US Losing its Scientific Dominance 1382
ScaredSilly writes "The New York Times is reporting that the US is losing its dominance in the sciences. They cite lowering research budgets, increased military spending and 'reverse brain-drain': fewer techies staying in the US after school. I personally think that our comparatively crappy K-12 educational system, and an increased dominance of military research over core scientific research plays a big role. (It's easy to get DARPA, DoD and DoE funding, but difficult to get NSF funding). What do you folks think?"
It's so much easier to bid and get cash... (Score:5, Interesting)
I concur (Score:2, Interesting)
With the newer better EU, and the technological progress of the far eastern region coupled with the sudden roll of cultural trendsetters, the US could easily settle into a new roll as the greatest trailer park in the world.
Not to mention that the US has to hitch space rides with the Soviets nowadays. Tough times for close minds.
Post 9/11 syndrome? (Score:5, Interesting)
One of the US's major strengths in research has always been the ability to attract top scientists from all over the world, but with the more and more draconian immigration and visa laws it's becoming harder and harder for foreign scientists to work in the US...
An alternative thought (Score:2, Interesting)
Not that there are too many philosophy or business majors out there, but because someone has to teach them. Instead of putting money into RA's, grad students must be pooled into TAs and untenured professors (probably those with the most recent education, more reason to do cutting edge research, and none of the mental roadblocks to do it) have their time eaten up teaching them.
Especially in the new liberal education where everybody has to have some computer skills, etc. So instead of two sections of 30 non-chem chemistry courses, you have 25 totally 300+. Same resources, spred thinner.
People (read: parents and some academics) might not like the idea that college isn't a panecea or that going to college and not reading James Joyce doesn't hurt you in our adult life (everybody here remembers the major themes of Finnegin's Wake right?). Modern society works partly because people can specialize. So let them do so: let the physicists hack physics, not intro courses or three class workloads, etc.
Naturally this may play back to the crappy K through 12 making people think that college is necessary... eh, just a thought.
Misallocation (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Blame Public Education (not funding) (Score:5, Interesting)
There is also an increase in laziness in the US. Kids today don't want to work hard for anything. Just take the easy road. I know because they are my friends. They think I am nuts for reading and working hard at things.
So, in K-12 education it's not cool to be smart and you get torn into if you are added with the US laziness equals less qualified people to do the jobs
Example: in college engineering 4 of the top 5 students were foreign. Either Arabic or Asian.
Re:Blame Public Education (Score:3, Interesting)
From the article (Tom Daschle's statements) (Score:5, Interesting)
"We stand at a pivotal moment," Tom Daschle, the Senate Democratic leader, recently said at a policy forum in Washington at the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the nation's top general science group. "For all our past successes, there are disturbing signs that America's dominant position in the scientific world is being shaken."
I thought science was the one area where there should be no borders. Why is it so disturbing that other countries are doing well in scientifical-type stuff?
Mr. Daschle accused the Bush administration of weakening the nation's science base by failing to provide enough money for cutting-edge research.
Okay - this is ridiculous. The graphs cover 20 years - 1983-2003. Bush has been in office for ~3 years. Explain again how this is his fault...??
PS I'm not defending Bush - I'm defending basic math skills.
Oh, and here [nytimes.com] is a link to the printer-friendly version. Kudos to the submitter for including a link to the reg-free version.
Re:Great news (for New Zealand) (Score:2, Interesting)
Decline of Public Schools, or of the public? (Score:5, Interesting)
DoD Funds good for a lot of things (Score:4, Interesting)
I think that by the middle of the next century (Score:3, Interesting)
I personally think that Europe is headed for the same fate and the 3rd world due to sheer numbers and industrial output will have surged into the same power league as the EU and the US.
this power struggle will be the cause of the 3rd world war, after which, the balkanization of nations and cultures will begin to disappear and we will come together as a planet some time near the end of this century.
Same here (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Post 9/11 syndrome? (Score:5, Interesting)
But if you had RTA, you'd also notice that the trend had been going for many years prior to then. So you can only blame the Bush administration little (if at all, for it had been happening prior to them ever coming to office).
The key paragraph, IMO (Score:5, Interesting)
IOW, the real problem is Roman
Ideally, of course, it doesn't matter where the knowledge is -- knowledge is knowledge, and an American is not diminished if the latest miracle drug or neat gizmo he uses to make his life better comes originally from outside our borders. But it adds up over time. Part of the reason for America's dominance of most of the 20th c. was simply that we were a huge nation with lots of natural resources
We are not, hopefully, going to turn into Russia: a Third World nation with nukes. But if we don't pay attention, we are going to see the permanent decline in living standards for the average American, in not only relative but absolute terms. This trend has already begun. That's not the future I want for myself and my children.
The Mess of Education (Score:5, Interesting)
Most states have lowered the amount of funding they are providing to education at all levels.
From K-12 through the college system the amount of funding is in constant decline and is doing nothing more than hurting the youth of america today and hurting america as a whole in the future.
If that were not enough, those students who are actually prone to creative and/or intelligent thought are often stifled by a system that looks more like the Special Olympics with the every student is equal approach that prevents them from advancing at the proper pace.
5 Ways to Improve the system:
1. More available private school systems
2. More funding for education programs
3. Allow students with talent to advance
4. Advanced schooling for aforementioned students
5. In college, more research opportunities for undergrads.
The last one may seem a bit iffy but I can state from personal experience that I would have loved to get more time actually working on stuff in my field and be left out because I wasn't a grad student yet.
From A Grad Student Perspective (Score:5, Interesting)
Typically there are two sectors where research is done, academia or industry. In the USA, Industrial research unfortunately is usually the first to take a hit during bad economic conditions as we are presently in. Furthermore although some companies still do longterm innovative research that may not yield results for many years, this is becoming less common. What little research is still being done is done more for immediate application based work.
The traditional research for the general betterment of society without much regard for profit happens in academia. Unfortunately, academic research is suffering recently in the US. First as mentioned, due to the recent emphasis in defense funding and more grants available from DARPA, DoE, DoHomelandSecurity, research is focused into the application/results based work these agencies require rather than the open knowledge for discovery's sake approach of the NSF.
Furthermore, the core element of academic research are the Grad Students that do all the grunt work. In the US, most Science/Engineering grad students are international students. Given current visa restrictions, harrasement and a host of other problems, international student applications to the US have dropped significantly. This is having a noticable impact on research in universities.
Finally, meaningful R&D is now not exclusive to the US as it was a few decades ago. Many other countries are now making breakthroughs, or striving to establish resesarch institutions. For example, Indians know that their outsourcing days are limited, either 'cause either the outsourcing trend will stop or someone else (Phillipines, etc) will do it for even cheaper. So their next big thrust is to bring R&D into the country.
Nothing too organized there, just a few random musings that I thought could add to the discussion.
Poor public education? (Score:5, Interesting)
He didn't know how. So I wrote the formula down for him.
"What's that", he asked, pointing to the symbol for square root.
I asked if he had a high school diploma.
"Of course", he exclaimed.
Now, how does someone get through high school not knowing what a square root symbol is?
Then there are the smart kids that get bored after going over the same material year after year. Why? Because Johnny half-brain needs the lesson again. And since we're all just have to be one big happy group of robots, all the same, well, we'll just have to wait for him to catch up so that we're all equal at the end.
There's plenty more to complain about. Am I bitter? Sure. I was tested gifted. I was a clever kid. I should have gone to a university when I was 18. Instead, I was going to summer-school just to graduate.
Why? Because the lesson of public education isn't education, it's busy work. Well, I didn't need busy work like Johnny half brain to understand the lesson. My punishment for understanding the material without doing all the busy work was failure.
I was intellectually a free spirit and I wouldn't follow their plan.
And I payed for it. I'm still paying for it.
performance in world wide competitions (Score:5, Interesting)
Yet, people live and die to go to these U.S. Universities, and never consider going international.
Don't worry, Britain's following your lead. (Score:2, Interesting)
Anyway what do you want science for when you have MacDonalds?
Too much higher education perhaps? (Score:2, Interesting)
Here in SA you need pretty good school marks to get into university, and most people do not have a degree, nor is it considered unusual not to have one. Is there perhaps a danger in the US that with so many people studying, the ones who will truly excel and increase your research output are being bogged under by those who are there "because they can" and not necessarily because the degree and research is what they want to do in life?
From another point of view (Score:1, Interesting)
So, the question is: where are the students, in fact ?
Depends ... (Score:1, Interesting)
The REAL issue is that science and engineering are frowned upon in the US because of the relatively low pay for amount of education required. Also, there is very little career advancement in those professions.
Re:I concur (Score:5, Interesting)
This has nothing to do with "who is running the country" today. The results we see today are a consequence of 30 years or more of problems. This kind of thing just doesn't creep in overnight. What we're seeing is a consequence of the actions of the past, not the present.
I agree with the poster that it's the education system. A couple weeks ago in NYC parents and students protested a 3rd grade proficiency test which they claimed was racist. Children needed to get a 40% on the test in order to matriculate to the 4th grade. Parents and some "public officials" claimed the test was racially biased, but never backed up their claims. This is just one example of where our education system is going. We can't even demand a 40% proficiency from a child before he's pushed ahead.
Social promotion is the KEY problem in our education system. My father was a teacher in Illinois in the 70s. He tells stories of parents complaining about the bad grades of their children, going to the administration, and then they letting the children pass onto the next grade. This kind of social promotion weakens the child's ability to grasp more complicated subjects. If a child can't understand fractions, how are they going to get Algebra or Geometry? It's a slipperty slope.
