• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. To Fund Math Education Research in Canada

Carjosse

Sit Nomine Digna
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 14, 2012
Messages
16,498
Reaction score
8,165
Location
Montreal, QC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
The U.S. Department of Education is funding research in Canadian schools on which system for teaching math works better, the discovery based Ontario curriculum or the JUMP program which is more of a hybrid but is also more structured. The Ontario Ministry of Education supports the idea probably because they don't have to pay for it. The U.S. is using Canada as a testing ground now I guess, thanks for the money.

You can find the article here.

I like this idea and I assume the JUMP program will win out just from personal experience with the Ontario curriculum. What I want to know is what do you think about your government using funds to fund educational research here in my country and province instead of your own.
 
The where of the finding doesn't bother me. It's how well the research is conducted. There are so many uncontrollable variables when it comes to something like education.
 
I like the idea of getting better ways to teach math. We'll probably get good information out of it.

But then I ask myself - why bother? The US school system is inherently broken due to teachers unions, standardized testing tied with federal and state funding (money), and a curicculum which teaches kids how to take tests (again, for the money) instead of teaching subjects such that students understand the subject and use the information. Until educational reform goes through and parents/students have the opportunity to use vouchers to enroll their kids in the best schools instead of being forced to send their kid to their local school (because their local taxes are tied to the local school system), I doubt the information we gain will be put to good use.
 
The U.S. Department of Education is funding research in Canadian schools on which system for teaching math works better, the discovery based Ontario curriculum or the JUMP program which is more of a hybrid but is also more structured. The Ontario Ministry of Education supports the idea probably because they don't have to pay for it. The U.S. is using Canada as a testing ground now I guess, thanks for the money.

You can find the article here.

I like this idea and I assume the JUMP program will win out just from personal experience with the Ontario curriculum. What I want to know is what do you think about your government using funds to fund educational research here in my country and province instead of your own.
I think it's legit. Education is a great use of funds
 
I like the idea of getting better ways to teach math. We'll probably get good information out of it.

But then I ask myself - why bother? The US school system is inherently broken due to teachers unions, standardized testing tied with federal and state funding (money), and a curicculum which teaches kids how to take tests (again, for the money) instead of teaching subjects such that students understand the subject and use the information. Until educational reform goes through and parents/students have the opportunity to use vouchers to enroll their kids in the best schools instead of being forced to send their kid to their local school (because their local taxes are tied to the local school system), I doubt the information we gain will be put to good use.

Question. How many years of experience teaching K-12 do you have?
 
The U.S. Department of Education is funding research in Canadian schools on which system for teaching math works better, the discovery based Ontario curriculum or the JUMP program which is more of a hybrid but is also more structured. The Ontario Ministry of Education supports the idea probably because they don't have to pay for it. The U.S. is using Canada as a testing ground now I guess, thanks for the money.

You can find the article here.

I like this idea and I assume the JUMP program will win out just from personal experience with the Ontario curriculum. What I want to know is what do you think about your government using funds to fund educational research here in my country and province instead of your own.

That seems very sensible to me.
 
I like the idea of getting better ways to teach math. We'll probably get good information out of it.

But then I ask myself - why bother? The US school system is inherently broken due to teachers unions, standardized testing tied with federal and state funding (money), and a curicculum which teaches kids how to take tests (again, for the money) instead of teaching subjects such that students understand the subject and use the information. Until educational reform goes through and parents/students have the opportunity to use vouchers to enroll their kids in the best schools instead of being forced to send their kid to their local school (because their local taxes are tied to the local school system), I doubt the information we gain will be put to good use.

Maybe funding more research into how we do it would benefit you.
 
More of our money, down the toilet.
 
Question. How many years of experience teaching K-12 do you have?

That's an interesting implicit claim.

How many tours did you serve in Iraq or Afghanistan? If the answer is "none", does this mean that your opinion on whether or not we should have launched or should now continue those efforts is invalid?
 
More of our money, down the toilet.

