Nobody who works in public life is against Plans, but power desperate Polys (and those who follow their lead ) produce far too many of them . Presumably its often a sense of powerlessness and remoteness (CEO's now often do not KNOW the organisations they run ) that drives this new wave of snowing .
How does Green labor come to think that Canberra can coordinate the States action in the Murray Darling Plan. The Carbon tax too, is ambitious beyond its means. How long will Labor's new love affair with the market last ? Not long , because its a pretence - a pretence that says price will avoid paper . The politics of paper and plans seems to move in extremes . Too often people who act professionally but are treated poorly by the powerful are casualities
Thursday, December 1, 2011
Sunday, November 20, 2011
Bland Curriculum constrictions
James Paterson (IPA) in The Australian ( nov 11) and in Quadrant makes a strong point about the reasons why Australians are now faced with more pedantic and overly bureaucratic education review . In presuming to tell teachers how to teach, and what they are doing wrong ( perhaps rather than tell the parents ) our political parties are doing our best teachers and our educations system great wrong . If only pollies wouldn't meddle or think they know things in other people's area of expertise.I must stop dreaming
....And get back to a memorable lesson and how it happened . A good teacher has a rather special way of approaching any subject , and its not helped by trying to define "The lesson" too closely in phrases and words that everyone ( esp a non teacher ) understands. That is to bring boring forward and leave basic excitement outside the room . That is to make the teacher the educator of the bureau and as everyone knows on that subject -most of our best teachers don't want to go back to kindergarten .
The lesson is a whole and , like a good meal , is best enjoyed and approved as a complete thing .
I would argue the case that it's "the extras"and the links to them ( the "externalities" in ecosystem or economics, if you like ) that often make a subject interesting eg a powerful discussion on renewable energy links maths, physics and plant biochemistry or fun food learning needs a bit of secondary level chemistry to make fun with food technology more than a mere list of checkboxes .Kids learn, and learn how to learn by glimpsing process in nature , not nature in isolation - in categories . You will reduce boring if you have the right links. Kids, like us, learn more by linking subjects than we do by studying them in isolation. Its part of what we say when we say "learning best by doing" too.
Just listing the components is just making a very, very long list, which no teacher has time to check list ( even though bureau persons in Canberra and Spring street might )
There is a lot to be said for the old system in Victoria where non core subject matter is categorized generally so that only the final product is approved ( rather than try and talk to the parts as they do in curriculum review)
For example learning about responsible use of alcohol is not a matter of telling kids how many stubbies is good for your health . Good education is a matter of TRUST which means the pollies are probably undermining it by trying to take full control of it.
With alcohol and good health lessons you either
-leave it to their parents,
-have a clear approved lesson of what is to be taught in a form parents can clearly understand ,( Vic system)
--or use only people the parents trust to teach the sensitive non core subjects ( has to be clear that they do ) .
Politicians meddling in the categories and undermining the trust and technical soveriegnty of a "good lesson " undermines, like a good meal, the right combination of ingredients that make them both interesting , tasty and memorable .Education should be edgy and the curriculum approach is anything but edgy.
Any more ideas on how we can avoid the ongoing dumbing down of education in Australia?
The stream of parents choosing private schools says something about more interesting combinations of subjects and values than the plain flour meals offered as gospel in too many public schools
....And get back to a memorable lesson and how it happened . A good teacher has a rather special way of approaching any subject , and its not helped by trying to define "The lesson" too closely in phrases and words that everyone ( esp a non teacher ) understands. That is to bring boring forward and leave basic excitement outside the room . That is to make the teacher the educator of the bureau and as everyone knows on that subject -most of our best teachers don't want to go back to kindergarten .
The lesson is a whole and , like a good meal , is best enjoyed and approved as a complete thing .
I would argue the case that it's "the extras"and the links to them ( the "externalities" in ecosystem or economics, if you like ) that often make a subject interesting eg a powerful discussion on renewable energy links maths, physics and plant biochemistry or fun food learning needs a bit of secondary level chemistry to make fun with food technology more than a mere list of checkboxes .Kids learn, and learn how to learn by glimpsing process in nature , not nature in isolation - in categories . You will reduce boring if you have the right links. Kids, like us, learn more by linking subjects than we do by studying them in isolation. Its part of what we say when we say "learning best by doing" too.
