<p>Goethe (yay) again, the third stanza of "Erlkoenig"
Here's one</p>
<p>"Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens"</p>
<p>this is my most favorite (favoritest? superlative superlative!) quote.<br>
This is so much more fun than the other mundane but vital things I do!
If other people are interested, we could open a free-for-all guessing game in all categories, especially math and science. =P Unless.. other people... are ....too.......busy? Thoughts?</p>
<p>There is a teacher who's austrian and teaches german at my school. She's going with me to isef, even though she's not my teacher because no one else will...ha...go schools that suck in science...
Is anyone from Florida going to RSI?</p>
<p>it's good that there is someone interested, even if they're in a totally unrelated subject. She must like you :-)</p>
<p>Speaking of science going out the window, I have an interesting/scary story. My physics teacher went to a talk by Scott Stephens (weatherman who believes that the recent hurricanes were caused by an EM device w/zero point energy and which is controlled by the Japanese mafia) </p>
<p>my teacher was okay until Scott Stephens said that jet contrails were created by aliens who control the US. The only reason the government doesn't expose them, according to Mr. Stephens, is because then the world would know that the US government has no power. then my teacher lit into him and they had a verbal match for fifteen minutes.<br>
Are you ready for the scary part? Are you sure? Well here it is: the other 100-120 people in the room believed this guy and some of them stood up at the end to congradulate (?!) Mr. Stephens for standing up to the "narrow-mindedness" of some "detractors," namely my physics teacher</p>
<p>~brrrrrr~ I just got shivers up my spine for the future of science</p>
<p>wow, that is scary. it really does suck that american students are so behind in math and science today. 20 years ago, we ranked number one in the world, now, we don't even break the top 20. I was watching oprah (i was bored...and didn't want to study for the AP tests), and it was an episode about the corrupt school system, and how it just doesn't work for 5000 students to be crammed into a 1600 student school. There was a bill gates school called High Tech High that was mentioned as an example of a great school. In the school, there are no textbooks, and everyone learns by actually doing the experiment or making the robot. I thought that was so awesome, I wish all schools were like that because it would get so many more people interested in science if they realized it was more than just combining chemical equations or making a punnett square!</p>
<p>Narrow minded ones: please do not discount the enlightening theories of our great prophet Scott Stephens -- without his wisdom we would remain ignorant to the zero point energy weapons employed by the Yakuza and the true nature of U.S. government. The "science" you speak of is nothing but hogwash, placed in various text books by the yakuza so as to hinder your efforts to understand their plans. </p>
<p>Sorry, couldn't resist. But on a serious note, while I find the experimental drive is inarguably a useful tool in cultivating scientific interest, I find the absence of textbooks to be a possible detriment. Not that I am centered on elitism, but in my opinion the chief goal of scientific education should not be to cultivate interest in as many students as possible, but to foster the interest which is inherent in the more motivated students. While hands on education is certainly a useful tool in this course of action, I think that students may be tempted to value certain means of learning over those which though perhaps less engaging are more helpful: Yes reading a textbook is not as interesting or fun as performing an experiment, but the beauty of science is that the base of knowledge which we have to grow off of is constantly expanding. Reading about that knowledge is often the most efficient way to understand it, and I believe that makes the textbook an invaluable tool. Furthermore, I feel like repeated attempts to locate some panacea like resposne to America's declining math/science program might in fact worsen the situation. For instance, the previously mentioned high tech high school is I'm sure a very interesting learning environment, but on a national scale it would be not only unaffordable, but untenable for the public's education. Unfortunately not everyone will or can appreciate the amazing qualities of science; however, the worst thing we could do is risk compromising the ability of those with an understanding of those qualities to pursue that passion in the name of expanding interest.</p>
<p>Zfrankl, while you make many valid points in your argument, there are some issues that I disagree with you on.