On another instance, attempts by the "right wing dominancy" is provide a "way out" through school vouchers to inner city children has been beaten by the liberals to death. School vouchers' intentions are to move kids with potential out of the "slum schools" and into private schools that put more an emphasis on education than on checking children for knives as they walk in through the door in the morning.
And finally, the NEA is terribly corrupt. They spend more money from dues collected by teachers for lobbying Washington politicians than they spend on continuing the education of their own teachers or ANY OTHER activity. We have a union that's just as corrupt as any big company that lobbies the Congress for their own special interests, except you never hear about THIS special interest because it's one the liberals support.
King of the Hill (yes, cartoon) had an interesting commentary on cultural impacts of studies in our public schools. While, yes, it was maybe drawn out a little bit, it shows how historical facts (like in this case the story of the Alamo) are being drowned out for oblivious and unimportant facts like what the state cactus is. The point is, don't talk about the Alamo because it'll offend someone.
And I have to agree. As a freshman in high school, we used 30 year old ancient history books as opposed to the new ones because the teacher felt the new books were loaded down with crap and didn't have any real substance. He then would proceed to fill us in with the "latest discoveries" in Egypt, Greece, Italy, etc in order to bring us up to date.
Political Climate an Influence? (Score:3, Interesting)
Surely such academics staying in their 'home' countries reduces the lure of the US as a 'brain magnet' and reduces the number of US citations, publications and awards? If it gets too serious is there a the danger that the US will lose its critical mass of overseas brains and never regain it's 'brain magnet' status? Is this an unforseen consequence of the 'war on terror'?
Military spending (Score:3, Interesting)
For whatever reason, it is not politically possible in the US to push through a need for the government to create an "information superhighway" or a national highway system for motorized vehicles for infrastructure (actually, a footnote if someone really is interested in the national highway system's creation would be to look at national railroad strikes from the Great Upheaval of 1877 to Truman having the US army seize control of the operation of railroads in 1950 due to a looming strike). It seems the only way it's possible to get the government to spend money is to manufacture a need for "national security" so the national highway system is for defense, teh Internet is for defense and whatnot. Other industrialized nations do not have this problem, and much has been made about how this is actually economically damaging to the US. For example, Europe directly funds Airbus, while the US must fund aerospace research by having Boeing manufacture military planes, and then spend money transforming that technology to commercial aerospace. That transition due to this uniquely American problem costs the US, and lets other industrialized countries gain due to this quirk.
The US has dominated the world for decades economically, but nowadays the EU, with its common currency and economic borders down has a GDP the size of the US, and a currency worth more than the dollar. Asia's economy has crises from time to time, but has grown and is growing at an enormous rate. With Japan as the solid base, South Korea behind it, China and India behind them, and the Asian tigers behind them, there is some stiff economic competition and there is no way the US will be able to match the growth rate of the region, even with CAFTA. I see current US leadership (Republican and Democrat) flailing to maintain a US world position that it can no longer hold, the only thing the US dominates in currently is military because that's where all the spending is. The bottom line is the US is having trouble realizing it is no longer ruler of the roost in terms of having the economic dominance it had decades ago, and I think this will have to be learned the hard way in terms of and economic (and thus military) collapse of some sort at some point.
Education is only part of the problem... (Score:5, Interesting)
What disappoints me about the US is its screwed up immigration policy. I am University educated and hold a degree in technology. Classically what the US would like. I once tried to immigrate, but learned that all I could get is an H1B. The H1B would allow me in the US while I might get a greencard. I looked at that and said no way as I would like to build a life.
Then I read Business Week and read the article, "Aliens: A little less alientated". Essentially it talks about how illegal aliens can get bank accounts, driver's licenses, mortgages, etc. I just read that and shook my head. I am not shaking my head at the aliens, but the fact that the aliens get so many rights. On the one hand I want to do things by the book and become part of society. Then I read the way to do it is become an illegal alien in the US. IT JUST DOES MAKE SENSE...
Re:Military Spending (Score:5, Interesting)
Psychology has two main branches - clinincal and cognitive. Most people do clinical (counselling), and yes, that's often a joke. Cognitive (which is a very small field) is a pure science. I'm going to get my doctorate in it, and while I know that most people don't know the field exists, I try to correct them when possible. Cog psych uses physics, neuroscience, computer science, biology, engineering, chemistry, etc. to understand the functioning of the brain. I've spent the last three months working on a single set of stimuli for a reading experiment (eye-movement tracking) - we take our science seriously.
Re:Blame Public Education (not funding) (Score:5, Interesting)
Is this actually true? I'm from the UK, and there is a stereotype of the American geek as small, weak, beaten up, no girlfriend etc, but I've wondered if this is accurate.
In the UK, (at least, in my highly subjective experience) this doesn't happen. I'm really geeky, and am recognised as such, but I've still got a lot of friends/girlfriends/social life, and I, nor any of my friends get "beaten up" or teased for being intelligent/liking science/computers etc.
Maybe it's a cutural thing?
An opinion from Germany (Score:5, Interesting)
Personally I do know at least one person that won't be allowed to study in the US anymore. She is listed in one of those mysterious lists and as a consequence isn't allowed to study in the US anymore. She can't figure out how and for what reason she came into that list. Perhaps she knows the wrong people like some of my friends and
The fault is the lack of work ethic in Americans. (Score:5, Interesting)
The reason for that is that parents don't teach a work ethic. School is "uncool", and work sucks.
In the short term, raising standards would create more delinquents and criminals. If we did introduce standards it would take more than a few generations to undo the damage and bring the passing rates back up.
Many students do poorly in school due to lack of work ethic in their parents. Many students, such as myself, do poorly in school, because school really sucks, due to the lack of work ethic in other students. (I did great in college.)
Many teachers see this and feel like it would be futile to try to fight the status quo.
Re:Post 9/11 syndrome? (Score:4, Interesting)
I don't think this is because they are "smarter", but more because they have more to loose, you either "make it, or break it".
And I can perfectly understand why some foreign students are going elsewhere, if you are coming from a (often poor and underdeveloped) country with a history of oppression, going to USA just so they can treat you as a criminal by taking fingerprints looks less attractive.
Dominance of military research (Score:5, Interesting)
IMHO what has changed recently is that military research sponsors (notably DARPA) now call for very short-term turnaround in research results. Typically they like to see substantial results from a project in six months now. This means that there are new difficulties for using DARPA funding for basic research.
At the same time that military funding has been emphasizing short-term versus long term research, industrial research labs, and general industrial support for research, have collapsed. Essentially, corporate funders have been deterred by examples like Xerox PARC, Bell Labs, and IBM labs. They don't believe that corporate research generates results for the funding enterprise. This suggests that research must be funded as a social good, like highways, etc.
Unfortunately, military and enterprise funding for research has gone away at precisely a time when ideological sympathy for funding social goods through taxation is at an all-time low. And, of course, the federal budget is squeezed between tax cuts, recession, and the war effort. On the up-side, we don't have to balance the budget any more...
Answer= HOME SCHOOLING (Score:0, Interesting)
Re:Don't worry, Britain's following your lead. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:It's all about cultural values (Score:2, Interesting)
Yes, it's the schools (Score:5, Interesting)
Case-in-point: Our single most important indicator of student ability, the S.A.T., is administered by a unabashedly profit-driven agency, the College Board. The Board has proposed a major revision to the test beginning in 2005 [collegeboard.com] which will raise the total points possible to 2400 by tacking on an essay and a grammar section, while eliminating analogies (the closest thing to a real 'logic' quiz on the verbal section) and quantitative comparisons. The claim is that this shift is designed to (*cough* increase fees *cough*) better address learned knowledge of students, rather than raw ability (the test was initially intended to be sort of a IQ test you could prepare for).
So what are we saying to kids? 2/3 of the MOST important indicator of student ability tests language (and just white america's OWN language!)? 2/3 of your time as a student should be devoted to learning how to read and write in english? Is it really that hard, or important, to test students on the ENGLISH language as a primary indicator of their potential? The fact is this: schools are increasingly prone to test what they know students are good at, and what better way to soften up scores than add an entire section which, by nature, must be graded on complete subjectivity? Schools *know* they cannot teach math/science well, perhaps due to students' reluctance to embrace the subject, perhaps due to the pathetically low salaries and disrespect the average american pays to primary school teachers...so they just test what students are good at, and do it in a way that is so fluid that they can literally raise the scores of a nation with this "essay dial" whenever they need to answer to the neo-conservatives and the bitching liberals.
Re:Its easy (Score:3, Interesting)
I think first and foremost, the value of education is not really understood by children, nor many of their parents who might not have good education in the first place. Second, it's not just standards the schools set on students in what they learn, it's the expectations the students must have themselves. Very few from my high school went on to college and I don't think many believed they could every make it so they never tried. This and expectations also goes hand in hand with role models. My father got a PhD and my mother got her masters. I expected out of myself to get a PhD (I'm currently working on my masters), while many students were just proud to graduate high school.