Just listing the components is just making a very, very long list, which no teacher has time to check list ( even though bureau persons in Canberra and Spring street might )
There is a lot to be said for the old system in Victoria where non core subject matter is categorized generally so that only the final product is approved ( rather than try and talk to the parts as they do in curriculum review)
For example learning about responsible use of alcohol is not a matter of telling kids how many stubbies is good for your health . Good education is a matter of TRUST which means the pollies are probably undermining it by trying to take full control of it.
With alcohol and good health lessons you either
-leave it to their parents,
-have a clear approved lesson of what is to be taught in a form parents can clearly understand ,( Vic system)
--or use only people the parents trust to teach the sensitive non core subjects ( has to be clear that they do ) .
Politicians meddling in the categories and undermining the trust and technical soveriegnty of a "good lesson " undermines, like a good meal, the right combination of ingredients that make them both interesting , tasty and memorable .Education should be edgy and the curriculum approach is anything but edgy.
Any more ideas on how we can avoid the ongoing dumbing down of education in Australia?
The stream of parents choosing private schools says something about more interesting combinations of subjects and values than the plain flour meals offered as gospel in too many public schools
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
Original ideas - rarer than we all think
While Australia's media elite fail to recognize their old childish chorus of delight in all things reactionary (wars on everything old explains their venerability to new things technical ) they will continue to drag their audiences into the predictable reactionary dullness that has dogged the ABC for the last 30years .Greers constant reappearance on the ABCTV clearly illustrates that the ABC is stuck in the past.
As the eternal appeal of Shakespeare, and Williamson show ,some recipes don't need to change,but can benefit from the new medium .
Clearly ncp (Trioli 's forum tonight) are confused enough to not recognize that more technology won't help when more honest talk may.
ABC success is dependant on allowing objective outsiders scripts to air ( the slap ,no1 detective ) NOT the tribe of commentators waiting in the wings for another contract.
As the eternal appeal of Shakespeare, and Williamson show ,some recipes don't need to change,but can benefit from the new medium .
Clearly ncp (Trioli 's forum tonight) are confused enough to not recognize that more technology won't help when more honest talk may.
ABC success is dependant on allowing objective outsiders scripts to air ( the slap ,no1 detective ) NOT the tribe of commentators waiting in the wings for another contract.
Friday, July 15, 2011
The perfect subject for a discussion --Hot Air
Our PM and her mates somehow developed the view that hot air concerns were something simple that she could discuss with the public- how could she get it so wrong ? It seemed to them last week that it was pretty simple ---so that maybe is where the problem still lies.
To have a good discussion you have to limit the points to something that's simple. Something that has clear boundaries and is easy to visualize.
POLITICS
"Air is really pretty simple" ( only largely N,C O H Ar ) Tick that
" Warming is pretty simple " ( we all experience that every day ) Tick that
"Global warming is pretty simple" tick that "Fossil fuels heat up our our homes and engines so why not our atmosphere" It all makes sense , simple sense to most people. Tick
Check. Best of all there will be no unexpected arguments against what we say because you can't see any of the things we are talking about . Perfect
"Not only is radiation invisible its divisible and so is air . Even if we are wrong ,its going to be very hard to prove us wrong . Our bloke knows more air than their bloke and no one in the media wants a long debate nbout things they can't see . It''ll be fun and , no way we can lose - we have picked something too deep for us and too deep for them ---- to top it off " it looks simple "---- if you want to see it that way " Big tick
REALITY
Real Science stuff on the atmosphere is awe fully boring because anything to do with organic chemistry , fluid dynamics and radiation is really complex let alone together .