Actually if anyone can be trusted to get honest results back to us for the money, I'd trust the Canadians before I would trust our unions. It's worth noting, for example, that this money is coming from our Department of Education, a centralizing and foolish bureaucracy which has spent tons of money without verifiable impact - and the reason Ontario schools look to it for a centralized system to dole out cash is that Canada does not have such a department.
 
Actually if anyone can be trusted to get honest results back to us for the money, I'd trust the Canadians before I would trust our unions. It's worth noting, for example, that this money is coming from our Department of Education, a centralizing and foolish bureaucracy which has spent tons of money without verifiable impact - and the reason Ontario schools look to it for a centralized system to dole out cash is that Canada does not have such a department.

Education is a responsibility given to the provinces in the constitution as it varies a lot across the country. We have unions aswell we actually have four different ones, one for each school board.
 
I like the idea of getting better ways to teach math. We'll probably get good information out of it.

But then I ask myself - why bother? The US school system is inherently broken due to teachers unions, standardized testing tied with federal and state funding (money), and a curicculum which teaches kids how to take tests (again, for the money) instead of teaching subjects such that students understand the subject and use the information. Until educational reform goes through and parents/students have the opportunity to use vouchers to enroll their kids in the best schools instead of being forced to send their kid to their local school (because their local taxes are tied to the local school system), I doubt the information we gain will be put to good use.

Teaching to the test as many like to say can be beneficial to students if you think about it. Most state tests, at least the ones I'm very familiar with, have evolved over the years to assess students cognitive skills as opposed to just recall information. Students must extrapolate information to conclude conjectural knowledge of, in some instances, unrelated subject matter with little or no prior knowledge of the topic.

In addition, students must learn test taking strategies they should be able to transfer to routine problem solving strategies, e.g., eliminating wrong answers by procedural evidence.

The problem I see from capable students, i.e. those with sufficient IQs and achievement ability, is a lack of prior knowledge and below level or even poor reading skills. A related issue is also apathy on the part of the student. However, I don't necessarily blame teachers for these issues. What I have observed though is that parent input and monitoring of their child's progress in school is usually lacking. In other words, there is usually a correlation between student achievement and parent involvement.

Another issue is class size. Many students benefit from small group learning interactions, and that doesn't mean in a class of 20-30 students. That means in a class of 4-6 students. Others even need one to one interactions to learn basic skills. However that will never happen because of that costs associated with that model.

I know some students excel living in the worst of conditions, but they are the exception rather than the rule, so to speak.

I know this is a generalization, but from a practitioner's POV. Just my :twocents:
 
Education is a responsibility given to the provinces in the constitution as it varies a lot across the country.

Wait, what?!? How in the world could a federalist system survive without constant meddling by a national government ill-suited to handling the varieties within your populace? Surely your test scores must be far, far below our, better, more centrally directed system.
 
Wait, what?!? How in the world could a federalist system survive without constant meddling by a national government ill-suited to handling the varieties within your populace? Surely your test scores must be far, far below our, better, more centrally directed system.

The federal government gets control of everything else.
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1062809295 said:
Teaching to the test as many like to say can be beneficial to students if you think about it. Most state tests, at least the ones I'm very familiar with, have evolved over the years to assess students cognitive skills as opposed to just recall information. Students must extrapolate information to conclude conjectural knowledge of, in some instances, unrelated subject matter with little or no prior knowledge of the topic.

In addition, students must learn test taking strategies they should be able to transfer to routine problem solving strategies, e.g., eliminating wrong answers by procedural evidence.

The problem I see from capable students, i.e. those with sufficient IQs and achievement ability, is a lack of prior knowledge and below level or even poor reading skills. A related issues is also apathy on the part of the student. However, I don't necessarily blame teachers for these issues. What I have observed though is that parent input and monitoring of their child's progress in school is usually lacking.

Another issue is class size. Many students benefit from small group learning interactions, and that doesn't mean in a class of 20-30 students. That means in a class of 4-6 students. Others even need one to one interactions to learn basic skills. However that will never happen because of that costs associated with that model.

I know some students excel living in the worst of conditions, but they are the exception rather than the rule, so to speak.

