Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Space Science

NASA Thaws Out 'Teacher in Space' Program 59

Posted by michael from the rolling-the-dice dept.
Guppy06 writes "The Houston Chronicle reports that, seventeen years after the Challenger disaster, NASA is pushing forward its Teacher in Space program again. Christa McAuliffe's original back-up, Barbara Morgan from Idaho, is scheduled to go up this November. NASA intends to recruit more teachers in the future. Between this and rumored Mars missions, it seems new NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe is keeping himself busy."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

NASA Thaws Out 'Teacher in Space' Program More

NASA Thaws Out 'Teacher in Space' Program

Comments Filter:

  • heh (Score:2, Funny)

    by GigsVT ( 208848 )
    NASA Thaws Out Teacher in Space.... ....program.

    Caught me offguard for a second. :) Images of frozen teachers in stasis, part of a super secret Mars mission, etc etc.
    • I kinda thought that maybe they had frozen samples of Christa McAuliffe that they were going to thaw and then clone to give her a second chance.

      Whew, I am glad it wasn't.
    • Personally I would have titled this article "NASA Resurrects Teacher in Space Program".

      And people accuse me of being tacky! I don't get it!

  • I am really disappointed that they waited this long in the first place, but I'm also glad they are moving forward with this. Perhaps they have the balls to put a teacher on the moon (or even Mars) in the near future.

    I for one would LOVE to have my kid taught about space by someone who's actually BEEN there, you know what I mean?

    • What's the benefit again? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by GuyMannDude ( 574364 ) on Wednesday January 22, 2003 @01:28PM (#5136288) Journal

      I for one would LOVE to have my kid taught about space by someone who's actually BEEN there, you know what I mean?

      No, I'm afraid I don't. What perceived benefit do you think this would have for your child? In what way will this teacher be more qualified to teach basic astronomy because of their experience floating around in a cramped shapeship for a few days?

      I admit that I didn't read the article but I don't really see what the rationale for restarting this program is except, of course, for the obvious publicity. People could argue that this, alone, makes it worthwhile (remember the media coverage John Glenn's 2nd space trip got?) for NASA to pursue but I always get a bit nervous when people start trivialising inheriently dangerous things. I am by no means blaming the Challenger disaster on the Teacher in Space program but I think there is an interesting parallel between the shoddy preparations done for that trip and the idea that space travel was so safe that civilians should be allowed. Space exploration is not a joyride. If some multimillionare wants to pony up the bucks and realizes they are taking their life in their hands, then so be it. But there's a big difference between that kind of thing and a NASA-sanctioned program encouraging teachers to risk space travel. I'd prefer if NASA was to spend their money and effort on more serious ambitions than this Teacher in Space program. This smacks of something designed purely for publicity and to keep up appearances of "applications for Everymen and Everywomen everywhere!"

      GMD

      • there's a big difference between that kind of thing and a NASA-sanctioned program encouraging teachers to risk space travel.

        Risk is the name of the game if you want to sit in that chair. You risk your life every day on the interstate, you risk you life when you go swimming, you risk your life crossing the road. Hell a nuke might go off near you and you'd be dead as a dodo.

        As long as the vollenteers know the risks, why the hell not?

        P.S. publicity == more funding == more exploration (hopfully not more safty).
        • As long as the vollenteers know the risks, why the hell not?

          Hmm... I seem to remember something about a huge deficit (I think along the lines of about 6 trillion USD). Maybe that's a reason why the hell not? Just a thought.

          • So slash a potentially USEFUL program (see my response to an earlier fork in this thread) in order to pay off national deficit? How about we limit politicians and federal employee's to a MAXIMUM income of $80,000 (only raisable by a vote of the American people, after all, they DO work for us, why is that they get to determine their OWN raise, seems backwards to me)? That would save a LOT of money in taxes that could be used to pay off the national deficit as well as continuing to pay for such wonderful programs as the Teacher In Space.
            • I think there's a definitive line between a useful program (which I don't deny NASA has) and sending random schlubs into space just because they want to.
              • random schlubs into space just because they want to.

                That's the way the Russians do it (remember Lance Bass, he's a random schlub that was sent into space 'cause he wanted to).

                Sending teachers is 1000000000 times more beneficial then sending some teen pop rocker.
                • Sending teachers is 1000000000 times more beneficial then sending some teen pop rocker

                  1000000000 times 0 is still 0.