Lucky for polys the key elements are invisible and highly divisible
---AIR Look at the forces acting on it ; downward there is weight , and horizontally drag at the lower boundary and inertia right through to the top ; Turbulence throughout creating layers and eddies. Mountains push it up and carry water with it in all sorts of forms that drastically change the radiation and reflection patterns over every square inch of earth.
HEAT energy from the sun manages to heat up one edge of this turbulent flow in a way which is greatly influenced by the amount and height of water in the atmosphere directly above it .Meanwhile, the wind blows and carries the complexity all ways
ALL TOGETHER -lots and lots of different types of radiation running largely through the air and in changing ways each day and season .
- and every day and in every place the effect of water from the surface has an impact on whose talking to who
- on one boundary users of NCOHAr are acting against the laws of physics by using up some of the air contents in a way that is mind bogglingly complex.
I am not confused or committed to reducing Co2 . The greenhouse effect has never been properly demonstrated and most long wave radiation we produce is most likely being lost to space. Doesn't stop people thinking otherwise.
Not easy to see whose bumping into whom and what they are saying when they do . More here Copyright riskwithin reason@gmail.com
To have a good discussion you have to limit the points to something that's simple. Something that has clear boundaries and is easy to visualize.
POLITICS
"Air is really pretty simple" ( only largely N,C O H Ar ) Tick that
" Warming is pretty simple " ( we all experience that every day ) Tick that
"Global warming is pretty simple" tick that "Fossil fuels heat up our our homes and engines so why not our atmosphere" It all makes sense , simple sense to most people. Tick
Check. Best of all there will be no unexpected arguments against what we say because you can't see any of the things we are talking about . Perfect
"Not only is radiation invisible its divisible and so is air . Even if we are wrong ,its going to be very hard to prove us wrong . Our bloke knows more air than their bloke and no one in the media wants a long debate nbout things they can't see . It''ll be fun and , no way we can lose - we have picked something too deep for us and too deep for them ---- to top it off " it looks simple "---- if you want to see it that way " Big tick
REALITY
Real Science stuff on the atmosphere is awe fully boring because anything to do with organic chemistry , fluid dynamics and radiation is really complex let alone together .
Lucky for polys the key elements are invisible and highly divisible
---AIR Look at the forces acting on it ; downward there is weight , and horizontally drag at the lower boundary and inertia right through to the top ; Turbulence throughout creating layers and eddies. Mountains push it up and carry water with it in all sorts of forms that drastically change the radiation and reflection patterns over every square inch of earth.
HEAT energy from the sun manages to heat up one edge of this turbulent flow in a way which is greatly influenced by the amount and height of water in the atmosphere directly above it .Meanwhile, the wind blows and carries the complexity all ways
ALL TOGETHER -lots and lots of different types of radiation running largely through the air and in changing ways each day and season .
- and every day and in every place the effect of water from the surface has an impact on whose talking to who
- on one boundary users of NCOHAr are acting against the laws of physics by using up some of the air contents in a way that is mind bogglingly complex.
I am not confused or committed to reducing Co2 . The greenhouse effect has never been properly demonstrated and most long wave radiation we produce is most likely being lost to space. Doesn't stop people thinking otherwise.
Not easy to see whose bumping into whom and what they are saying when they do . More here Copyright riskwithin reason@gmail.com
Friday, July 1, 2011
Changing the categories
Being completely rational has its down side - Too much information and too many categories AND too many categories that keep changing .The Greeks knew that , but somehow thousands of years later we are more than happy to wander around in a fog of changing word meanings -, unable at many levels to go back and find out ---what went wrong ? This confusion at coping level can't last and threatens our civilness via our ability to agree on consensus and settled logic stuff.
A rock was once a rock - now its a bit of silica and a lot of oxygen but if it were just those 2 , we still wouldn't know what it was . How it came about is critical to whatever it is - the story is important and critical .Something similiar seems to be helpful for corroborating categories
The problem of changing names for things is not such a big issue for settled science which is very helpful because we can get on with our jobs eg . We know an neutron is not a neutron but who cares - "we know where it is and where it fits"
BUT its a big problem with big picture stuff - values and the value we put into words ( or take away from them eg changing meaning of "wicked") . Good intentions abound , but any thinking person knows that "good intentions" create the greatest evil when the application does not cut it where it counts on the ground , when we don't look at the truth because we don't like it ( in ourselves for example) or when we deny things ( like evil when we in the West dispose of the word " wicked:")
We don't need rulings ( the law ) as much as we need something to measure things with - that's good science and good faith and good relations (way back to some consensus about what to call things of importance). Otherwise the law and mere words may just be a very course imposition by those with the power or the loudest voices .