1) Funding. but on a national scale it would be not only unaffordable, but untenable for the
public's education. To fund high tech high, and schools like it, is not only possible, but would be equivalent or even less to the current amount being spent, or wasted, which seems to be the better word, on education. The worst school in my district spends about the same as high tech high per student, yet instead of gaining students who are excited in science, they get dropouts. Students like those are the ones who need high tech high because reading from the books isnt teaching them anything. Perhaps if they were able to do a lab in which they extracted their own DNA from cheek cells, they would be more interested in biology than just reading about it on jumbled pages.
The state spends $34,000 p/y on inmates at year, and only $10,000 p/y on students. 75% of all inmates never graduated from high school, and thus they dont have the skills necessary to succeed at life. If we spent money more effectively within the school system on students, perhaps more would be engaged in what they are learning and actually want to stay in school, and thus wouldnt drop, which would result in fewer people in jail, and that leads to a happier society. Although I realize that was a very simplified version of the complicated scheme of things, it seems inarguable that the more interested students are in school they greater possibility that they will graduate, thus creating a positive trickle down effect that benefits everyone.
2) While I also believe that books are a very useful tool, and a great starting point to develop ones foundation of knowledge, they cant motivate students.
Zfrankl, I have no doubt that you are probably one of the smartest kids in the country (given you PSAT scores and acceptance to RSI), and are highly motivated within your mathematic endeavors, but not everyone is like you. I realize that you are not trying to sound elitist in saying that the purpose of science education should not be to foster an interest to a wide range of students, but rather to advance the curiosities of the gifted, but in fact, coming from someone who attends one of the best high schools in the nation, it does sound just a bit pretentious. The students who have an inherent interest in science will more likely than not be the ones who are white with a middle/ upper socioeconomic level with educated parents. I believe you posted in previous comments that you are Jewish, and asked how much money you should bring to RSI given that money was not an issue. In my district, not one of the 3500 students who live in the ghetto and attend the lowest scoring school in the region seem to have that motivation to delve into the exciting fields of chemistry and biology like you. I dont believe that it is because they are stupid, but rather because they lacked some of the opportunities you had. You are probably aware of Maslows Hierarchy of needs, which states that you must reach the lower stages before you can attain the ones on top. The lowest level is physiological needs, which are biological needs of food, oxygen, etc. If students on free/ reduced lunch dont know whether they will have dinner tonight, how can you except them to think about school. A simple analogy would be a little kid who has the flu and doesnt want to go to school; however later that day, the sick kids brother calls and invites him to a football game, despite the sick condition the little kid is in, he is willing to overcome it because he wants to have fun. The joy of reading a textbook will not bring them back to school the next day, but perhaps the prospect of building a robot will. </p>
<p>I know this whole blurb was really random but I guess thats just how I think. Well after that distraction, I shall bring my motivated butt back to working on my isef project :D</p>
<p>I "should" be studying for APs but this is fun. I think we may not be disagreeing that much, and I perhaps just failed to articulate myself well. I am not aware of any of the funding statistics for High Tech High, but I'm sure they are very efficient with their funds. As for the issue of increasing funding, I agree that it would be desirable, but it would require a real change in the way public schools are funded: Right now local property taxes tend to fund the majority of the local schools, thus areas with lots of rich people who have to pay a lot of property taxes get better schools, their kids grow up with a better education, become rich etc.... However, I think limiting the issue of education to funding(which I'm not claiming you are doing, this is more just a rant) is a dire mistake. As someone mentioned before, our national education standards in math and science are lackluster at best compared to countries such as Taiwan and Singapore. But, I find it hard to believe that the majority of countries who outscore us are spending more money on their education system than we are. I think the deeper problem is of a socio-economic nature: I come from New York City, and in the city there are countless schools which have horrific statistics. Yet, these schools often recieve the same funding as my school per student, and the teacher distribution is also not done so as to give better teachers to better performing schools. What I have been told time and time again by teachers who transferred from other schools to our school is that the issue is one of the value students place on education. I AM NOT blaming the students of the other schools for this supposed "lack of motivation"; rather I think it is a result of the way the school system is structured, and the underlying social tensions in the neighborhoods where the kids come from. In areas like these we probably do need ways to inspire students to gain interest in science, but at the same time the problem needs to be dealt with on numerous levels. Yes, you are right, there is a duty in the educational system to somehow offer oppurtunities in these areas, but I just feel like the education system often takes the brunt of the blame when in fact the issue is on a level that involves countless other things, that need to be changed from areas of power which are higher up. </p>