                  • I'm sorry if you don't get it. I've already explained my view once.

                    From my other comment in this thread:

                    " In high school, the only English teacher I could relate too was Ms. Melba Clarke. Why could I relate to her? She taught literature, could speak a bit of Gaelic and Old English, and when we were learning about William Shakespeare and the language he used in his plays, she could relate stories to us from when she was in England.

                    Same with my college Trigonometery(sp) professor, Mr. Hammesfar(sp (been several years since I've had to remember how to spell his name)). He was a former Navy seaman aboard a ship involved in some of the Bikini Atoll experiments. Because he could relate his experience using trig in real life (as it related to Electronics Engineering, my former (and uncompleted) major), for the first time ever I passed a math class with a 3.4 GPA (and he was NOT an easy teacher by any means).

                    While the experience itself might not make one more qualified in the traditional sense, it gives the educator a real life frame of refrence to help students become more interested in learning."

                    In short it provides "this is how it's used in the real world" view that students can respect. If you can't understand that, I'm sorry that caffiene has destroyed your last brain cell.
                    • Okay, I absolutely agree with you with regard to teaching ability of people who've used what they know in life. My 10th grade chemistry teacher was a chemist before becoming a teacher, and this translated into him being a great teacher. However, I think that the millions of dollars it costs to get into space might not be worth a few students getting a better education. Maybe as a compromise NASA could send 5 teachers out in a ship instead of one, spending only a fraction per teacher that they would have before. I just fail to see why sending one person into space should be worth the incredible cost to the government in as bad a shape as it already is. Maybe wait a few years until the economy is better and I'll agree with you more on this topic.
                    • Okay, now you're making sense. They should send more teachers (specifically those teaching the sciences, (including music teachers, I'd love to know how brass, woodwind, and string instruments are affected by weightlessness)) as it would reduce the cost. But sending anyone into space, teacher or not, is expensive. So what if the current astronauts are former pilots or army grunts or whatever. It costs the same to send them up as it does to send up one teacher.

                      I think the cost is worth ANY amount of kids getting a better education, especially with k-12 education as shabby as it is now a days. I can honestly say that all my high school education provided me was a lot of choices of professions without the skills needed to make it in college (not that the college I first choose was any better, but it was a private college).

      • Re:What's the benefit again? (Score:4, Interesting)

        by jimmyCarter ( 56088 ) on Wednesday January 22, 2003 @02:47PM (#5136914) Journal
        I think you're missing the point. Sure the teacher that goes up into space for a couple of days and stays cramped up in a shuttle or whatever won't be any more qualified to teach astronomy or physics or anything else relating to space.

        BUT, could you imagine the stories this teacher would have from that experience? These stories would subsequently be relayed on to the students with passion that maybe might spark a student's interest in the field -- a student that probably wouldn't have been interested otherwise.

        /. is a great place, but sometimes the cynicism is a little too much.
        • In high school, the only English teacher I could relate too was Ms. Melba Clarke. Why could I relate to her? She taught literature, could speak a bit of Gaelic and Old English, and when we were learning about William Shakespeare and the language he used in his plays, she could relate stories to us from when she was in England.

          Same with my college Trigonometery(sp) professor, Mr. Hammesfar(sp (been several years since I've had to remember how to spell his name)). He was a former Navy seaman aboard a ship involved in some of the Bikini Atoll experiments. Because he could relate his experience using trig in real life (as it related to Electronics Engineering, my former (and uncompleted) major), for the first time ever I passed a math class with a 3.4 GPA (and he was NOT an easy teacher by any means).

          While the experience itself might not make one more qualified in the traditional sense, it gives the educator a real life frame of refrence to help students become more interested in learning.
      • Obviously it's for publicity and PR, and I think many of your points are valid. But you miss the point. NASA needs good press, and they need something people can relate too. Most people think science is egg-headed nerds in labs working with test tubes (ok, so that's not too far off ;) ). Consequently they don't feel like their tax money goes toward anything worthwhile. NASA needs programs like this to capture peoples imaginations so maybe they think twice when there's further tax-cuts for NASA.
        I just can't believe it costs very much to send an already trained teacher up in place of a regular astronaut. All organizations need PR, and this PR is pretty cheap.
  • Nasa has a tendency to have dramatic accidents occasionally... And we have a shortage on good school teachers ( in NY at least ). We should send some politicians up instead... Allow them to paste their ad's on the sides of the ship etc.. If the ship blows up, we lose one more politician...
    • It's been done: John Glenn. :)

      I remember when I heard about the Challenger accident vividly. With that in mind, exploding shuttles don't make good jokes.
      • I remember when I heard about the Challenger accident vividly. With that in mind, exploding shuttles don't make good jokes.

