It used to be that first you became educated - then you went to college or university.
Now, you are not educated when you have finished high school - so you must waste time completing your education in University. When Clinton in a fit of the cuddles, said that every American kid would do the first year of college (to cheers) he was really saying that every young American would complete their high school education in college.
Back in the 30's we did either Matric or the General Certificate. Matric had five subjects, the GC had six. In each case, English and Math were compulsory. You could choose the other 3 or 4 subjects, but one had to be a language.
That's all.
I can speak for physics, but I think other sciences were similar.
Physics took three years to a B.Sc. You had three subjects in the first year - Physics, of course, and two others, which tended to be Math and Chemistry.
Once through that, for the other two years you could take a General, or a Special.
In the General, you had two subjects - usually Physics or Math. In the Special, you had only one subject - Physics. In both cases, when you reached finals, you would get one question in French, one in German. (You were expected to pick up scientific French and German in your own time. At least enough to make your way through the finals' questions.
No Spanish, no social sciences, no black studies, no gender studies, no political correctness, not even remedial reading - just a direct path toward the goal of becoming a physicist.
This was possible because it was assumed that if you were at college you were already educated.
It seems to me that one became a ScD and that a PhD went to someone who had proficiency in more than one subject - perhaps two doctorates? I'm hazy about that.
It was a hard task, but young people would do it. I wonder if they won't do it now making recruitment from elsewhere - where they will work - an inevitability.
Harry
---------------------------------------------------------
Keith wrote:
Some FWers who, like me, are concerned that the developed countries are
having to recruit scientists, engineers and medical people from
underdeveloped in order to maintain economic development, might be
interested in the following. It comes up in the recent Question feature on
the Edge Web site and is answered by Leon M. Lederman. Its context is
America but the same problem applies to England, France and Germany among
several others.
<<<<
"Is it conceivable that the standard curriculum in science and math,
crafted in 1893, will still be maintained in the 26,000 high schools of
this great nation?"
----
The world is caught up in a paroxysm of change. Key words: globalism,
multinational corporations, ethical influences in business, explosive
growth of science-based technology, fundamentalism, religion and science,
junk science, alternative medicines, rich vs. poor gap, who supports
research? where is it done? how is it used? advances in cognition science,
global warming, the disconnect between high school and college . . . these
and other influences are undergoing drastic changes and all will have some
impact on science, mathematics and technology and therefore on how our
schools must change to produce graduates who can function in the 21st
century --- and assume positions of leadership. Is it conceivable that the
standard curriculum in science and math, crafted in 1893, will still be
maintained in the 26,000 high schools of this great nation?
This is a question that obsesses me in my daily activities. I have been
agonizing over it along with a few colleagues around Fermilab, University
of California, and the students, staff and trustees of the Illinois Math
Science Academy (IMSI), a three year public residential high school for
gifted students, I was involved in founding some 16 years ago.
Is not our nation even more at risk now than ever? Are not our 2 million
teachers even more poorly trained now, even less respected, hardly better
compensated than when we were A Nation at Risk? Some 13 years ago, the
collected Governors of the United States under the leadership of the
President made six promises, all starting with: "By the year 2000 all
students will . . . ".
The rhetoric varies from high comedy to dark tragedy. Today, the Glenn
National Commission summarizes its dismal study of science and math
education in a succinct title: "Before It's Too Late". Alan Greenspan
mesmerizes a congressional panel on "Education and the Work Force" with the
warning that if we do not radically improve our educational system, there
is a danger to the future of the nation. Words carefully chosen. Rhetoric.
We have no national strategy to address this question. In a war on
ignorance and on looming changes of unknowable dimensions, shouldn't we
have a strategy?
----
Leon M. Lederman, the Director Emeritus of Fermi National Accelerator
Laboratory, has received the Wolf Prize in Physics (1982), and the Nobel
Prize in Physics (1988). He is the author (with Dick Teresi) of "The God
Particle: If the Universe Is the Answer, What Is the Question?"
>>>>
__________________________________________________________
“Writers used to write because they had something to say; now they write in
order to discover if they have something to say.” John D. Barrow
_________________________________________________
Keith Hudson, Bath, England; e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_________________________________________________
******************************
Harry Pollard
Henry George School of LA
Box 655
Tujunga CA 91042
Tel: (818) 352-4141
Fax: (818) 353-2242
*******************************