In line with what I said earlier, students have to believe it'll make a difference. People are short-sighted to begin with, and many people's ability to reason are flawed, so you can't expect kids to be the brightest on seeing long-term effects. That's why it has to be instilled as a core-belief, a value, from a young age that learning (not can) WILL make a difference. Yes, many students have the ability to reason by high school, but if many of the kids weren't trying hard or learning by the time they get there, it's really hard to make up some of that knowledge (especially since math is so critical for the sciences and it only builds upon itself). It's also hard to learn how to learn (learning in academics is obviously different from learning in sports, music, etc. there are nuances you have to pick up) and if they haven't learned some of those skills, it can get very frustrating.
Which leads to another problem. People give up too easily. People marry fast and devorce fast. They want instant gratification. You have lotteries everywhere and people don't want to work hard to reach success, they want it easily or want to complain about not having it.
There are a lot of societal/cultural issues and I don't know who or what organization is supposed to address them. Too many corporations think short-term that they can't see how they're hurting themselves by creating such "consumers".
A friend from Ukraine remarked to me about how she found the US system scary. She said that when she was young, she completely believed in the communist teachings. And while there was corruption and so forth, the government had a plan and many of the masses believed it and they worked toward it. Here in the US, it's aimless. Corporations use money to help themselves and you don't know how it's going to go.
However, in Japan, you also have marketing and advertising that have created mass consumers as well. Are the effects on their education of their young only to be seen later, or have the traditional values held firm?
I wish more studies would be done on this, and the media itself would present this more as a problem. If the US is losing its dominance because other countries had nowhere to go but up, then that's great news overall really. However, one would suspect that there are many other issues at lie and politicians only seem to say they'll do something but do nothing but token gestures.
Creationism (Score:1, Interesting)
Blame Public Parents (Score:5, Interesting)
The single, largest factor is the child's immediate social group. Typically starting with parents, branching out to siblings, then to cousins & friends. If this social group puts no value on an education, does not read, is not curious - then the child is almost guaranteed not to develop much intellectually. Oh sure, there are exceptions, but just that.
And the parents can almost completely compensate for a poor school system if they want, here's how:
1. restrict all non-productive distractions. This includes television, gameboys, and computer games. In my household there is ZERO broadcast television, ZERO non-public radio, ZERO gameboys, and about 2-4 hours of computer games a week. Some folks think this is hard it isn't - you especially realize this when you find that your children never beg for toys around christmas time - they just don't see the commercials.
2. read stories to your children every day. There's a wealth of great children's literature, and I have yet to find a pack of boys that could resist for a moment a reading of Kipling's Rikki-Tikki-Tavi. Once the television is off, once you start reading the good stuff, and there butts will be solidly planted. You can give them paper & pencils to draw with as well. BTW, I'd consider the fun authors to read: Roald Dahl, Kipling, EB White, Grahame, Mary Norton, Sid Fleischman, Elenor Estes, Joan Aiken, Louis Sachar, Walter Brooks, etc. Oh yeah, and if you've waited until your kids are 15 to start this it might not work. Sometimes it does, sometimes it's too late.
3. Provide them books as gifts
4. Fill the house with books
5. Spend time with them at the library every week
6. Help the children find interesting ways to approach homework
7. Encourage good grades (with allowances tied to grades, etc)
8. Pursue your imagination with them: just do things that are fun and interesting that they can learn from: - bulid a trebuchet - travel to a foreign country - every night read a poem - join a story-telling group - just use your imagination I've got two boys that are in the top of their class in a pretty good school system. We never pushed them - we simply read to them. That's all it took. Once their imaginations were engages the rest happened all of its own.
The single biggest reason that most children leave school with a poor education - is probably that their parents assumed that they could simply "out-source" the responsibility of education to an institution. I suppose this is a recursion problem isn't it?
As an exhcange student (Score:2, Interesting)
I went to the 2nd biggest HS in Sweden, and they had a practical section and the more academic section. Meaning everyone took certain courses, but outside of those you either learned a trade or did more history, econ, etc. Perhaps it was because I didn't fully understand all the social intricacies, but both sets of students seemed to mix well, and there didn't seem to be any tension between the students. Compare that with America where those that learn a trade are typically looked down upon by the college bound students.
Furthermore, Sweden has high standards, but they don't seem to control the student's lives like in Japan. Having not attended university in either country, from what I hear it's the opposite of America. In the U.S., if you've got the average
So really, no system is perfect, and money isn't the answer no matter where you are.
Re:Blame Public Education (not funding) (Score:5, Interesting)
Recently, right here on Slashdot, we had a lot of discussion about the 35 hour work week. I don't remember how it came about, or what the main topic was, but I got into a lengthy discussion about how I abhorred the very idea - if I wanted to work hard to get ahead, and sometimes that means working more than 40 hours (with no extra compensation, just the desire to do the best job I can), then please let me do so. We don't need the government restricting how many hours I can work.
I was actually met with resistence. A lot of people don't want to get ahead. They want to get by, and if they can do it at 35 hours a week, then they'd be happy if the government stepped in and required that employers cannot have people working more than 35 hours. Meaning that it's not optional. The government has already decided that 40 hours defines the workweek, and anything more is overtime... now some people want a maximum number of hours allowed to be set.
I don't know where everyone else works, but people where I work do plenty of overtime (mostly compensated, I'm the only one in my department on salary). They don't do it just for the money, they do it because we have drop-dead deadlines and they need to finish things, but what amazes me is, even after a long day and the possibility of overtime, they will nit-pick about things that most other people wouldn't notice and they spend time fixing every little problem they possibly can.
I know it's probably the exception to the rule, but I wanted to point out the contrast that you can see... we're becomming the nation that shuns hard work and belittles those that work hard as "tools."
Re:Blame Public Education (not funding) (Score:5, Interesting)
Like all stereotypes, this has an element of truth. In this case, it's a large element of truth. I'll answer each element in turn:
1) American geeks tend to be smaller and non-violent (I'm 5'8" and 170 pounds, somewhere around "average" to "small"), and tend towards software development because I'm not particularly drawn to physically demanding activities. This in itself is a relative distinction because an overwhelming number of American males in my age group are "large" due to all the huge amounts of extra fat they carry.
2) When I was growing up in the public school system, I was teased, taunted, picked on, and generally made to be a borderline social outcast because I didn't play sports (which is extremely boring stuff). I tended towards intellectual activities, something which was highly frowned upon by my peers in the U.S. I ended up learning Okinawan Kempo just for the psychological terror it inflicted upon the school bullies. A short demonstration as part of a required class presentation (subject matter was at the student's discretion) was the key to freeing me from the "targets" list.
3) Not having a girlfriend is hit and miss, as it is in most walks of life in America. Being the brunt of cruelty does a lot to damage one's self-respect, and therefore one's ability to interact with other people and with the opposite sex. Not being a part of the mainstream opens one up to this type of cruelty in America. There is also the matter of a small pool of desirable and available women, part of another very true American stereotype: more Americans than not, of both sexes, are grotesquely fat.
So yes, it's largely a cultural issue. America has turned into a cesspool of worker bees happy to pull in a small weekly paycheck in exchange for not having to stress their brains too hard.
Re:Blame Public Education (not funding) (Score:5, Interesting)
There is also an increase in laziness in the US. Kids today don't want to work hard for anything. Just take the easy road. I know because they are my friends. They think I am nuts for reading and working hard at things.
We send our kids to school expecting the schools to overcome our culture. Our culture is lazy. Our culture values television, movies, and sports over intelligence. Parents inadvertently raise their kids to be lazy and to have no interest in learning. Parents don't think smart is cool - they think beauty or athleticism is cool. That passes right on to their kids.
I just finished reading The Pleasure of Finding Things Out (a collection of various things Feynman said). When he was a kid, his father used to teach him to learn by teaching him to question everything. Instead of just saying "that bird is a robin", he would ask what makes that bird different that the other birds. They would then observe the bird's behavior and try to deduce reasons for what it was doing.
Example: in college engineering 4 of the top 5 students were foreign. Either Arabic or Asian.
These are cultures that value hard work and discipline. Sure, you can make the stereotype that Asians are smarter. It's not likely that they are genetically smarter. It's much more likely that they are raised with different values.
We need to start embracing responsibility and discipline. We need to start valuing hard work over luck. There is much reward in working hard and accomplishng great things. Everyone is all about the almighty dollar and not about accomplishment.
Re:Education is only part of the problem... (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm just very lucky that my parents lived dirt poor and worked long hours to save money for my education. And though I've lived here for almost 20 years, I'll probably be leaving and doing my PhD in another country.
For those that are wondering, I came here on a J-2 visa (which has requirements on going back to your home country and so forth). If I had come illegally, I'd have many less legal issues. There are many well-meaning laws that have many unintended consequences...
Misleading (Score:4, Interesting)
The USA may be losing its dominance as far as "science" goes - i.e. if you take every scientific discipline as equal in utility and then delineate nations' scientific populations without prejudice, it is. But add the weight of "useful" - as in, has produced tangible benefits to humans - and the USA is still mightily dominant, with no competitor in sight.
A significant number of great advances in science and medicine have been incidental to military research; that's a fact. The entirety of the materials comprising your PC? All of it is a result of military research in some age or another. It's a sad fact, but according to history, humans only really come up with revolutionary technology when they need it to commit war. Successful, peaceful civilizations always have stagnated at a technological plateau, until either a raiding party or a trade route came their way.
Re:Blame Public Parents (Score:1, Interesting)
My wifes neice is 6 or 7 and has no idea that she can pass time by reading books rather than watching TV
I feel sorry fopr people who have no idea that reading books is an alternative to TV etc.
