Lem

[Pavel Samsonov]

> Oh, come on now, people.  "Boasting" about not using the internet or email
> or even computers will get us no where with our current crop of students.
> The fact of the matter is, our "audience" as it were consists of kids who
> have been brought up on TV, movies and, yes, the computer, **whether we
> like it or not**.  A university education is no longer the prized
> possession of the very rich, the very privileged and the very erudite.
> Hate to tell ya, but that's democracy in action.  So I suggest we stop
> moaning about the sorry state of American culture (an opinion I don't
> share), stop whining about how "kids today" are completely uncultured
> (they are not), and get on with the business of trying to figure out how
> best to teach the students of today.  If new teaching methods are called
> for, then let's put our energies there.  Our students may not be able to
> spell "Luddites," but I bet they know them when they see them.
>
> Eloise

First, using computers and Internet in teaching is a must. It is just a
matter of time that part of foreign language courses be taught online. It is
a separate talk how it can be done, but it can and should be done. I am a
gerat enthusiast here.

The loss of interest to Russian is a complex issue and like any complex
issue it has many causes. There is no doubt that there are specific reasons
for the decline of Russian, and one of the main causes is that Russian
programs were articially inflated during the cold war.
The interest, however, will always be there, but on a lower level.

Other reasons - yes, the US society is changing. You can read more on this
in Neil's Postman's "Amising Ourselves to Death".
The book is controversial, but one thing is for sure: intellectualism is not
in fashion in the US now.
I know, some folks will immediately produce counterarguments but here are
the facts about Texas A&M University:

- Only 12% of US citizens are enrolled in the graduate program in Math, 17%
in the graduate programs in Engineering.

By the year of 2008 the deficiency of computer-related workers is estimated
as 25-30%.

Let me quote from several independent sourses.

1. Freeman, P. and Aspray, W. (1999) The Supply of Information Technology
Workers in the United States, Monthly Labor Review, 4:

-  Only about half of all high school graduates complete algebra II or
chemistry, which are prerequisites for college mathematics and science -

2.King, J. 1998. Nerdy Image Feeds Labor Crisis - IS' Geeky Reputation
Hampers Recruiting Efforts? Computerworld, v.32 n2 pl 96, January 1998.:

- Our studies suggest that many young people regard IT professionals as
geeky, nerdy people; on the other hand other students who may be interested
lack resources to gain education and training -

3. Mitchell, G., Carnes, K. Mendosa, Ch. AMERICA'S NEW DEFICIT: THE SHORTAGE
OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY WORKERS. U.S. Department of Commerce,
http://www.ta.doc.gov/reports.htm#USTPS :


- There is a mismatch between what universities teach and what industry
wants. While workers with degrees from two- and four-year computer science
programs are attractive to potential employers, many employers have found
some skill sets lacking in many of these graduates-

Can we talk about a deep crisis in the US education?

Or  "So I suggest we stop
> moaning about the sorry state of American culture (an opinion I don't
> share), stop whining about how "kids today" are completely uncultured
> (they are not),"

Are they really not? Probably, not completely. The way things are going, how
long is it going to take them to become "completely" uncultured?

How about the ecstasy about the new world's descovery: "Student-centered
(good guys) as opposed to teacher-centered education" ( the latter is for
bad guys - to be teacher-centered is almost like commiting a crime).
And the "constructivist paradigm:" those who don't support are ruining our
education. Down with teacher-controlled teaching. "We don't need no
education" - has it been almost an anthem?

"There is a paradigm shift from teacher-controlled to student-controlled,
self-paced learning". Teacher is a peer, a friend, a consultant. A catalyst.

Good.

I am a full supporter of student-centered education. It is almost 2,500
years old: it was Aristotle who said that a person cannot teach any other
person anything: nor math, nor swimming nor a foreign language (sic). But
what he can do is help this other person teach himself.

Wilhelm von Humbold: "We cannot teach a language, we can only create the
conditions in which it will be learned".

Too much fascination with the "paradigm shift" and "constructivism" can also
explain the lowering of educational standards.
I know, I am being "politically incorrect". But I believe there is no such
thing as "student-centered" or "teacher-centered" teaching.

There is poor teaching and there is good teaching.

With compliments,

Pavel (Paul) Samsonov
EDAD, College of Education,
Texas A&M University
tel. (409) 862-7771 (lab)
      (409) 862-9152 (home)
fax (409) 862-4347
e-mail p0s5658 at acs.tamu.edu

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Use your web browser to search the archives, control your subscription
  options, and more.  Visit and bookmark the SEELANGS Web Interface at:
                http://members.home.net/lists/seelangs/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------