        Uh, why though? I never really understood why it was such a big deal other than the money. If your local news had reported on a 5 car pileup on the Interstate where 7 people were killed, would you remember that moment vividly for the rest of your life??

        Sure, the shuttle cost a lot of money, but the government is in the business of building expensive things and then blowing them up, you know how much each cruise missle costs these days, right?

        So really, what's the big deal?
        • If your local news had reported on a 5 car pileup on the Interstate where 7 people were killed, would you remember that moment vividly for the rest of your life??

          No, but I vividly remember where I was when I heard that each of my three deceased grandparents had died.

          Some people we care about - family and friends obviously, but "celebrities" too. Love it or lump it, that's human nature. And if and when dead astronauts no longer get automatic promotion to celebrity status - when a shuttle accdient is no more vividly remembered than a plane crash - then you'll know that the Space Age has truly arrived.

          • when a shuttle accdient is no more vividly remembered than a plane crash

            Cute. Also true.

            The shuttle explosion was a loss of innocence, perhaps kind of minor in retrospect but a big shock at the time. We'd never lost anyone in flight before, and the accident changed our space program fundamentally. Challenger eventually stood also for a massive governmental failure. It was *not* just about 7 people getting needlessly killed, and certainly not about money. I remember a friend flipping out at how the Times used up the first six pages solid on the accident, while people were dying by the hundreds or thousands in Columbian mudslides. She was right in a moral sense about what counted, but deaf in an emotional sense to those around her. (I gotta say that 6 pages was hugely excessive!)

            I don't have any concrete answers why we feel differently about the deaths of strangers, and even less how we "should" feel. The death of a stranger can sometimes be more traumatic than the death of someone you know. But they're not all the same.

            Heck, I even remember where I was when Reagan got shot, and I didn't even like him. It was a significant event in history, though kind of a footnote to JFK's assassination.

    • Nasa has a tendency to have dramatic accidents occasionally... We should send some politicians up instead...

      Yes, "accidents"
    • ..Political Science teachers...

  • Hooray! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by orthogonal ( 588627 ) on Wednesday January 22, 2003 @12:50PM (#5135974) Journal
    And this enhances education, or NASA's research program, or exploration of space, exactly how?

    Oh. It's just a big warm fuzzy, tending to promote fuzzy thinking about space exploration and NASA ("Space is cool! My teacher went there! I wonder if she met Chewbacca?") without providing any real scientific or engineering advance or even teaching kids that to get to space we need to understand math and physics.

    Huzzah! Hooray! Let's put a teacher in space everyday!

    <fine print = 'sotto voiced'>
    Offer limited to humanities teachers and "esteem coaches"; we can't spare the few competent math and science teachers we still have.
    < /fine print>

    We were supposed to be having vacations on the moon by 2003. Instead we get this. Feh.

    • Re:Hooray! (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Pyromage ( 19360 ) on Wednesday January 22, 2003 @01:01PM (#5136079) Homepage
      It can be inferred from your post that you support space exploration.

      I submit that this promotes space exploration by making it sound better for the ordinary people. It becomes more accessible because the teacher is just a regular person, not a specially trained astronaut.

      With normal people (hey, millionaires and teachers!) going into space, we begin to see that outer space is out there and people can go there. With the interest that this could help drum up (which would be an improvement over current views, no matter how small of one), it could help restore confidence in NASA.

      Also, for those that say the U.S. should focus on local issues first, I'd like to say this: firstly, they are already working on them. Maybe this money could help it a bit, but we ARE working on fixing local problems. Second, I think that it's important to achieve things. Not just to be the first to put a man on the moon, just to beat the Russians, but to advance science. If we don't do it, someone else will, and the intelligent people who want to do it will leave. America is losing a lot of great minds because the government is not encouraging, or even discouraging, their research.

      If we get enough support for NASA to try for Mars, we'll make it. If we go for Mars, we will succeed: every other time we've said "we *WILL* do this", we do. Imagine what it'll mean if we do get to Mars! The technology that would spur, there would be massive repurcussions, and the results would be amazing.