Re:Blame Public Education (not funding) (Score:4, Interesting)
It depends on the mix of income backgrounds. You hear of kids committing suicide because they were bullied for being academically successful in the small town ("townie") schools, where the career path for the majority of students is to go on the "social" and do casual labour. That doesn't happen in the exclusive or dominantly middle class schools, where the ethos is to prepare everyone for university.
It's more of a financial thing.
Re:DoD Funds good for a lot of things (Score:4, Interesting)
Indeed. Currently I work as an R+D engineer. Slightly over half of my work is on government sponsored research, primarily DoD. Most of the research they sponsor isn't in weapons, but in systems support and soldier support.
As an example, projects on which I am currently working or recently worked include:
The great thing is, all of these have use in non-military settings (and in fact, probably have more non-military applications than military ones). Moreover, to get most of these grants you have to show non-military commercialization potential.
It's true (Score:5, Interesting)
My last year of college (jan 03-dec 03) I did a social experiment. When I talked with new people I expressed my interests as being motorcycles, mountain biking, that I was a Business Management student (I am), etc, but I never mentioned computers.
Not only did girls stop asking me to fix their computers all of the time, I started getting laid.
Military Research... (Score:2, Interesting)
Microwaves being a great example, so I think that point is nothing more than an ignorant politically motivated statement.
I believe the K-12 issue is much more of a reason. But beyond that, I think our extremely binding IP Rights/Lawsuits situation is the single most reason to blame for our decline.
When you have patents like "The use of alphabetic characters on top of buttons..." and then lawsuits for any device that uses buttons with letters on them. You have no need to even wonder why technology and advancement is being stymied in the U.S.
- theSaj
several reasons (Score:4, Interesting)
This book was written by Senior Policy Advisor in the Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI), U.S. Department of Education, during the first Reagan Administration, where she first blew the whistle on a major technology initiative which would control curriculum in America's classrooms. [deliberate...ngdown.com]
This "dumbing down" was done on purpose, and she has the paper trail to prove it. hard to go forward as effectively in research when the defaultposition is to brainwash the kids into being corporate moo slave consumers and statists instead of just a quality education.
Then look at the trends in finance where we developed the technique of corporate raiding [google.com], junk bonds [google.com], hedge funds and derivatives [google.com], and lying at top levels of the economy as a proper business model [google.com], and you can see that the get rich quick, something for nothing attitude has become more important than actually researching and producing products and services as the top priority for the nations "business community". There's no way around it, long term research won't equate a "postive cash flow" in this quarters statements, so they abandoned it. When eventually it lead to a severe decline in profits (as it was bound to), they switched to outsourcing what they could, in sourcing cheaper labor for that which couldn't be outsourced, and bribing politicians more to keep laws passed that would maintain short term profits over longer term profitability and stability.
Now look at something else, back to the children, we've also seen the most curious phenomenon of the forced drugging of children in the schools [google.com], to go along with the deliberate brainwashing and dumbing down. Been going on a long time now, now it's quite normal, but it was simply unheard of just a few decades ago, it's totally new, and completely wrong. I think it's funny as all get out, I can drive into town and go by an elementary school, outside they have a DARE sign, when inside 1/4to 1/3 of the students are drug addicts on purpose. The irony is delicious but disturbing, because few of the parents and even fewer of the JBT "drug warriors" can see it.
And my pet peeve, the thoroughly ridiculous emphasis on schools being the farm teams for the major professional sports leagues, and addicting generation after generation of people into their complete scam profits machine. And it's not just the schools, look at any local news broadcast in the evening, 1/3 of the total non commercial time is devoted to this "bread and circuses" to keep up the addiction. How much of that news time do you ever see any reference to the hard sciences, or anything actually intellectual compared to the scores for the "big games"?
We lost it culturally on purpose, it's not good enough to be our own smart workers anymore, we need managers, marketers, entertainers, middle man skimmers and gamblers, and most importantly, mercenaries-but not deep thinkers or actual productive workers. Our foreign policy now, both civilian and military, is based on L
Having recently been in school... (Score:4, Interesting)
Who ever said that schools are funded enough is living on a different planet. In Maine, and to my knowledge most other states, High School teachers make less money than a Manager who works for McDonalds; why is that? If you want kids to take school seriously, you better damn well have teachers who can answer their questions (e.g. we should be hireing Masters for our teachers not Bachlors) and we need to re-think the way we teach. In most schools, we teach democracy but preech dictatorship. The school staff is constantly trying to control the students forcing them to rebel, forcing the teachers to tighten thire grip-- it's a downward spiral.
All too often brilliant kids "slip through the cracks" because the classes are only taught to tailor to a single style of learning. For athletic students, it's not uncommon that their "coach" talks to the teacher and lest them slip by classes... creating one click, then you have the kids who are bored with the material (not fast enough) another click (note these kids often do bad because they simply dont bother) then you have the "go with the flow" kids who do everything their told and are disliked by the other groups because they're selling their souls to satan...err the school board.
I could go on for hours listing problems with todays school system but instead I'm going to assume that you (the reader) are an inteligent being (to a certain extent, granted you probably did attend american schools...)and throw out some ideas on how to fix things:
Eliminate "Grades" as in Kindergarden, Freshmen, Senior... etc. This is a stupid concept. Why should we hold back a student from learning higher level Mathmatics because he/she is not so good at English or History? Let each subject have it's own level system and let the student advance at his/her own pace. E.g. Mathmatics level 5, English level 3, History level 8, etc. Eliminate the grouping of age with subject matter. Do this, and you will find that peer presure of not wanting to at a low level will start to make kids WANT to learn.
Let the students decide what they want to learn. The student should have an assigned Mentor (each mentor should have a limit of 10 or so students at once) which they can talk to for guidence and information. It is up to them to take the initaive to choose the course they want, choose the professor they want, and do what the professor requires for them to advance. Teaching style should be a pleathera of differnt styles with focus on individual attention if needed. E.g. secudled lectures (not too often, but long enough to get things done, like 3 hours), Labs, Trips, Recomended Reading/Viewing, etc. The student should be able to get everything he/she needs out of the text book; everything else is to help if needed. One-on-one meetings with the professor during office hours are recomended. It is up to the professor to determine weather the student is ready to advance or not, be it by interview style orally, by writen exam, or by project. None of the actual tests will go into file, instead (for quality assurance) a writen (noterised, and signed) report/certificate will be writen up (each unique, no standard form) giving a detailed review of what the student knows and that he/she has met the level requiements... Checks will be done on professors at the higher levels (if the professor teaching the next level of the subject determines that the student is not ready they must file a report on the previous professor, so many infractions and the professor risks loss of license and job)
This will teach american students that:
THEY need to take inititave (nothing will be given to them)
They need to WORK for what they want
That they ARE good at something (e.g. subject that they excell at)
And through the process, have a better idea of what they want to do in life.
Of course, this is just fragments of a plan of mine... most are against it because it requires that children be remov
Re:Blame Public Education (not funding) (Score:4, Interesting)
I don't know that the whole argument of scientific leadership really works as well in these times, upon reflection. If half of a major US firm's workforce is based in India, is that an American science leader, or an Indian one? If an American company is really just a shell for a European corporation, who gets the "credit"? Half the people I know in the tech industry these days work for companies outside the country they live in, but I'm not sure how they'd be counted.
I'd say the days of the US dominance in science is over, only because it's getting harder to pin down the criteria for counting.
Re:Poor public education? (Score:3, Interesting)
Many of my teachers were just plain ignorant.
I remember one day being told, for example, that opposite angles formed by two intersecting lines aren't necessary equal. As proof, I was asked to go to the black board and measure two such angles with a giant protractor. To my surprise, the angles were different. I pointed out that two intersecting arcs had been drawn rather than lines, and this affected the measurement. She then said, "lines ain't got to be straight".
In another class we were asked to bring in food labels so were could see what those evil corporations were putting in our food.
The teacher complained, "look at all these chemicals they're putting in your food!". There's riboflavin and niacin and citric acid! She didn't know these were vitamins. She thought those evil corps were poisoning everyone.
Re:Blame Public Education (not funding) (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Blame Public Education (not funding) (Score:5, Interesting)
Those are very intresting ideas. Most of which I agree with.
I would like to make a few observations I have made working in various countries.
Most people do like to go home at 5:30pm. Regardless of the country. In the Uk, I never saw people working late, even in the tech culture. I worked in a building with 3 other software companies, and i was actually surprised at the laxness and lack of REALLY long hours people tended to put in compared to what I was used to on the west coast.
Lots of western european countries have laws in place to protect smaller companies, such as retail stores. Try going shopping for a TV on a sunday afternoon in even a city like Zurich. in 2000, it was not really that possible. AFIK it's still the same in Germany.
We have 5 software engineers working for me on a project we are doing. This is the 3rd project we have taken (major) and the second company the guys have worked at together. They have no problems working weekends, nights mornings, whatever.
IMHO the hardest working people I have ever met are eastern europeans. Of course, keep this in mind, i have only worked with a few dozen in Bucharest Romania, Ukrain and Poland. (After doing offshore dev teams for almost 6 years, you stick with what you know). These guys run circles around most american or european groups I have worked with. They code because they are hungry and we pay them -very- well (pretty much a western salary), we don't treat them like cheap labor. I guess if i was working for the equivilant of 200k dollars per year, I would be working my ass off too.
Anyway, the point of what i am saying. Don't discredit or generalize a generation as a whole. I hear my friends in europe saying the same thing about the younger generations that live there. I have been saying the same thing about my 17 year old sister. Imagine what your grandparents where saying about the people growing up in the 70s.
