Compulsory Courses for Any Curriculum; The Science Dilemma

There is a body of knowledge associated with every branch of science that students must learn, largely by rote. There's the scientific method that is universally applied. Then there is the ethics of science. That is the area that is violated too often, especially in the realm of climate change. Finally, there is one lesson that all true scientists must accept: Humility. It is hard to accept the fact that one's specialized knowledge in one discipline does not make them expert in all scientific disciplines. That seems to be the hardest lesson of all.

I think integrating science into other subjects is a good way to slip stream and build a foundation for other sciences. For writing class ask for a paper with the topic pertaining to environmental impact for a product of the students choosing. In business make the case study be on a paramedical company and so on. I think some times the academic world likes to be stratified and tries to stay in their lanes - math doesn't teach science. Wrong approach - calculus could easily be applied to understanding physics. I think showing a linkage and how it applies would be a good approach.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPPtS7kyfXI

I don't deny what was said here thus far, however, having been a really serious engineer, physicist, mathematician, and podiatrist, at least until my now total perm VA approved disability, I've actually given what I'd like to think is some fairly serious thought to that sort of topic. I was never able to be faculty, both due to clumsy errors in my part, as well as my disability, though I was given a couple of chances amlong time ago, and did teach one semester as an adjunct at a local college near my wife and myself, also a fair while ago. So, while I obviously haven't been exposed to virtually all areas of serious science, on a quite serious level, I have, nevertheless, at the very least, been exposed to many. There is truth that some bodies of knowledge need to absorbed btmrote at first, I wouldn't dispute that, having gone through a good deal of that myself. However, where I think a large part of the dilemma and problem starts, is in most studentsmover the past sevl decades having no patience for the necessary self discipline of drill needed to study properly, combined with a woefully inadequate level of exposure to the actual techniques really needed for proper study. Once the cupiditymof a student, I think, is captivated, most students might be inclined to study on their own, without needing to be driven to do so. I do think, though many here might well uñderstandably disagree with me, that all to many kids are exposed to needlessly high and excessively convenient technology, whether cell phones tablets PCs as the case may be, that I quite frankly think, regardless of disagreement by others reading this , are, in fact, actually seriously detrimental to pediatric intellectual growth. Computers are NOT in my view the solution to science education, for the quite simple reason that most kids at present have absolutely zero clue how they actually work, how to program them, what operating systems and assembly languages are, or anything beyond the merestmof scientificmplatitudes as to what binary actually is, or how it relates concretely to computing architecture. All kids, of average IQ, I personally think, or higher, should be explicitly reqd to do , at minimum, algebra, geometry, and trig, as well as classical bio, with some exposure to biochemistry and molecular biology, by no later than 9th 10th and 11th grades. All should be expressly reqd to take both differential and integral calculus , as well as insisting at at AP level, for all sciences, if at all possible. All kids should also very seriously have the chance to use voc ed high schools, which quite freq have quite good curricula, and are often needlessly and freq unfairly derided, as being too plebian for those college bound. All kids should be positively reqd to do explicit hard science projects, incl encouraging such topics as amateur radio, model rocketry, model aircraft and cars, incl and most especially radio controlled versions. Further, kids should all positively be taught, explicitly, the history of science, not merely of physics, but also of math, engineering, and biomedicine, without exception, and irrespective of their own interests, as a common core of extremely specific science topics overtly and adamantly reqd of virtually all kids, without exception, so long as they were intellectually capable of absorbing such a curriculum. In colleges, all kids must, must, must, be reqd to do calc based physics, calc based chem, and calc based bio, as well as should also be reqd to take differential equations, linear algebra, complex variables , modern algebra and group theory, as well as moden not solely classical physics, to include statistical mechanics, quantum mechanics up through the schrodinger equation, and also physical chemistry, organic chemistry , biochemistry and molecular biology. All should be exposed to classical mechanics up through and incl Hamiltonian and Lagrangian dynamics, not solely a Newtonian approach, and both special, as well as general, relativity, and also particle physics up through the concept of 4-vectors, the Dirac equation, the concept of cross section, and the quark model, at minimum. All should have a working knowledge of basic geology, stratigraphy, and aeronomy as well as synkoptic meteorology, in order to be able to both understand, as well as appreciate, the planetary physics associated with climate change. Robotics could be included, however, it should also be combined with sufficient basic electrical networks, solid state electronics, linear network theory, and both linear as well as nonlinear and digital control system theory, so as to enable intelligent converse. Also, at no time, before, at minimum, high school, should kids, in my view, be exposed to cell phones, or calculators, as I am positively convinced that they positively degrade the growth of the intellect, as I've said. All kids should be expressly taught to use a slide rule for the simple reason that doing so is one of the very best ways to teach kids what logarithms are, and how to use them. I also think that the present push toward STEM training trivializes serious science education in kids, even if that is not thenintention, of course, and does NOT help foster the growth of the scientific mind. Asian countries, I've read, still, to the present day, even in ultra modern societies, teach the use of an avacus, which, at least to me, speaks volumes about how scientific teaching philosophy differs from that in the US and possibly European countries. Reading should also be positively reqd, with no less than a novel a week, or other serious historical work, especially biography and or autobiography, quite literally from elementary school on, without exception , so long as a kid can absorb the information, once again. I think also that physical education should be shifted away from team sports, to more intellectually demanding sports, e.g., judo, which is a worldwide popular scored sport pretty much all over the rest of the planet, or, at minimum, if team sports are offered, judo or some other serious martial art as a means of teaching mental discipline should also very definitely be required as well. All kids should be positively reqd to read not merely Shakespeare or Homer, but also Dickens, Ben Johnson, Melville, Poe, Thackeray, Macaulay, and as many of the classical works found in the encyclopedia brittanica great books series, the single best literary collection in my view edver assembled, as is possible to expose them to, so far as might be feasible. Do all that, and there is then a fair chance at least in my view of reversing the present societal decline in education espec in science described here. I don't doubt that many reading what I've written here would think it both excessive, as well as utterly impossible, and utterly draconian, I merely point out explicit educ topics as what I think are merely necessary concrete educ goals to strive for, requisite at minimum for the growth of the mind, both in terms of philosophical development, as well as for purposes of educ in science. I'd be most eager for any thoughts, though I of course realize that what I've laid out here will doubtless be deemed for too ambitious for present day students, as well as at odds with the present tendency toward a cell phone driven society, which I personally deem a very great societal error for numerous reasons which I hope the curriculum I've laid out will make manifestly apparent, I hope that was of at least some interest, many thanks. Asian countries while possibly excessively harsh and driving ofmkids, by keeping schools open summers and or on weekends in many instances I've read of, as well as requiring enrippchment coursework outside of normal class time, while perhaps admittedly not letting kids develop as kids, which criticism I can understand, certainly, by such approaches, if nothing else, manage to atr least instill, I've read, a higher overall societal pjshtowared educational development than presently exists in the US especially in the sciences, based on the statistical trend shown here, if nothing else, that is all I am trying to point out .