Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Education
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 08-16-2008, 11:20 AM
 
2,195 posts, read 3,631,164 times
Reputation: 893

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Humanoid View Post
Because some people are discussing it on the internet? Searching the internet and finding someone that disagrees isn't a good way to determine whether something is or isn't the case. After all this very thread will show up in searches for this very subject shortly! Regardless, computer science is essentially applied mathematics. Its just as much of a "science" as philosophy, mathematics and similar subjects.
It would have helped if you'd actually looked at the sources, Humanoid.

Two of the sources I provided are print, not internet, in origin, and go back almost 20 years. The Association for Computing Machinery's journal was (and probably still is) highly regarded as was Peter Denning's work - both on this and on other items.

I chose the pieces that I chose pretty carefully.

What part of "knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method" do you think Computer Science does not fulfill?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Humanoid View Post
But this reminds me of something. Our schools don't really teach the foundations and basis of the subject matters they pretend to teach. Instead they focus on things that are easily memorized and tested in multiple choice tests. The fact that so many people don't understand the methodological differences between say mathematics and a science (e.g., biology, physics etc) says a lot about our education system.
Ditto the fact that they disregard sources before examining them (or do not examine them carefully).

I am not insisting that it is science, Humanoid. I am insisting that it is not the slam dunk case you think it is. And yes, our schools do not teach disciplines, they teach subjects.

 
Old 08-16-2008, 04:30 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles Area
3,306 posts, read 4,140,365 times
Reputation: 592
Quote:
It would have helped if you'd actually looked at the sources, Humanoid.
I did, where they originated is no concern to me. Its just some inaccurate views on the internet in my eyes, you can find such for any subject really. I hear there is a hot debate about whether intelligent design is science or not too....

Quote:
What part of "knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method" do you think Computer Science does not fulfill?
There are no laws in computer science or is the scientific method utilized. Surely computer scientists use induction, but the scientific method is far more than the simple using of induction. The sources you cited confuse theories about abstractions with theories about the the natural world. Computing/information systems are abstractions and do not exist in the natural world, in much the same way Topological spaces don't exist in the real world. Now of course, particular examples of information systems exist in the world (computers, the brain etc), but computer science at least at the theoretical level (on the non-theoretical level its engineering) studies information systems in general. As a result theories about such systems cannot be demonstrated successfully with the scientific method (e.g., empirically) , instead they use deductive analysis in much the same way as pure/applied mathematics does. Its almost silly to mistake say testing performance characteristics of some algorithm (which was mentioned a lot in your "sources") with what scientists do, in the former case you are not trying to confirming or falsify a particular hypothesis. I test algorithms in the way all the time and I would never mistake my work with that of a biologist etc.

Quote:
Ditto the fact that they disregard sources before examining them (or do not examine them carefully).
So, because I didn't agree with the sources and noted that citing some views on the internet doesn't justify anything I did not examine the sources? I must ask are you looking over my shoulder?
 
Old 08-16-2008, 06:36 PM
 
2,195 posts, read 3,631,164 times
Reputation: 893
Quote:
Originally Posted by Humanoid View Post
I did, where they originated is no concern to me. Its just some inaccurate views on the internet in my eyes, you can find such for any subject really. I hear there is a hot debate about whether intelligent design is science or not too....

(snip)

So, because I didn't agree with the sources and noted that citing some views on the internet doesn't justify anything I did not examine the sources? I must ask are you looking over my shoulder?
When you say "just some inaccurate views on the internet in my eyes[/i]" about, for example, a journal article, then there is good cause to believe you have not looked at it.

When you reiterate that stance, and note that "where they originated is no concern to me," then you shift from my concluding that you missed something to your choosing to willfully misrepresented what you read. I don't actually care whether you disagree with them or not. The manner of your dismissal I do care about.

And your introduction of the straw man/intelligent design is an example of that which you decried in an earlier post.

*shrugs*

Some parts of computer work are as you describe them. Some are not. I find myself wondering if you would also insist that the field of chaos studies are, similarly, not science. But, it's only wondering in a cursory sort of way.

We are clearly far off the topic at hand, and I am dropping it at this point.
 
Old 08-17-2008, 01:58 AM
 
Location: Seattle-area, where the sun don't shine
576 posts, read 1,815,793 times
Reputation: 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronK View Post
Thanks for nit-picking and not focusing on the subject at hand.
Thanks for taking a post just to point that out and thus being hypocritical. And thanks everyone for allowing this thread to keep being derailed.
 
Old 08-17-2008, 06:20 AM
 
2,839 posts, read 9,964,936 times
Reputation: 2944
Ugh, where to begin?

Yes, education needs major reform. I wouldn't even know where to start!

I think it should start later... IMO, small kids (3, 4, 5 years old) need to be home with mom. (Yes, I realize that would take major lifestyle reform for many families!)

If formal school started at age 7, more information could be learned in far less time. My son learned to read at 6 1/2, instead of at 5 like they do in the public schools. He's now 7 1/2 and reads on a solid 3rd grade level. By waiting until kids are ready to learn to read, they learn it faster and better! I see the same thing with math instruction, or lack thereof: they learn so much by "real life" math when memorization is not drilled into them starting at age 5.