There will always be hard working people that learn to capitalize on their situations and environment. They will learn to take advantage of their skills, and domiinate their areas of influence. I don't think history has disproven that only 3-5% of the population will succeede in that way. I doubt that much will change as time goes on, and there will always be people that are splashed with a cold blast of reality and rethink what their goals are.
As for brain drain out of the United States. i believe this if it's visa workers going home, but not americans. I believe that most that leave will be back before long. I actually, don't believe for a moment that a lot of people are leaving the country for jobs off shore. Having been working in europe as an american for about 5-6 years, it's hell. It's only gotten worst since 9/11 and the generalizations that people abroad make about americans in general.
I am sure glad to be home.
Re:Blame Public Education (not funding) (Score:3, Interesting)
"Because daddy doesn't want to be on his deathbed and regret that he didn't spend more time at the office."
Re:Blame Public Education (not funding) (Score:5, Interesting)
Regarding national dominance, given the globalization of the market place it's hard to pin down a particular nationality on any of the large players anymore. In particular in the high-tech field you get ingredients from all over the place. If you look at high-profile products like airplanes and cars, they're a standardized grab bag of components from all over the world. Even traditionally national brands don't really indicate country of origin anymore. If you buy Siemens or Bosch components in the US, they were most likely manufactured in the US, using components designed in Europe by engineers educated in the US--or vice versa, who knows.
The USA has "too much overhead". (Score:3, Interesting)
I made a post previously [slashdot.org] about this, but got moderated as a troll (not without reason), but the replies only went to prove my point rather than refute it.
Americans in general have unjustified pride and arrogance based on past performance when it comes to technical expertise and quality in production. This is becoming less and less of a truth and more of a memory, but the arrogance lives on.
Moderating this down or arguing the point is like sticking your head in the sand. The truth is American education is less than adequately focused on education and more on entertainment/sport/politics. I know some pretty cool Americans, but most of them have fled the States. (as the article suggested)
Wake up people... if your economy stutters, small 3rd world countries usually die. The world (wether we like it or not) depends on the stability of the US$.
Re:Blame Public Education (not funding) (Score:2, Interesting)
Another UK/US cultural difference there, then. I'm 5'8" as well, but I weigh 140 pounds, and would also consider myself 'average to small' build.
Re:Answer= HOME SCHOOLING (Score:2, Interesting)
What IS the answer is strict federal controls on education. Let's face it, putting education in the hands of local officials may have worked 30 or 40 years ago, but things have changed since then.
Re:Blame Public Education (not funding) (Score:3, Interesting)
The smart kids go teased and beat up. Who wants that.
Well, the obvious answer is that the less intelligent students have learned at home that validation comes from putting other people down. Not a sustainable model for a society, IMHO.
But this brings up a good point.
If society as a whole wanted to improve its overall standard of living as much as possible it would recognize that the most intelligent 5% of the population has given them 50% of the ideas that have promoted progress overall. And it would try to take as much advantage of this as possible.
A better learning environment and one which is not needlessly slowed down for the benefit of the average and below average students could be provided to those students who would be capable of achieving a lot more.
Set up special schools and programs to make the most of the best students. (I'm probably not the only nerd who was able to kick back and relax, who was bored to tears seeing repetitive math education in elementary and middle school.)
Once those students get out into the working world, they'll contribute back manifold discoveries, inventions and ideas. What we're doing now is morally equivalent to the Cultural Revolution in China, where an entire generation of intellectuals was lost as many of them were put in prison or forced to work on farms to gain a proper appreciation of the working class. You see the same distrust of intellectuals everywhere. "Damn college kid thinks he's smarter `n everyone!" Yes, I'm smarter than a lot of people - that doesn't make me a better or superior person. Just smarter.
Meanwhile, increase the investment in education for all the other students, too! Increase investment in Head Start, day care for working mothers, school nutrition programs, etc.
Finally, make education tuition free. Get rid of fees and make the only requirement for entrance and continuing education be sufficient academic performance.
Re:Blame Public Education (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm a pretty smart guy & didn't have any trouble in school until I got into graduate school. Then it became a challenge. The only place I had to work my ass off before then was on the football field or the track.
There is some value in going out to practice & working your hind-end off for 3 or 4 hours. Sure it doesn't take intelligence, but it builds character & work ethic, which is just what many people in this post have been saying the U.S. is lacking.
Now, I know people will say that jocks are jerks & pick on the smart kids. But hey, if the coaches (just like teachers) would get their head out of their butt & put a stop to this (like mine did) then there wouldn't be a problem. In fact, of our top 10 high school students, 7 of us were part of both the state champion football & state champion track teams. And you know what, we are all now sucessful & hard-working.
As far as sports being limited to a few people, this is just because schools are so darn big now. A school of 200 is able to involve a lot more kids in sports than a school of 2000. There's only so many spots on each team that can get filled.
So I know most people here think sports are useless because they aren't interested, but many of us are. I learned many lessons & built a lot of character in sports. It isn't that bad folks.
Re:Poor public education? (Score:1, Interesting)
The reason is a simple one (Score:3, Interesting)
Quality of educators. It's a no-brainer. Anyone who is proficient in science or math is not going to waste their time teaching at the elementary or high school level.
Additionally, (and this is true of education in general), it used to be that many professions were closed to women, but teaching wasn't. Consequently, our best and brightest women used to be school teachers. This is no longer true. The brightest women, just like the men, are going into other fields.
Misdistribution of resources (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Blame Public Education (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:The key paragraph, IMO (Score:3, Interesting)
emm, open your eyes dude and take a look around...
Re:Science is hard (Score:3, Interesting)
When I was in high school, in the 1970s, an engineer came by in a three piece suit and told us if we wanted to be engineers, we needed to position ourselves for the transition to management, or lose our jobs to the next wave of cheap new grads.
Re:Blame Public Education (not funding) (Score:3, Interesting)
At other times people are idle enough to do continuing education (or simply R&D) while waiting for the next project. It wouldn't make sense to double our staff for those peak times, only to have twice as many people idle at other times.
Moreover, while we do hire freelancers occasionally, a lot of projects require the core people working on them. Just read the Mythical Man Month by Brooks, you can't take a job that someone can do in 80 hours and expect to do it in 40 with two people. Returns diminish with each added person.
To make my case clear, I work in television production. So I work a lot of overtime when the director of a live show decides he wants some new graphics for TONIGHTS show. Hiring another programmer (I do the interfaces) would be pointless. The people I work with are artists (3D and otherwise). Our problem isn't that we don't have enough animators, it's that customers come to us at the last minute and expect work we budgetted 4 weeks for to be done in 2 or 3 (in other words, they missed the deadline for bringing us the material to work with, or reviewing and certifying our work). Now that stuff has to be on-air on a certain date. If we say "no", they go somewhere else from now on. That doesn't help the animators or me.
Now, in other parts of our studio, people love the job because of overtime. There's not really a whole lot you can do when a live sporting event runs long. Our crew call for a POST game show is four hours BEFORE the start of the game. People aren't running around working frantically, they're usually getting free meals, reading books, surfing the web, we even have a half-court outside for people to play basketball, all for the hour or so that they will work at the end of the day, and sometimes they do some preproduction (maybe another hour worth of work). You can't hire more people to avoid that.
So you are showing an exteme position - I hardly "give up my life" because I work overtime. I have two kids that I spend a great deal of time with (according to statistics I've heard, I spend at least 5 times more time with my kids than most dads). In fact, I'd say that it's BECAUSE of my hard work that I get to do things like leave early on Tuesdays and Thursdays to watch my son in his martial arts class. How many dads do that? I'm typically the only father there. So it's quite a load of BS that working hard, and working overtime, necessarily means I'm missing out on anything.
If you want to just "get by", then that's fine, just don't drag me down with you, and don't ask the government (like they did in France) to enforce some maximum work hours on me. You live your life how you want to, let me live my life how I want to.
Money is the Problem (Score:3, Interesting)
What do I propose? The only way to get more people interested here is to increase funding. Make science an important part of government funding. Give students incentives to go to graduate school. Pay professors a good salary. Then I think more people would be interested in research.
Mod parent up, please. (Score:2, Interesting)
We're used to thinking of that state of affairs as though it will last forever, as though it were personally handed to us on a silver platter by God Himself. But it doesn't work that way.
Truer words were never written. The real cause of the rot is not the NEA, the public system, the liberals, or the conservatives. The blame lies with all of us.
I know, that sounds like a cop-out, like blaming "society" for the actions of convicted murderer. But, truth be told, we've had it so good for so long that we've come to expect the status quo. And we're not willing to invest in its maintenance, let alone its improvement.
How bad is it? Take taxation as just one example. Now, like it or not, facilities for the common good need funding. But the mantra "taxes bad" has been repeated so often in this country that many of us are not willing to pay even for the most basic services. Witness what happened in Alabama recently: The very conservative Christian Republican state governor proposed a referendum for a tax hike (how likely is that?). He pleaded for voter approval as the "Christian" thing to do. (And things are pretty bad down there. If you're involved in a road accident in a rural area, good luck: a state trooper, EMT, or other first responder might show up.. if at all.. in thirty minutes.) As you might have expected, the referendum was shot down in flames. Hey, "taxes bad", no matter what, right?
