovative math education, Klein
said, the group of scholars felt compelled to act.
``We want to get the word out,'' said Klein. ``How else is a
regular citizen like me going to get the U.S. Secretary of
Education's attention? At least teachers who are under assault from
principals to use these bad programs have this letter.''
The letter is signed by 200 scholars, including heads of math
departments at the California Institute of Technology and Stanford
University; two recipients of the Fields Medal -- math's top honor --
and four Nobel laureates in physics.
The ad, funded by the Los Altos, Calif.- based Packard
Humanities Institute, also criticizes the Education Department for
leaving ``active research mathematicians'' out of the
decision-making.
Not true, says Linda Rosen, Riley's math and science policy
adviser.
The agency's expert panel -- nearly 100 teachers, mathematicians
and other evaluators -- spent more than two years reviewing the
programs before recognizing the 10 programs from an original list
of 61 submitted by publishers or developers, she said.
They were chosen based on factors that included quality,
usefulness and proof of student success. Five were designated
``exemplary'' because they helped a variety of children. Five
others were called ``promising'' if they succeeded in a few
schools.
``Several folks had the opportunity to participate in very
significant conversations,'' she said.
Supporters contend the new programs help children from varied
backgrounds grasp math concepts and teach them to think about
problems beyond rote memorization of multiplication tables.
Some classroom teachers are less certain.
``I've seen absolutely no relationship between mathematical
ability and socioeconomic status,'' said Lawrence Braden, a
longtime math instructor at a private school in Concord, N.H., that
serves a variety of children. ``The poorest kid in the Bronx should
have access to the best program because that kid could be the next
Albert Einstein ... If you take this mediocrity across the U.S., no
one will benefit.''

Тут дорогой товарищ ошибается. Не отваливали бы сотни миллионов на разработку и внедрение таких програм если бы это никому небыло бы выгодно. Америка, как известно, страна контрастов. И контрасты надо воспроизводить. То есть надо делать и богатых и бедных. Сергей Георгиевич неоправданно сузил пробрему когда назвал школу системообразующей для России.

Школа в любом развитом обществе играет системообразующую роль. Ведь воспроизводить надо не только производительные силы: железки да работников, но и подчинение людей господствующим в обществе производственным отношениям. В средние века это делала семья и церковь. Сейчас система образования.