<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: What Do We Really Mean When Discussing Science and Engineering Competitiveness?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.scienceprogress.org/2007/11/what-do-we-really-mean-when-discussing-science-and-engineering-competitiveness/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.scienceprogress.org/2007/11/what-do-we-really-mean-when-discussing-science-and-engineering-competitiveness/</link>
	<description>Progressive approaches to science policy</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Mar 2010 13:54:22 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Michael Meo</title>
		<link>http://www.scienceprogress.org/2007/11/what-do-we-really-mean-when-discussing-science-and-engineering-competitiveness/comment-page-1/#comment-362</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Meo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Nov 2007 03:51:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scienceprogress.org/2007/11/what-do-we-really-mean-when-discussing-science-and-engineering-competitiveness/#comment-362</guid>
		<description>I comment from the perspective of a high-school math teacher of some 20 years&#039; experience, in a large (&gt;1500) urban high school.

We do not have the capacity to teach engineers to be poets, and poets to be ingineers, due to the top-down planning that is being discussed in the Urban Institute and in the United States Congress.

Rather, we have that capacity because of the traditional professional courtesy we have extended to teachers.  Teachers are in the United States traditionally allowed to close the door and use their best judgement.

All of the burden of the reforms of the past N years (N being a large integer approaching half a human lifespan) has been to deny, curtail, and avoid that professional courtesy.  The chant has been that we must have &quot;accountability,&quot; that we must adopt &quot;best practice,&quot; and so on ad infinitum, always assuming that the central authorities know better than the teachers.

A very effective reform at this point would be a moritorium on reform.

Concentrate on recruiting highly-qualified candidates.  Ensure them of employment.

Allow them to solve their problems in their own way.

Ah, but it&#039;ll never happen.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I comment from the perspective of a high-school math teacher of some 20 years&#8217; experience, in a large (&gt;1500) urban high school.</p>
<p>We do not have the capacity to teach engineers to be poets, and poets to be ingineers, due to the top-down planning that is being discussed in the Urban Institute and in the United States Congress.</p>
<p>Rather, we have that capacity because of the traditional professional courtesy we have extended to teachers.  Teachers are in the United States traditionally allowed to close the door and use their best judgement.</p>
<p>All of the burden of the reforms of the past N years (N being a large integer approaching half a human lifespan) has been to deny, curtail, and avoid that professional courtesy.  The chant has been that we must have &#8220;accountability,&#8221; that we must adopt &#8220;best practice,&#8221; and so on ad infinitum, always assuming that the central authorities know better than the teachers.</p>
<p>A very effective reform at this point would be a moritorium on reform.</p>
<p>Concentrate on recruiting highly-qualified candidates.  Ensure them of employment.</p>
<p>Allow them to solve their problems in their own way.</p>
<p>Ah, but it&#8217;ll never happen.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