<p>First of all, you are completely correct, I have benefited from a lot of oppurtunities that the vast majority of other people(rich or poor) would not have had(both my parents are scientists, and while we are not "loaded", we have enough money that I know I can go to college etc...). And, I also agree that what I called inherent interest in science is by no means a sign of intelligence, and is often a result of societal factors. What I meant by my claim about what the goal of science education was not that we should take all those who are interested and leave behind the others, but rather that perhaps we should tailor education more to the interests of the students. Things like High Tech High are probably a good way to spark motivation in a lot of students who never would have had another stimulus. However, a population does not need to be comprised of countless scientists, nor will everyone given the oppurtunity take to science. To me this doesn't mean we should eliminate or discount programs like High Tech High, but it does mean that we need soemthing more comprehensive. To be honest, I don't know what this comprehensive strategy should be, but I feel that perhaps endorsing a more flexible method of teaching would be beneficial. Ie. The students who are not given oppurtunities to be exposed to science may not have taken to science even if given the oppurtunity, this by no means makes them unintelligent, it just means they have seperate interests. I think that allowing students a greater level of exploration into what they truly wish to study may be more beneficial than anything else we could do. As for the students who would in fact be interested in science if exposed, things like High Tech High are useful tools to introduce them to it and get them interested. But as I said earlier, I think the problem runs very deep, and beyond the means of a change in the educational bureaucracy alone. What I mean by saying that the problem is multidimensional is not that the culture/society of the students who lack interest is inferior, but rather that the current structure of our system is unfair towards them. For instance, simply lacking money does not necessarily mean you will not become a good motivated student(there are many kids at my school who have very little money, but they often come from families who motivated them to learn). But, lacking money(back to Maslow) will make it harder to learn. But because of this, simply providing money and more interesting oppurtunities to schools, though it may mitigate the problem, will not end it.</p>
<p>Welcome to the Institute. I am logisticslord. All students with last names E-J will be with me studying the effects of corn dogs on the digestive tract. So E-Js, please sign below and let's get working!</p>
<p>I would be very surprised to find a person at RSI who is not in the middle/ upper economic level with supportive parents who foster their scientific endeavors. I know that I wouldnt be able to do 3 hours of research each day, and purchase the software that I needed to do my research projects if I lived in single parent household; more than likely I would have to work at a minimum wage job rather.
I completely agree with you on the point that to reform the school system would take more than just money and changing the way under which the educational bureaucracy is operates, because mindlessly funneling money into the school system does not/ has not solved anything. If one were to truly look into changing students in the worst schools, you must change the neighborhood and social environment they are surrounded by. There is a reason that the highest scoring students are Asian; the Asian culture values education and thus the students at an early age learn to value books and learning, completely different from the emphasis placed on sports within the African American society. Although it sounds completely mean, but what would be effective in reforming the lowest performing schools is to make them into boarding schools in that the students would live on campus at all times and thus be protected from the environment of drugs, gangs, and prostitutes that they return to each day. Their physiological needs, or the lowest level on Maslows Hierarchy, would be met. It is much better to invest in the education of these students now, than pay for them when they are in jail. Despite the high probability of this boarding school idea succeeding, it also would never be implemented, and I dont know if it should be because it is very harsh and the psychological effects of young children leaving their parents can also negatively influence their development.