A rock was once a rock - now its a bit of silica and a lot of oxygen but if it were just those 2 , we still wouldn't know what it was . How it came about is critical to whatever it is - the story is important and critical .Something similiar seems to be helpful for corroborating categories
The problem of changing names for things is not such a big issue for settled science which is very helpful because we can get on with our jobs eg . We know an neutron is not a neutron but who cares - "we know where it is and where it fits"
BUT its a big problem with big picture stuff - values and the value we put into words ( or take away from them eg changing meaning of "wicked") . Good intentions abound , but any thinking person knows that "good intentions" create the greatest evil when the application does not cut it where it counts on the ground , when we don't look at the truth because we don't like it ( in ourselves for example) or when we deny things ( like evil when we in the West dispose of the word " wicked:")
We don't need rulings ( the law ) as much as we need something to measure things with - that's good science and good faith and good relations (way back to some consensus about what to call things of importance). Otherwise the law and mere words may just be a very course imposition by those with the power or the loudest voices .
Too much Information
No more common expression of our day symbolises the problem of our day . "Keep it simple stupid" : is not only right today, but it was always right . How did we ever get it so bad with TMI ? Maths teachers I know admit "we just do too much maths ".
How then did the founders of our modern civilisation get it so right when they met in Nicene 17 centuries ago and said "enough is enough ". . "We don't object to more books in Alexandrian libraries , but we reject the Greek inheritance when it crowds out and doesn't identify the essentials . " Infact ,we reject the idea that all the rules and rulings need to be there - men are born free with a will to live free so most of the things you need to order your life are not in there - you have a mind and a will to do good -- use it "
We can all sit around here for another thousands years and still be no better off than Socrates as far as putting the pieces together .
How come they knew that the jig saw pieces would keep changing ........and we don't?
"There are 66 books that talk to walking the walk and that's enough to get all the basics right ". It doesn't mean there are other stories, and most importantly, it doesn't claim to tell you how to live ( except who to talk to about that) . Who needs that????? Too much information and No freedom ( like we are supposed to have been born with - our inheritance !) Copyright Emperors Academy July 1st 2011
Being completely rational has its down side - TMI
How then did the founders of our modern civilisation get it so right when they met in Nicene 17 centuries ago and said "enough is enough ". . "We don't object to more books in Alexandrian libraries , but we reject the Greek inheritance when it crowds out and doesn't identify the essentials . " Infact ,we reject the idea that all the rules and rulings need to be there - men are born free with a will to live free so most of the things you need to order your life are not in there - you have a mind and a will to do good -- use it "
We can all sit around here for another thousands years and still be no better off than Socrates as far as putting the pieces together .
How come they knew that the jig saw pieces would keep changing ........and we don't?
"There are 66 books that talk to walking the walk and that's enough to get all the basics right ". It doesn't mean there are other stories, and most importantly, it doesn't claim to tell you how to live ( except who to talk to about that) . Who needs that????? Too much information and No freedom ( like we are supposed to have been born with - our inheritance !) Copyright Emperors Academy July 1st 2011
Being completely rational has its down side - TMI
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
Why is a crooked letter and can't be straightened
Our forebears are not as silly as we are often tempted to think . My mother in law 's old saying is right on the ball .
Sometimes you and I need to be perfectly honest and accurate about talking science - we need to say, like her, that "we haven't got time to discuss it properly right now". For those who don't know the expression . My wife would ask the good question as a child "why? " and "why mum why? " of her mother and get the above answer .Lateral thinking - gloriously non greek stuff
The point is , I don't mind why and where you have to go to get there ...with such questions - the reality is that lots of people ( most) are not prepared to take the journey , so their jumping ship is plain annoying and time wasting for us scientists ( honest engagement is the key).