      • Re:Hooray! (Score:3, Interesting)

        by MacAndrew ( 463832 )
        I support space exploration, but not manned space exploration. The cost effectiveness of unmanned spacecraft has been well demonstrated, and these programs were badly hurt by the Shuttle, I can tell you from hearing from the people who worked on them. (I grew up near JPL.)

        The teacher-in-space program may inadvertently illustrate what an extravagance manned space exploration is and backfire. Remember all the criticism when they sent John Glenn up? At least he was a former astronaut, and they performed lots of medical experiments on the "first gerry in space." I'm not sure what a schoolteacher brings to the program except an opportunity for propaganda, and I suspect at least some people will see through that and say we aleady have enough things that need money on terra firma -- ironically, spending on education is among the msot prominent. Also, it's not that the money is that much relative to what ground-based problems need, but if it is a waste it is a waste, and if it diverts attention from more important (if boring) issues, it is a tragedy. Perhaps it can be defended as simple entertainment, but I don't feel the gov't is in the business of entertaining us, and not at such risk and cost.

        If I were NASA, I would stress the economic and scientific payoff of the program. In some cases cases having a human in orbit is valuable, but we could scale back to meet those needs. The Shuttle has failed to meet its promise as a cost-effective way to move things to and from orbit, and it was the vain effort to prove otherwise that was a major factor in the fateful "go" decision in the Challenger launch. (The military quietly abandoned the Shuttle after that.) For pursuing our dreams -- well, it may be a lot cheaper, produce better science, and save lives to rethink those dreams.

        This is not a "troll," just a plea for getting the most bang for the buck. I would like to see swarms of probes throught the solar system, something humans will not do for many, many years. The "gee whiz" factor of men and women in space is of little lasting value, and Mars can wait.

    • Re:Hooray! (Score:2, Insightful)

      by SweetAndSourJesus ( 555410 )
      "Huzzah! Hooray! Let's put a teacher in space everyday!"

      Hey, if it gets NASA the PR karma they need, I'm all for it. People tend to lose interest when astronauts are just studying the effects of lemon pledge on slime mold in zero gravity, you know.

      "We were supposed to be having vacations on the moon by 2003. Instead we get this. Feh."

      Well, there was that whole "seven people blowing up and completely horrifying a generation [everything2.com]" thing. The "cold war being over" thing didn't help, either.

    • And this enhances education, or NASA's research program, or exploration of space, exactly how?

      Exactly how does it enhance space exploration to have it done entirely by military test pilots and hard scientists? Not that I have anything against the military (I was in it once) or hard science (which is now my profession), but in my experience these people do not have the broadest range of attitudes and experiences that one could possibly bring to such a project.

      The original seven Mercury astronauts were chosen as military pilots because they both had the right skills and were accustomed to following orders, so that they wouldn't publicly question the government's motives in pursuing a space program. Is that necessarily a good qualification as an explorer?

      So yes, let's send up the teachers, authors, humanities professors, and so on. Exploration is at least as much about communication as it is about discovery, and we need a few more good communicators to go up and tell us what it's like.

    • You don't think inspiring kids promotes exploration?
      It will make those launches a topic at every school in the country, just like it did before. We had plenty of classes and projects related to the previous program. It drove a lot of resources, curriculum and imaginations.

  • Software Engineer in Space? (Score:3, Funny)

    by theCoder ( 23772 ) on Wednesday January 22, 2003 @12:57PM (#5136040) Homepage Journal
    Teacher in Space is all well and good, but where's the "Software Engineer in Space" program? That's the one I want to sign up for!

  • am glad that NASA doing this. It raises the space awareness of all of us. Without the space program most of us wouldn't have jobs. Computers were instramental in the space program.
  • When will be able to vote on exiling our teachers into space?

  • Why? (Score:1)

    by pla ( 258480 )
    How does this benefit science?

    Just another money-wasting PR scheme. They will have a crewmember who counts as a liability, not an asset, and serves no real purpose.

    Yeah, we may have one small group of kids who feel very motivated about space tech for a few weeks. A statistical blip, totally meaningless.


    And, of course, this means we'll have to endure a "thawing out" of all the tasteless jokes from the Challenger explosion (such as "Need Another Seven Astronauts"). Yay.
  • That's strange, I thought space was really cold. Maybe they have some kind of generator up there?

  • Headline should have read: (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    NASA Dredges Up 'Teacher in Space' Program.