And that's just one example. You can trawl CNN or Fox or any other media source for examples of "sound bite" discussions and an utter lack of depth masquerading as intellectual thought.
In short, I think Americans have gotten lazier in one key respect: the ability to think critically. We're still hard working, but we've become so mentally lazy that it's impossible to discuss public policy in any meaningful way, let alone to Do The Right Things (tm), whatever those might be. Forget the emphasis on instant gratification and rampant consumerism; this is key respect in which our culture has failed us!
And we will get exactly what we deserve.
My family came here 150 years ago. Maybe I'll be the first one to emigrate if this continues..
Why should I care about math or science? (Score:3, Interesting)
I think about how my daughter is growing up; she always wants to see the back of the camera because she thinks she'll see the picture I just took of her immediately. Everywhere I look, we've developed a one-click or single button solution to the "problem" because we want it now Now NOW! And when it's all abstracted away, you really have no idea how it works, and because you're so used to it, you don't really care.
So I can see that our zeal for instant gratification, ease-of-use, and a rather arrogant demand that everything be, above all else, as simple as possible will lead more and more to think of math and science as "the hard stuff" that they are simply incapable of dealing with because it requires thought and concentration, with no "reward" being given at the end, and no understanding of how it affects their daily lives. It's like schools that teach latin with the presumption that if you know how languages are put together, you will learn the derivations easier. Most simply complain that latin isn't a good language to impress chicks with, and study something else instead.
This
doctoring (Score:5, Interesting)
If you want an efficient system, try fascism. Yes, it's more 'efficient' than anything at increasing production numbers, getting rid of those pesky weak and sick people, etc. But there's a reason why the vast majority of people on the planet do not want it: because we're willing to put up with a few lazy people free riding on benefits and a little bit of slacking to have a generally better quality of, and respect for human life.
Re:Blame Public Education (not funding) (Score:5, Interesting)
while i am pretty sure that is not all true, in the place where i grew up (Austria, Europe) none of that was an issue. at all. sure, there were people who didn't do well in sports, and people who were uncool (like myself in my later teens for not smoking or drinking or getting any girls) but in general, those people had their place and were never terrorized. we were all part of the group. we had jocks and nerds, but they would hang out together.
i am sure part of the reason is that the class system is very different: you get a group of 25+ kids, call that a class, and they stay together for 5 years or so, teachers come by to teach classes, and there is very limited choice in subjects. e.g. you spend all your time with the same people. and there are lots of social activities with those people.
i don't think that explains it though. UK has the same system as america...
Re:US politics / scientists' politics (Score:5, Interesting)
SciAm has been a political organization for many years now (is it fair to say their inception?). They're working in their own best interests on many issues, which largely "tilt left" in bent. Hence, the attack on the current administration. It has much to do with competing ideologies that threaten long-standing, but still far-from-proven, theories in the biological and environmental sciences, along with ethical issues which history tells us are often tragically considered ex post facto.
The best way to raise the hackles of any scientist is to challenge their intellectual endeavors on any level. Refute their theories, threaten their funding, refocus research (money) into other fields - any of these tactics will kindle their ire. SciAm is but one mouthpiece. UCS is but one other.
And let's not forget the most important fact of all: This is a presidential election year in the United States. That, my friends, says it all.
Stem Cell Research (Score:1, Interesting)
role models.. (Score:4, Interesting)
For me growing up, I read all the time.. got beat up for knowing how to read. (jealousy).. That just fed me to continue.
Now, what role models do the young men have? Nothing of any worth. The women (who are by far surpassing men in every American field now) have many many role models and a lot to look up to. I personally cannot think of a public role model who is successful and smart and not villified by the media (think Bill Gates).
All these young kids have nothing just ignorant rappers and other leeches on society that should never be role models because they are be "subversive" for money. Today, the guy in a high school who listens to classical or something non-violent would be considered "alter".
Anyway, they are all doing the same things, everywhere you look and it is sad. I suppose the world will always need trash guys and janitors, but having an entire generation of them is just plain sad.
Re:Argh... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Blame Public Education (not funding) (Score:3, Interesting)
I started HS in '79 and I'd agree with the fact that most of the popular crowd were also the brains though they definitely weren't "geeky". But the violence was there in spades and I think had started evolving from the violence my father spoke of in his high school.
We had one girl kill another with a butter knife in the school cafeteria for wearing jeans identical to the brand new pair she had on around 1980. I heard that the last knifing actually at the school (knifings happened all the time in the rural South outside of school,,, heck, we played "war" with real BB guns so a knife fight was a small step from enjoyable play) was between two boys in '76. Violence was considered on the decline actually, even with the death, which everyone viewed as an anomaly.
But, I see the death not as an anomaly, but as a result of declining violence. It seems that the vents have been removed in the current system and the result is that, when anger does boil over, its anger that has been suppressed for a long long time.
Re:US politics / scientists' politics (Score:5, Interesting)
It's not just SciAm that has observed this creeping Lysenkoism either -- see also the International Herald Tribune [iht.com], and that bastion of left-leaning reporting, the Washington Post [washingtonpost.com] (with the sub-head, "Changes Renew Criticism That the President Puts Politics Ahead of Science").
And by the way, do you consider any and all criticism of the President in an election year invalid by virtue of perceived politicking? Sometimes things are just wrong at any time.
Re:An informed opinion... (Score:2, Interesting)
I've had my share of living in Asian countries, and I can tell you, if anything, there's a general regard that anybody born after the 70s is dumb, soft and basically incapable of doing anything.
This situation is merely more prevalent in the US due to the less stringent cultural and social structures. An Asian student who just graduated will work to the death, because Asian culture instructs one to obey authorities. In the US, a student will most likely rebel just to "stick it to the man".
Also, consider that the Asian countries are roughly one step behind the US in terms of socioeconomic development, expect the yet-to-be-born generation as problematic as the current up-and-comers in the states.
No. (Score:3, Interesting)
Even years ago (this was back in the early 70's) religious schools didn't push their religion on you... at least the ones I went to didn't. I know because I was pretty much the only non-catholic kid at a catholic school.
However, as you probably already suspected, it wasn't totally a bed of roses, primarily due to the other kids. Nothing like being an outsider right from day 1... but they never forced me to sit through their religious classes, and they never forced me to sit through Mass. Instead, they allowed me to skip those classes. Unfortunately, when they were inevitably questioned about this by the other students, they told the students "he doesn't have to take this class... he's not catholic." (Yeah... great. Thanks a lot, Sister... thanks for singling me out even more.)
Even with the obvious downside, I'd still send my kids to a superior parochial school over a mediocre public one (and I'm still not catholic).
Intellectual Curiousity (Score:2, Interesting)
Creation science is both a cause and an effect of American intellectual decline. There are disturbing parallels between the rise of literalist Christianity in America and in Rome. In Rome, Christianity started as mysticism, mutated into a malignant populist movement suspicious of intelligence and learning, and ended up destroying the very knowledge needed to sustain the empire (the burning of the Great Library of Alexandria was but one of the atrocities committed.) Barbarism took the empire from within.
Someone should tell that chimp in the White House that the big military he likes to beat people with is entirely dependent of America being the first to discover things. You cannot be technologically superior if you don't have the science.
How about "Higher Education"? (Score:2, Interesting)
Unfortunately, today's universities and colleges seem to be more places of vocational training, rather than places to actually learn and be educated. Students go into college, and pick classes they think will best help them find a job, learn the skills they need. Quite frankly, I'm appalled by recent movements to abolish general requirement classes altogether, simply because they "waste time" and should be replaced by something "useful." Neither are students encouraged to explore. Individual department requirements for graduation are getting heavier and heavier, some coming to a point where grabbing a double-major in a four year span is almost impossible. My class was the last in my school's Economics department to graduate with almost no required knowledge of econometrics, and the basic requirements for that would take 16 credits. While I personally have been told that I don't measure up to what employers seek in an economics major ("No knowledge of econometrics? What were you doing with a policy concentration? Sorry, you're not quite what we're looking for."), in those 16 credits I've learned the entire grand history of the Roman Empire, complete with an impromptu Latin lesson, the origins and far reaching effects of myths in the world culture, and a fascinating look at juvenile psychology. I don't consider myself less fortunate in terms of job placement, since most of my friends with Comp-Sci or Finance majors spent almost as much time as I did trying to find employment (half a year).
I don't know if I'm just unique among my group of friends, but I was actually sad to graduate. Almost all the others I know couldn't wait to graduate and get away from books and papers forever. Does that say something about how high education has become in our modern society? After all, how can we expect a society to advance in the areas of pure science when the student interests are focused on "usefull stuff" that "helps me find a job"?
Re:Argh... (Score:2, Interesting)
Fuck `em I buy my shit on Ebay! (Used)
Re:Blame Public Education (Score:3, Interesting)
John Henry Gatto, the author, taught for 31 years in the NYC school system, was named teacher of the year and is a brilliant historian and scholar.
I am still working my way through this book (free online at http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/underground/toc1.ht m) and am amazed at how it all comes together.
Our system of factory education was originally created in Germany by the Prussians to totally regiment their culture. It was designed to do that. Read Gatto, by God, read the history of compulsory education and the educrats and and the scales will fall from your eyes. Find it at:
http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/underground/toc1.ht m
For a shorter piece, an essay that was published in Harpers in 2001, go to this link:
http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/hp/frames.htm
So why are students failing? They are supposed to. The built-in systemic goal of modern mas compulsory education is to create an unthinking, uneducated, obedient mass of socially constructed worker bees. It is not an accident. Why is copulsory government schooling mindless? It is intended to be mindless. Why do kids with any brain go crazy in the hothouse atmosphere of factory high schools? Because any right-thinking human being would go crazy! The problem isn't students not wanting to learn, but schools wanting to teach kids things that clearly do not serve students' best interests, but the interests of the Machine.
