Reginald A writes :
I just read the ED Week July 12 Article \”Science Group Bemoans Quality of
Biology Textbooks\”
and was thinking that
the findings of the AAAS Project 2061 were spot on: that textbooks and the
general math and science curricula were \”a mile wide and an inch deep.\”
Clearly this is an area where a library could work in partnership with a
school system. Of course, policy drives this sort of thing…that\’s why the
curricula and the textbooks are in the shape they are. Still, those school
systems – or individual teachers – who are willing and able to draw on the
expertise of the library, could add some sorely-needed depth to a math and
science program.
Reginald A writes :
I just read the ED Week July 12 Article \”Science Group Bemoans Quality of
Biology Textbooks\”
and was thinking that
the findings of the AAAS Project 2061 were spot on: that textbooks and the
general math and science curricula were \”a mile wide and an inch deep.\”
Clearly this is an area where a library could work in partnership with a
school system. Of course, policy drives this sort of thing…that\’s why the
curricula and the textbooks are in the shape they are. Still, those school
systems – or individual teachers – who are willing and able to draw on the
expertise of the library, could add some sorely-needed depth to a math and
science program.
From Edweek:
A review of the 10 most popular biology texts found them to be loaded with facts for students to memorize, but offering little explanation of the underlying scientific importance of them. The analysis is the latest under Project 2061, the American Association for the Advancement of Science\’s long- running effort to improve science education.
\”The important ideas are often camouflaged behind vast amounts of vocabulary and details,\” George D. Nelson, Project 2061\’s director, said at a press conference held here late last month to release the analysis. \”Not much learning of biology is going to take place while using these books.\”
Recent Comments