    Or maybe...

    NASA Resurrects 'Teacher in Space' Program.
  • I don't think that the Teacher In Space program was so much "Frozen" as it was "Burnt to a Crisp".
  • NASA always uses education as an important goal, we need to teach our children about space. NASA doesn't seem to know much about space and doesn't seem to have any real goals for humans in space. They have done good research on planets, asteroids, comets etc... but how many billions of dead presidents have been spent on the wonderful Internation Space Station, when was the last time it made the news???? The Stuttle shouldn't be needed for experimention anymore if we have a dedicated platofrm in space for longer term studies, but last we they sent up another shuttle with one of the goals being bone growth in space, how much does a bone grow and wouldn't it be more realistic to do a 6month study than a 10-15 day one for something like this. I know there are many great engineers and scientists at NASA but all the money is being spent on Shuttle and ISS (space station) PR type activities rather than having good scientific goals. Bag the teacher in space and send people to do real science or save the money to do more astronomy or other useful research. I can't even guess how many millions of dollars it will take to send a teacher into space so that they can produce 4-5 hours of wow isn't being weightless in space cool!!!!. There are plenty of old videos from Apollo and SpaceLab and others that show weightlessness, gravity etc... we don't need more. Those are mine and your tax dollars being wasted, NASA needs to concentate on things that are helpful to the US/World be it enviromental, reseaching the planets etc... getting to Mars etc... Also one guestion that I've always had was that when they have been repairing the Hubble (another major screw up) of assembly of the SpaceSation etc... they always send up a PhD or Astronaut when the task is really a mechanical assembly job wouldn't a construction worker or electronics assembly tech be more skilled to install HW or swap out electronics???

    NASA should be the best a brightest tackling the worlds biggest challenges but it seems to be more of a money sink for PR purposes.
  • NASA Thaws Out 'Teacher in Space' Program

    In that case I guess we'll also be thawing out the Need Another Seven Astronauts jokes.

    -
  • I have a few college professors I didn't care much for -- send them up instead. Elemetary, Middle school, and even high school teachers are fairly harmless and some are actually beneficial. At least college professors don't actually have to have a teaching degree or any or much teaching ability (mine didn't).

    Oh yeah, let them up there and make them write a 300 page thesis on why this program is a bad idea. :-)

    Enjoy.
  • I can just see the next NASA publicity stunt:
    Survivor: The Final Frontier where getting "voted off" the shuttle down right sucks (really).

    I guess NASA needs new, creative ways to get funding for the Mars mission (or Survivor series).

  • Launching a big disco ball into space seems like phase one for project international discotech. It must get boring on the ISS.
  • Or maybe Sexy Teachers & Naughty Nurses..

    What would spooge do in space? Does zero G effect the male erection? Weightless measurements of the breast to design more comfortable bras with more 'natural' support.

  • Completely dating myself here, but...

    I remember when the first time this happens and all the teachers at the elementary school I went to were so happy that a teacher was going up in space. They got the rest of us kids pumped up about it, and then brought out the TV so we could watch it live as it happened.

    ***BOOM***

    I don't quite believe I knew I had just watched history in the making, but the teachers huge grins turned into dropped jaws very shortly, and then the television got turned off after they regained their composure. It wasn't a *big* deal for me, so I didn't really get upset.

    I've heard once or twice since then that child psychologists had a field day trying to analyise the affects that this had across the nation on kids (much like the Oklahoma City/Murrah, and now 9/11 attacks... only those were much, much worse)

    So, my question is, are the public classrooms going to have this on TV again? Odds of the same thing happening twice are remote at best, but still...

    Hmm... quick Google search reveals this link [inthe80s.com] that is interesting...
    • That's kind of funny. My experience was exactly the opposite. We didn't watch the launch live. In fact, I remember that as we were discussing it later, our teacher mentioned that fewer people saw it live because a shuttle launch just wasn't the big deal it used to be. However, once it happened, our teachers had us all huddled around a few small TVs watching news reports and re-runs of the tape. I think we saw that explosion way too many times that day. Then we talked about it for several days afterwards.
  • In related news, not long ago The Feederz reissued one of their better LP's: Teachers in Space.
  • It looks like in less than three days NASA has manged to get over 1000 applications [accessatlanta.com].

Slashdot Top Deals

We are each entitled to our own opinion, but no one is entitled to his own facts. -- Patrick Moynihan

Close