Regrettably, we have forgotten this, although the elitist theorists of education who set the system up were quite blunt about it back in 1850, 1880, 1900, 1920. They spoke of using government schooling to limit the curiosity and independence of children in order to better fit them their assigned industrial tasks.
If you want to understand the roots, the history, the development of the system, go read Gatto at
http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/underground/toc1.ht m.
Re: Naval Academy (Score:3, Interesting)
Also, I was a systems engineering major. I think 80+% of my class fell into type 1 (engineering) majors. So yes there were a few people skating by with political science or English, but that wasn't the majority by a long shot.
And finally, the Naval Academy's graduation rate is a lot higher than most other colleges in the U.S. So while I agree with some of the things you said about lack of American work ethic, I think the Naval Academy is not a particularly good example.
SEAL
Re:The US is already in decline... (Score:3, Interesting)
Another thing that caught my eye is the brain-drain at AT&T Labs. Starting around 2001 about half of the top research scientists have either been laid off or left on their own. The ones that left cited budget cuts and, more importantly, a shift in the time until their research has to result in profits. Research used to have a ten year window before it had to earn money, now that window has been cut to 18 months. I thought this might just be an AT&T Labs anomaly until I talked to a mid-level manager at Network Associates and found the exact same scenario. This tells me we are sacrificing the future for the very-near future. No one wants to fund any research anymore and the government isn't picking up the slack unless it has a military use (like putting missiles on satellites, YAH!). Managers cut spending by slashing long-term research, look like heroes, then leave before the negative repurcussions of not investing in the company's future hit.
This seems to be the case with the government as well. Here in California we had (and still have) a massive budget shortfall. So we booted our Governor out and elected Arnold Schwarzenegger. His first move was to role back a temporary tax that tripled car registration fees. Note that registration fees are much more expensive for upscale, new cars, so this was going to hit the upper-middle class hard. Also note that tuition fees for the University of California system went up BY $1000 DOLLARS (from just over 4k to over 5k - huge percentage increase)! The UC (and Cal State) system is the only chance a lot of lower-class kids have to go to a quality University because they are so affordable, less so now. Rather than keep the car tax, or add a provision for poor people to get off lighter, Arnie rolled back the car tax and kept the tuition hikes. He chose SUVs over education and everybody fucking cheered.
It's sad (Score:2, Interesting)
I love math and science, and through the eyes of a senior CE major public education did nothing to improve my learning potential or popularize the idea of science as an avenue for prosperity or fun.
-----
Re:Blame Public Education (not funding) (Score:1, Interesting)
I remember a scientist telling me about a mouse where, if you tweaked a gene, it would be born without a skeleton, but I guess as long as the other mice celebrated his diversity this was not a bad thing.
Same thing here in Romania (Score:2, Interesting)
Most things we wanted to do in school were not necesarily science but _useful_ Science was actually the cool stuff.
Now it's different. Things changed while I was in high-school and a lot in college - it's _all_ about money and a good job and nothing about learing for its own sake. The downside is that the shift turned our education system upside-down: I wouldn't count on an university graduate to know how to screw a lightbulb these days. Really.
Mandatory education (Score:5, Interesting)
By high school in India all the people that don't want to learn have dropped out. US schools are chock full of people that have no interest in learning and no ability to learn. The "average" student in an Indian english language high school is already the geek elite.
Re:100% corrrect! (Score:3, Interesting)
One other thing that a second job does is breed laziness towards managing expenses (as a part of managing the household).
1) Buying car instead of SUV: saves at least $1000/year on gas, insurance, and maintenance.
2) No kids in daycare: saves thousands of dollars per year.
3) Taking the time to optimize phone plans, weatherproof the home, etc.: an easy several hundred dollars a year.
4) Trimming down all the extra crap like too many cable TV channels, not buying video games at $50/pop, buying Legos instead of Fisher Price: hey, that's another few hundred dollars!
5) Taking the time to reorganize savings into interest-bearing accounts: Bam, another few hundred dollars!
Seriously, how long until the time spent not working adds up to be worth more than a miserable two-worker household? Not only that, the laundry might get done and you can be home to meet the plumber/take car to mechanic/take kid to doctor/etc. without taking vacation!
Re:Blame Public Parents (Score:3, Interesting)
A friend of mine in highschool had basically the environment that you describe -- raised Catholic, had a very close, loving, and spiritual family, no television in the house, and limited access to computer games. Everybody did a lot of reading, played games as a family on most weeknights, etc. He was a good student and a nice guy.
Then he went to college, and nearly died due to a previously unknown allergy to marijuana.
My point: once a child raised in such an environment is out on their own, they will still do whatever the hell it is they want. Reading E.B. White and Kipling is great; listening to NPR is commendable. But are they aware that there are people in the world that will try to manipulate, con, swindle, intimidate, or brainwash them? Do they know that there are people out there who will hate them simply for their beliefs, lifestyle, citizenship, or appearance, regardless of how nice, friendly, or smart they are? Do they understand that the world can be a rotten place? Have they had a chance to explore their sexuality, to question their faith?
If not, then once they hit the crucible that is college, then a lot of that may happen all at once. Since they are used to being smarter than their peers (at the top of their class) then they will assume, incorrectly, that they will get it right on the first try -- that they're smart enough not to overdose, become parents, etc. I've seen it happen more than once.
One Thing You Can Do (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't know if this is off-topic or if someone has mentioned something similar; I doubt anyone will even see this post at this point in the discussion, but I'm going to tell the story, anyway. This story relates one simple thing anybody doing activities with kids can do to encourage at least one kid to appreciate the value of math and science; with enough people doing it, maybe we can stem another article like this 20 years from now. Bear with me, I know how much the story sounds like a geeked-out after school special.
When I was a kid at summer camp they broke us down into teams for a day-long competition. Each event was designed to promote the usual values: faster, bigger, stronger, more aggressive. At the end of the day, our team was tied for first with one other team as we headed into the final event.
All the campers were standing in a grassy area next to the lake, surrounding the lifeguard tower. The guy on the tower asked each team to pick out their smartest member. Obviously, I got picked (mostly, I think, since I was the nerdiest looking ).
We stood in the center of a crowd of two hundred or so sweaty junior-high faces, all intently focused on us. The counselor would read a series of numbers and operations; our job was to follow the series in our heads. After the last number, the first contestant to give the closest answer to the actual value won the competetion.
In dead silence, the counselor started the competition. "30...plus 12...minus 17...times 2...plus 4...etc." It felt like my head would explode, but I followed as best I could, until the counselor said, "Done."
The silence was painful. I waited for a moment, typically unsure of myself, then said (in a meek, supremely wussy voice), "35." The counselor asked if the other contestants had their guesses. After one of the most excruciating 5-second periods of my life, they gave answers that were nowhere near mine (sending me into a panic).
The sadistic counselor waited a bit, then turned to me and said, "I'm sorry, your answer is....ABSOLUTELY CORRECT!"
The crowd went wild; not just my team, everybody. For the next day or two, I was a hero. An absolute fucking hero. Hot chicks congratulated me (they didn't offer to date me, but I took what I could get).
I'd like to say that it steered me into a career as a mathematician, but it didn't. I wish the feat itself had been more impressive (I'm sure most /.ers can solve 4th-order systems in their heads). It wasn't a big deal, but it did give me the idea that math is a beautiful thing in and of itself, and it did something else that was more important.
It showed every kid at that camp that being smart was valuable and that being smart had a place alongside being strong, fast, and aggressive.
Again, I know that's a cheesy little story that doesn't do much but make me look pathetic, but maybe the activity can help someone looking to inspire a kid or two.
The Dalai LLama
...I was cool for an afternoon once, I promise...
Focus has shifted (Score:3, Interesting)
It used to be that American companies were focused on producing more and better products. Now, the focus is exclusively on how to crank out more expensive versions of the same crap. Also, the notorious shortsightedness of American companies has only gotten worse since the stock market has been inflated to a ridiculous, unsustainable level [downside.com].
Case in point: Boeing [nwsource.com]. The Sonic Cruiser was something new and innovative - and was killed. The 7E7 is a more efficient, more polished version of the same thing they've been building for 20 or so years. After all, R&D costs money and you don't recoup those costs this quarter.
science and K-12 education (Score:3, Interesting)
1972-1985, I remember learning addition up to 3rd grade and multiplication and division up to grade 6. Although I was helping neighbors with multiplication in kindergarten. American History covered the revolution up to about the civil war every year, 1st through 12th grade. Never reached WW1. 8th grade introduced algebra, 9th geometry and chemistry, and gee I had to start learning things!
What would have happened if I'd been challenged all the way along, instead of coasting until 9th grade? My grade school tried, but I was just one of hundreds of students. High school had about a dozen kids at my level, and we had some special classes. College had hundreds, but they were cherrypicking from across the country. I don't see how grade school could have done much better unless they gave me my own tutor, or sent me to a different school.
Papers != Progress (Score:3, Interesting)
I remember scanning countless papers back in college and finding the majority to be lacking in useful information.