Kids should be able to follow their interests when it comes to science and history. I only remember what I was interested in from those subjects in school anyway. It's amazing where their interests can take them... last year we (we homeschool) studied volcanoes, which lead to Pompeii, which led to some Ancient Roman Civilization... then we visited Germany and visited castles, which led to a study of knights and castles and other things having to do with medieval times, etc. I suppose in a classroom of 30 children, this type of thing would be impossible, though. Smaller class size would sure help!

Uhm, what else? Once kids learned to love learning, by the time high school came, they should require little assistance deciding what classes to take... aside from 4 years of math and probably at least 2-3 years of English (I'm assuming the grammatical basics and elements of writing style would be taught long before high school... but I know that they're not!), they should be free to choose. Oh, a class on "life management" should definitely be offered each year, especially since so few kids seem to get that at home. Shorter school days and/or much less homework/busywork should be key. Very little or no standardized testing. Much more encouragement of parental involvement (is this a pipe dream, or do most parents WANT to be more involved?).

Ah, there's so much I would love to see changed....
 
Old 08-17-2008, 06:41 AM
 
Location: Los Angeles Area
3,306 posts, read 4,140,365 times
Reputation: 592
Quote:
We are clearly far off the topic at hand, and I am dropping it at this point.
You should have at least responded to the actual point rather than my manner of "dismissal" (how banal). And to note, Chaos theory is mathematics not science. If interested study it (of course you'll have to first take some graduate level math classes).

Quote:
And thanks everyone for allowing this thread to keep being derailed.
If people can't even agree as to what constitutes science vs mathematics vs art and so on there is little hope in fixing the education system.
 
Old 08-17-2008, 06:46 AM
 
11,642 posts, read 23,843,831 times
Reputation: 12273
Quote:
Originally Posted by artsyguy View Post
High school needs to be more like college. You should be able to choose a plan and not be dictated what to learn.
I don't think we can allow 14 year old kids to decide what they should be learning. Teens are not ready to make those sorts of decisions. A high school education should allow a person to purse ANY field they choose. It should be broad based and prepare a student to further their education NO MATTER WHAT they may choose at the next level.

If you look at countries with truly successful education systems you will see that they do not look at education by myopically focusing on reading and math as the US does. All students receive education in all subjects, including the arts.
 
Old 08-17-2008, 06:50 AM
 
Location: Los Angeles Area
3,306 posts, read 4,140,365 times
Reputation: 592
Quote:
Smaller class size would sure help!
There have been a number of studies that have seen teacher quality is more important than class size. The problem is when people think about these things they aren't thinking about free market economics! Of course smaller classes would be better, if all other things were equal. But good teachers are a scarce resource especially at the pay offered by the schools. When they reduce class size they have to hire new teachers, but since the pool of good teachers (at the given pay) is already scarce they end up hiring low quality teachers.
 
Old 08-17-2008, 07:35 AM
 
2,839 posts, read 9,964,936 times
Reputation: 2944
Quote:
Originally Posted by Humanoid View Post
There have been a number of studies that have seen teacher quality is more important than class size. The problem is when people think about these things they aren't thinking about free market economics! Of course smaller classes would be better, if all other things were equal. But good teachers are a scarce resource especially at the pay offered by the schools. When they reduce class size they have to hire new teachers, but since the pool of good teachers (at the given pay) is already scarce they end up hiring low quality teachers.
Well, of course... my post was my utopian ideal, not what's realistic and what might actually happen in my lifetime. Good teachers help too, but even the best teacher can only do so much when they have to teach to a test, and deal with kids who never see their parents, and teach kids things they're not interested in or ready for.... it's a Catch-22 of sorts, and one that I don't see a solution for. It's not only educational reform, it's American-lifestyle-and-priority-setting reform.
 
Old 08-17-2008, 11:06 AM
 
2,195 posts, read 3,631,164 times
Reputation: 893
Quote:
Originally Posted by Humanoid View Post
If people can't even agree as to what constitutes science vs mathematics vs art and so on there is little hope in fixing the education system.
The separation of that being studied into categories has never been smooth. A researcher was contacted by the Nobel Prize committee and told he had been awarded the Physics prize for his research.

"You must have either the wrong man or the wrong prize. I'm a chemist."

Is psychology an art or a science?

The black and white distinctions you are talking about and an ability to reform education are unrelated, especially when it is possible and perhaps preferable to get away from the discipline (subject) separation approach to schooling, especially at the pre-secondary school levels.

Walking down a street, he saw a sign. "Oh, a sign. English mode, ON!"

He read the sign, and came to a number. "Shift modes. Math ON!"

Too late, he realized his mistake. It had been a marker about a past event. "Shift modes. History ON!" Finally using the proper approach, he could correctly take in the data and interpolate it with the carefully categorized facts and understandings he already had.

Life doesn't work that way, for the most part. Why should we teach that way?


Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Education

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top