I think that allowing students a greater level of exploration into what they truly wish to study may be more beneficial than anything else we could do. So true. Personally, I believe students should be given the chance to focus upon the area of their choice when they go into high school (ex: arts major should be allowed to skip calculus because it isnt really necessary).
Furthermore, more on my rant, I hate no child left behind because it doesnt work at all. It measures schools based on test scores, and only gives them money based on whether they meet the basic level, thus it doesnt care about students who are already performing at or above the basic level. Funding for gifted student education is only 0.1% of most state budgets, with 17 states having no budget for gifted student education, because the majority of funds are directed toward programs that help the low performing students reach basic levels. Although these low performing kids do deserve help in reaching comprehensive levels for math and English, it isnt right to strip opportunities from one student in order to help another.</p>
<p>"I would be very surprised to find a person at RSI who is not in the middle/ upper economic level with supportive parents who foster their scientific endeavors. I know that I wouldnt be able to do 3 hours of research each day, and purchase the software that I needed to do my research projects if I lived in single parent household; more than likely I would have to work at a minimum wage job rather."</p>
<p>My parents are divorced..and currently I live with neither. nor do i go to a boarding/private school. When i did live with my mom before she sent me to where i needed to go and encouraged me to succeed and try hard...but never actually looked at anything science/math that i was doing. I owe most of any math/science success I have to helpful non-family members who were nice enough to teach/aid me. </p>
<p>on a different note....
it seems like everyone who's posted so far has had pretty significant science research experience already?</p>
<p>Perhaps I was wrong about the socioeconomic correlation to most students who do research, but you did say that your mom encouraged you to succeed. Supportive parents, even if they are ignorant (i know that my parents always encourage me to try new things even though they have no idea what I'm doing, in fact i could be staying after school to do drugs instead of going to meet my mentor and they would never know...but of course, i would never do such a despicable thing ; )), are esstential to the success of any person. I have a friend who's great at math, but who's dad grounded from doing math because it was taking too much time away from his duties to god (they are a very religious family).</p>
<p>susah, have you had previous science experience? Although I've had some, I would think that I would be starting on the same foot as you because I put down bioengineering and systems bio for my fields of interest, two areas I know nothing about.</p>
<p>At RSI, do we get to use the pool? If so, how often did you rickoids use it? When I visited MIT, I think I remember seeing an ice skating rank (if i'm wrong, i'm just in my little world again), did you guys use that?</p>
<p>The ice skating rink is only operational in the cold months (unless this has changed very recently).</p>
<p>Susah, I think that even though you may not have much research experience, it does't take long to learn. I've only have one summer, which hardly qualifies me as an expert, but after that first few days, I got pretty well acclimated. It's just a different way of thinking that's actually pretty easy to pick up. If you have a high learning curve, as probably most people going have, you can do most anything after a little practice. Although... moving from doing research at a state university to a world-famous university for me might be the same as moving from a drinking fountain to a firehose :-D In other words, everything I just said might be moot. Most helpful, right? </p>
<p>I want to second vanilea's question. I think it would be fun to go skating, though not on ice :-)</p>
<p>Sorry about that, I was a little behind. I was wondering if there was an inline skating place around.</p>
<p>Skating of all kinds </p>
<p><a href="http://www.sk8net.com/%5B/url%5D">http://www.sk8net.com/</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.sk8net.com/skate/places/%5B/url%5D">http://www.sk8net.com/skate/places/</a></p>
<p>Good job posting links over30. Assignment Grade: 94 A-</p>
<p>Using the Zcenter is a bit dicey... it took a while to get it figured out last year, and I'm pretty sure that people weren't allowed to swim. Perhaps they'll get that figured out ahead of time this year.</p>
<p>My parents are glad the skating rank isn't open because I was about to bring my ice skates with me...ha...ice skates and enough clothes to clothe a whole tribe in africa...just kidding.
What did you guys do in your free time (that's not academically related)?</p>