My belief is, papers are college student's tickets out of school and their status symbol (e.g., I've published 15 papers...hire me). The worst thing that can happen is that your paper is found to contain errors or is a repeat of another paper. The way to mitigate that risk is to make the papers very hard to understand or apply. Hence, you end up with a lot of impressive-looking but useless papers.
Re:Blame Public Education (not funding) (Score:5, Interesting)
The US has always had a tendency to be anti-intellectual. It once didn't matter much, as things were simple enough that most people could understand them and make the correct decision. Now absolutely nobody can, and those who can face this are abused by those who can't. We can't even hope for enclaves that aren't polluted, as the only such groups are 1) those who neither watch TV nor listen to the radios (possibly the newspapers also figure in here, but they are a much weaker influence) and 2) those who are impervious to being influenced, because they already felt that way.
The first group is divided into those who voluntarily isolate themselves from society and those who are coerced into isolation (e.g., children of Memmonites). Neither the first nor the second group make suitable leaders for a civilization. And so we are left with those whose personalities and view of the world are shaped by TV and other popular media. Which, examination quickly reveals, is a very poor model of actual reality.
Re:Blame Public Education (Score:2, Interesting)
So you'd like to know how sports build character. Well, let you give me my own personal experience & tell you how it related to my educational ones.
In sports (mostly track & football) I learned quite a bit about what it is to set difficult goals & work to achieve them. I learned that shortcuts do not work & laziness achieves nothing. I learned that being a good sport is more important than winning or losing. I also learned what it means to be both a follower (freshman) & a leader (senior). I took victories & defeats with both dignity & absurdity. I learned that being an asshole (basketball) simply makes you look bad & feel like an idiot. Basically, I took a lot of good memories & great lessons away from my sports experiences. Lessons I didn't get in the classroom.
Now, on to my educational experience. Here I also learned what it is to work hard. However, I also "learned" that shortcuts can be found & often exploited. I found it easy to get by with laziness. I got great grades but didn't have to work hard at all.
My basic point is this: For many people sports are a great way to get some experiences that translate into positive lessons. They're not for everybody, that's for sure. But they do build character (which the parents also should do) & it does build work ethic (not ethics, ethic). I agree that there is some bad stuff as well, but I think the majority is good.
As for your rant on fathers & their children. I guess you've had some bad experiences. My parents were nothing but supportive & didn't interfere at all. My friends had the same. Of course, there were bad parents but that merely pointed out to the rest of us what a real asshole those people are (read: life lesson) me. I guess I don't know what else to say on that. Parents can be idiots, that's for sure.
an american scentists's view from outside america (Score:1, Interesting)
I am an American; I got my PhD from a US computer science department about 8 years ago. For a variety of reasons, I ended up tasking an academic research job in Ireland.
I am generally not very impressed with European science funding models or the university systems. Individual European researchers: really fantastic; but governmental/societal support for science: generally a disaster.
But I will tell you in my particular case, the situation is quite fantastic. Ireland is quite different: the government is spending amount of huge amount of money on basic research; see www.sfi.ie details.
The bottom line is that my research funding possibilities are as food (if not better) than if I were in America. For example, I won a research grant that is [loosely] modelled on the NSF CAREER grant -- except that I got approximately twice as much money per year, for 5 years instead of 3. Furthermore, the money goes much farther: our overhead rate is 30% instead of 50%+ as is common at American universities. (Sorry to get into technical details here but academics reading this will understand the significance.)
For a variety of reasons -- mostly due to family connections etc -- it is likely that some point over the next five years, my family will return to America. Unlike all the stereotypes that you might hear, I can tell you that one of the things I worry about is how much harder I will need to work in America to maintain the same level of researech funding.
DoE Funding? (Score:2, Interesting)
After discussing this with a relative who works for the DoE, however, there is one gain to come of this...In a scramble to save money across cash-strapped states, much of New England is beginning to use free software licenses on much of the code they contract for online teacher registration programs, and the idea is spreading to other areas of the department.
Useless != good (Score:2, Interesting)
But the question that really interests me is, just what is "basic science"? The author seems to equate it with "useless science"--that is, neat stuff that we can't see a use for. I guess one might feel moved to give money for the discovery of neat useless stuff...as long as the money belongs to someone else. If it's your money, wouldn't you prefer to invest it in endeavors that have some reasonable chance of yielding useful results? I would.
The super-collider (remember the super-collider?) is an excellent case in point. Here you had some guys who wanted the public to invest billions in a huge facility that would provide employment to physicists who would use it to shoot subatomic particles at other subatomic particles at very huge velocities. The problem is that no one could articulate what useful results this endeavor would yield. Indeed, no one managed to articulate any conceivable gain from building this thing, except money in the pockets of physicists who would then write papers that were incomprehensible even to other physicists. I'm not saying there weren't good reasons to build the super-collider, just that if there were such reasons, no one managed to state them clearly. So what did we lose by not building it?
I guess I just don't see why we should subsidize something--especially something hugely expensive--just because some scientists think it's neat. Maybe I'm wrong...but can someone provide examples of massive government funding directed at research that had no practical end, but resulted in a major breakthrough? And tell me please, if a project results in a breakthrough, is it still "basic science"? --Oops, we made a mistake, this thing is useful, let's kill it!
Frankly, I think that this claim that we ought to support useless research is a pretty strange one, and I would like to see some argument for it.
Re:100% corrrect! (Score:4, Interesting)
There are two sides to that story. My wife and I both have science PhDs from one of the top-five research universities in the world, and the only cities where we could both find jobs commensurate with our degrees were Boston, LA and San Francisco. The median house price in Pasadena is $635,000 dollars, and it's higher in San Francisco. A newly-minted PhD in physics can expect around $70k. How the he!! are you supposed to afford a $600k house on one salary? Of couse, we could live out in the suburbs; in LA that's at least 50 miles.
Not all dual-income couples buy SUV's. But even a Prius is expensive. I drive a 10-year old Sentra and spend $150/month on gas, and another $90/month on road tolls.
It's nice for you to talk about priorities. But you've just admitted you gave up being a research engineer. Maybe that education was wasted on you? (actually, we need good high-school physics teachers, so good for you!)
My point (related to this topic) is that of course the U.S. is losing its scientific dominance when being a research scientist in this country ends up requiring the sacrificies it does. Specifically: salary (staying in academia was at least a factor of 3 cut compared to my other offers. Heck, the contractor doing my lawn makes $500/day - or he would've if I'd been that stupid.), flexibility (there are really only a very small number of places where you can find a science job, especially if your spouse is also a scientist - the "two-body problem"), family (it's very difficult to juggle having a family with working 10-12 hour days together with 2 hrs spent commuting. Not to mention getting daycare).
Getting back entirely on topic though; I'm not at all surprised that the U.S. science dominance is waning. I see it in my own field. We have never had a secondary-education system that produced enough sufficiently qualified students. For a long, long, time the U.S. has imported smart PhD's from all over the world, because they couldn't live as good a good life where they came from. Now that is beginning to change. Couple that with the recent spate of xenophobia (I know of several guys in my field who went home for vacations to places like China and Poland and either couldn't come back for months, or haven't been allowed back yet. You bet that sh$t like that is having an effect) and it is no surprise that we're losing speed. And then of course there is the area of bio-sciences, where the government is not only not supporting research, but actively outlawing it. Are you surprised that more progress in that area is being done in South Korea than here?
I have to laugh though. People talk about the knowledge ecomomy, and basically assume that Americans are somehow smarter than everyone else. That we have some sort of lock on innovation. That somehow we'll avoid becoming a second-rate economy. Personally I'm not so sure. I can easily see a world where China has the manufacturing middle-class, India has the software-engineering upper middle class, Europe is a big theme park, and the States is divided into a few ultra-rich investors, and a whole lot of minimum-wage service employees. What a cheerful thought.
Blame Society (Score:2, Interesting)
Due to budget cuts, I have 36-40 students in a lab classroom designed for 28. I have $200 per year to spend on consumables and to replace broken equipment.
Why do I have overcrowded classrooms and in essence no money?
Society does not want to pay for education. We elect politicians who do not think any further than their next election campaign and what will show results by then. No Child Left Behind (NCLB) is a perfect example. The authors think that by testing the students they will improve. BS! Those that improve are just taught how to take the test. Teaching to the test does not improve education, it only affects test scores.
Society needs to realize that to regain our dominance in all areas, not just science, we need to fund our schools. Increased funding will first of all arm our current teachers with the tools they need. It will also in the long run attract better people to teaching.
We need to realize that we will not see a substantive change for at least 5 years, and it may take 10 years to see that it works. This is longer than most politicians are in office.
Now I'll step down from my soapbox.
Re:Argh... (Score:3, Interesting)
>services. So what? Jobs are jobs, would you rather not
>have them?
I don't have any substantial objection to foreign firms operating on US soil, employing Americans to service the American market.
But when it comes to "outsourcing", that's not what's happening. What's happening is US workers are being replaced with foreign workers, based overseas, to produce goods or services for export back to the US market. This is a parasitic relationship at best, it's hollowing out our economy, driving insane trade and budget deficits, and leading to an erosion of our living, health and education standards in a classic race to the bottom.
Re:From a teacher (Score:2, Interesting)
1. Overcrowded schools
2. Too many overage kids in the same class with younger kids. Promots MAJOR bullying
3. "Get that kid outta my class"
School is a given, but schools should not be "GIVEN". You should have to work for the higher tiered schools, etc.