Take the way journos as a whole fail to recognise like psychologists do that we all have a religious bent ( may not talk about it but ) Thoughtful reactionaries TR's and Aethists are right to be concerned about the dangerousness of religion - They are, like us, impatient with where our society is heading but TR's don't analyse the context well enough to recognise whats good and bad ( that it motivates people and that's needed) about what we both rightly see as "explosive stuff." Reactionaries miss the whole point of course because they dismiss their own history -they don't see that freedom of religion out of the Bible is freedom to think for yourself . many of course can't see that but the image of God portrayed there is clear in setting those boundaries and maintaining them right through.
Jon Feine and Tony Jones will pretend they have time sometime to talk through things , but I try to avoid listening because like most scientists and geo scientists like myself, they only allow a limited conversation to occur on their favourite controversial subject and solution - and one which may well just suits their prejudice as non scientists quoting select science ( mere description ) .As presenters they jump ship when it suits them - not the audience ( any objective survey would pick this up ) They call the move - "moving on!:"
Point is , only scientists these days seem have time to discuss science .
If only the long suffering public would switch off too when the investigating jounalist has only 6 / minutes of problem solving time in his consultation .
What these dummy gurus don't know yet is like my mother in law wisely recognised - it probably wouldn't have mattered how good her explanation was if she gave one - the child looking for incharge wouldn't be getting what they wanted out of the story sharing exercise anyway - she saved time . How wise can you be --. saving time.
What the dummy advisory panels in the ABC and the political heavies have yet to realise is that talk is fine-- if you have time to waste . The shit will really hit the fan when the patient tries to implement the idea (MPCCC) You heard it first on blogger on 23rd June 2011
Sometimes you and I need to be perfectly honest and accurate about talking science - we need to say, like her, that "we haven't got time to discuss it properly right now". For those who don't know the expression . My wife would ask the good question as a child "why? " and "why mum why? " of her mother and get the above answer .Lateral thinking - gloriously non greek stuff
The point is , I don't mind why and where you have to go to get there ...with such questions - the reality is that lots of people ( most) are not prepared to take the journey , so their jumping ship is plain annoying and time wasting for us scientists ( honest engagement is the key).
Take the way journos as a whole fail to recognise like psychologists do that we all have a religious bent ( may not talk about it but ) Thoughtful reactionaries TR's and Aethists are right to be concerned about the dangerousness of religion - They are, like us, impatient with where our society is heading but TR's don't analyse the context well enough to recognise whats good and bad ( that it motivates people and that's needed) about what we both rightly see as "explosive stuff." Reactionaries miss the whole point of course because they dismiss their own history -they don't see that freedom of religion out of the Bible is freedom to think for yourself . many of course can't see that but the image of God portrayed there is clear in setting those boundaries and maintaining them right through.
Jon Feine and Tony Jones will pretend they have time sometime to talk through things , but I try to avoid listening because like most scientists and geo scientists like myself, they only allow a limited conversation to occur on their favourite controversial subject and solution - and one which may well just suits their prejudice as non scientists quoting select science ( mere description ) .As presenters they jump ship when it suits them - not the audience ( any objective survey would pick this up ) They call the move - "moving on!:"
Point is , only scientists these days seem have time to discuss science .
If only the long suffering public would switch off too when the investigating jounalist has only 6 / minutes of problem solving time in his consultation .
What these dummy gurus don't know yet is like my mother in law wisely recognised - it probably wouldn't have mattered how good her explanation was if she gave one - the child looking for incharge wouldn't be getting what they wanted out of the story sharing exercise anyway - she saved time . How wise can you be --. saving time.
What the dummy advisory panels in the ABC and the political heavies have yet to realise is that talk is fine-- if you have time to waste . The shit will really hit the fan when the patient tries to implement the idea (MPCCC) You heard it first on blogger on 23rd June 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)