On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 3:01 AM, Jason Blum <jason.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Interesting article about the whole Texas Instruments Graphing Calculator > scam: > > https://mic.com/articles/125829/your-old-texas-instruments-graphing-calculator-still-costs-a-fortune-heres-why > > Excellent article, thanks. Whereas I have love and respect for the BBC, I've been a past advocate of the Boycott Pearson campaign, precisely for the reasons mentioned above. I think Pearson has some better practices in the pipeline by now, and dropped my campaign awhile back, but I'm still rhetorically resisting the oppressiveness of big publishing in general (I used to work at McGraw-Hill and understand how what's profitable is to recycle the past with window-dressing changes). The Common Core is mostly for big publishing's convenience, as marketing to individualized curricula developed by faculty would be a real pain. Exactly right, it would be. The big publishing textbook business model is itself what's out of date -- we neither need nor want uniformity of that kind. Teachers want more pay and respect, and Jorge is a great role model for why they'd deserve both if allowed to innovate in the way Jorge has. But most are on a very short leash and have to do Pearson's dirty work as mind-killer slaves. Hah hah, there's more of my rhetoric showing. > Meanwhile you get ten times the functionality for free on > https://desmos.com/: > > https://edsurge.com/news/2015-04-30-texas-district-pilots-desmos-as-alternative-to-graphing-calculators > > But +1 on approaching math programmatically with Python. > > > Or with J and/or JavaScript and/or.... so many ways to go once the creativity is unleashed. But that's the fear: non-standardized and diverse approaches to the future, meaning college admissions offices would have to really think about their jobs again instead of just using algorithms and cookie cutters. We've swallowed the bogus argument that wholesale uniformity and "every one on the same page" has something to do with "fairness". If junior moves from military base A in Texas to military base B in Alabama, we don't want to upset her with some different content, something place-based or homegrown. The transition should be as smooth as just turning the page, as everyone is in lockstep, always the factory-minded ideal. One size fits all etc. Congratulations to those behind this "fairness = uniformity" deception, as it has worked very well for them. The gullible public has bought in to this premise. In the meantime, those very few schools who dare to break the mold are in a position to hugely advantage their students. There's nothing like shackling everyone else to TI calculators to help a lucky few stand out thanks to their school's bravery. What I don't get is why organizations like the IEEE or even the NCTM itself don't raise a fuss or in any way to insist on educational freedom. Don't teachers want any freedom? (Answer: many don't). NCTM and IEEE do not seem to understand how they're digging their own graves with their silence and that, looking back, they're going to seem awfully stick-in-the-mud as in "gee, look at these interesting fossils". You'd think at some point a sense of self- preservation, of wanting to survive, would kick in. Kirby Related polemics (hey, I'm a spin doctor too): http://mathforum.org/kb/thread.jspa?messageID=9796755#9796755 https://goo.gl/dajqz0 (based on today's correspondence)
_______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list Edu-sig@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