I know this is a generalization, but from a practitioner's POV. Just my :twocents:

That sounds reasonable, but don't you think then we're graduating millions of professional test takers instead of people who know how to use and apply what they've learned?
 
That sounds reasonable, but don't you think then we're graduating millions of professional test takers instead of people who know how to use and apply what they've learned?

That's really become one of rationales for administering tests, to see how well kids have learned to think. In most professions people have to take and successfully complete tests to prove achievement. Educators, doctors, lawyers, accountants, etc.

I think a better way to help students achieve success is to guide them to professional or vocational careers. The US used to do that in the 1970s but our government now thinks all students should graduate from college, which just proves how out of touch they really are.

I had to call a plumber to my house on a Sunday evening a few months ago to remedy a near emergency. I paid him handsomely for the fix. I'll bet he never attended college. ;)
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1062809355 said:
That's really become one of rationales for administering tests, to see how well kids have learned to think. In most professions people have to take and successfully complete tests to prove achievement. Educators, doctors, lawyers, accountants, etc.

I think a better way to help students achieve success is to guide them to professional or vocational careers. The US used to do that in the 1970s but our government now thinks all students should graduate from college, which just proves how out of touch they really are.

I had to call a plumber to my house on a Sunday evening a few months ago to remedy a near emergency. I paid him handsomely for the fix. I'll bet he never attended college. ;)

I think you have to go to college to be a plumber, at least here. Sure you have to take tests to get into those professions but after that they are almost meaningless. There are many things you can do without going to college or university.
 
That's an interesting implicit claim.

How many tours did you serve in Iraq or Afghanistan? If the answer is "none", does this mean that your opinion on whether or not we should have launched or should now continue those efforts is invalid?

Nice red herring and strawman. I see you have some opinions on education; what is your background here?

Question: How many do I need?

Any number greater than zero would add to your credibility.
 
The U.S. Department of Education is funding research in Canadian schools on which system for teaching math works better, the discovery based Ontario curriculum or the JUMP program which is more of a hybrid but is also more structured. The Ontario Ministry of Education supports the idea probably because they don't have to pay for it. The U.S. is using Canada as a testing ground now I guess, thanks for the money.

You can find the article here.

I like this idea and I assume the JUMP program will win out just from personal experience with the Ontario curriculum. What I want to know is what do you think about your government using funds to fund educational research here in my country and province instead of your own.

The system depends on the student....

As usual our government is built on a bunch of retards that don't know jack ****.

The last time they tried this **** they pulled "whole language" out their ass, which would fall into common core standards today - and is and has been used for many moons and has ****ed up a lot of kids in the process. Why you think inner city schools are failing? because they teach kids everything is just a matter of perception - there is no real factor or truth to anything.
 
Any number greater than zero would add to your credibility.
My sister and wife work currently in the school system K-12. What you deem credible is irrelevant. I do not work in the school system.
 
If I had it my way, kids past 8th grade shouldn't even have to go to school - they should be required to meet certain criteria every year and have prerequisites but high school should be treated more like college.

Kids shouldn't be programmed with a bunch of bull**** political ideas or taught via government/state approved materials. Let them learn on their own. This is the internet era and there is more than enough information online to allow a child to receive a well rounded education.

I know teachers and teachers unions will hate this idea because it means they will have to go find another job that's not as cushy as their present one but according to them it's all about the kids... If it's all about the kids let them learn - let them learn how they feel comfortable learning.

If it was done my way some of the best students would get their diplomas at 16 and have 4 year college degrees by 20...

Of course no one wants that because that would just push the lazy out of the work force.
 
My sister and wife work currently in the school system K-12.

Cool. But what about you?

What you deem credible is irrelevant. I do not work in the school system.

Then how can you really understand what goes on in classrooms? You hear their stories no doubt, but how do you really know for yourself what it is like?
 
Nice red herring and strawman. I see you have some opinions on education; what is your background here?

It is simply asking you if you apply the same standard to yourself as you demand from others for comment.

Do you? Or do you, in fact, have opinions on the wars despite having not served in them yourself?
 
Back
Top Bottom