Food For Thought: Hindering Excellence

A few links I came across recently caught my attention by discussing academic excellence and the education system. First is Are We Failing Our Geniuses? from TIME, which discusses the lack of available programs for advanced students. Second was the discussion of offering free college tuition for Math, Science and Engineering majors as proposed by Montana Senator Max Baucus. The idea there being that our programs are falling behind those in other countries, and therefore the incentive is designed to pull more students into those fields to have better overall programs.

I have to say, I've personally been pretty disappointed with our nation's education system for some time now. The No Child Left Behind act has encouraged schools to act like a union, where those not carrying their weight get promoted anyway due to contract rules and those performing better cannot get ahead. Where's the incentive to work hard? I truly believe this is where most politicians (and people in general) get confused between "equal opportunity" and "equality".

As for the free tuition idea, I believe the senator is just a bit misguided, or just trying to make a name for himself. The root of the problem is not a lack of interest, but a lack of understanding about the need for math, science and engineering in the foundational years of education.

Today, most subjects like to downplay it, but math and science make up the basis for almost everything we do. However, we're now getting business majors who can't do basic calculus (great for observing trends in earnings and markets), computer science majors who can't problem solve (and if you can't do that, then a program can probably be written to replace you), and civil engineers who create aesthetic roads that are absolutely unusable (that goes double for Pittsburgh).

The root of the problem may lie in the fact that most of today's teachers carry a degree in Education, and really don't have a specialty or a passion for one. Unfortunately, it's not years of education in Education that make a great teacher, but a passion for their subject and wanting to pass that passion on to others that makes a great teacher. I was fortunate to have a few of these teachers over the years, and am very thankful that I did.

Computer Science Without Math?

Sometimes, I really have a hard time believing the things that I read. Well, last week I came across a short article about a new book that computer science is not, and should not be based on mathematics.

Now, I can understand the opinion that programming requires less mathematical knowledge than it did in past decades because many algorithms have been established and languages have incorporated common complex computations into their folds. However, to claim that math is not needed for computer science is just rediculous. I'd love to see the author figure out the location of a mouse click without some kind of location calculation.

But maybe this does explain all the horribly inefficient code I've come across in my days as a developer.

Found via Slashdot

From The Slashdot Heap

Well, there's been a number of things piling up in my Slashdot folder on Bloglines that I've been wanting to write about and share with y'all. So instead of trying to write an article on each of them, I'll just highlight them here for ya this morning.

I know, a potpourri of topics, but it's what's caught my eye lately. Hopefully you found something worth reading! Smile

Almost Science

Crazy ScienceIt is pretty sad what passes as science these days. Was this study even set out to observer what they have claimed (that men have lingering distractions when presented with images of attractive women)? Did they completely forget to have a control group? Did they actually state that they measured men's testosterone levels by measuring the length of their fingers? Where is the science?

Then again, maybe it's time for me to start on that research proposal for the Belgian governemnt so I can study whether or not alcohol impares the ability to make sound judgements. Sound like just the kind of thing they'd back!

The Big Bang Cup

Big Bang Cup

I love astronomers! They're here to fill our lives with whimsy and fantastic explanations of the universe in a desperate attempt to squash all religion, and in the process making one of their own.

The latest theory (WARNING: Expires 03/2008) is that by observing "the oldest light in the universe", we can learn specific details about the events that occurred billions of years ago when the universe was formed.


"It's admittedly mind-boggling. Inflation poses that the universe expanded far faster than the speed of light and grew from a subatomic size to a golf-ball size almost instantaneously. This concept, however, was a mere product of calculations done with pencil and paper around 1980. The idea stands on much firmer ground today."

I've read all the details of the explanation, and it reads a lot like the Scientologists handbook. What firmer ground is there? When are the aliens coming to take us to the home planet?

There are just not enough details and connections to label these observances as proof of anything. Heck, we can't even ensure the measurements made by the WMAP are accurate because there's nothing to realistically test it against. I also like the diagram above which tries to give some illustration of the hypothesis, but it's intrinsically flawed due to the perspectives we have in observing all this from Earth.

But then again, there's a new theory every few years and it always "prooves" the last one wrong as scientists continue to search for some kind of proof that there is no God.

So even if this latest theory is correct, there is still the question of what caused the "inflation" at that point in time. I'm pretty sure I already know the answer to that one, and He knows I know.

BlogCFC was created by Raymond Camden. This blog is running version 5.9. Contact Greg