Eye-catching initiatives in education

Brian Micklethwait has a post about Tesco offering degrees in retail management.

Presumably they know what they're doing. Providing they don't try to make the courses too academic and theoretical it's probably a reasonable thing to do, although whether it's a degree in the generally accepted meaning of the term is another question.

Meanwhile the Scottish Council Parliament Government has issued guidelines on the teaching of computer games design in schools. A few schools have been teaching games design for a while now, and this announcement looks very much like the standard politician's "eye-catching initiative" - intended to drive the news agenda rather than herald anything new. That said, funky subjects like this may well attract the attention of some children who might otherwise be turned off by school, so it can do little harm.

Comments

[Kit]

"That said, funky subjects like this may well attract the attention of some children who might otherwise be turned off by school, so it can do little harm."

I disagree a computer games design course would attract kids that would be better off doing traditional maths and science courses. Any child with this qualification would still have no chance of becoming a games designer and be left with worthless certificate.
Schools should concentrate on a small group of core subjects.

[Bishop Hill]

I'm not sure Kit. I agree that the maths and science is a prerequisite, but a games course could be a useful way of engaging a distracted mind. "Here, study some geometry" is a turn-off for many. "You'll need to know geometry to understand how 3D rendering works might do the trick though.

[Jack Hughes]

We soon realised that our daughter we only reach her full potential if we spend time with her at home building on and extending what she has learned at school.

She is obsessed with dogs and we have just got a dog. So we do all kinds of science and maths projects involving the dog. Two simple examples:

Measure how much water the puppy drinks with every slurp.

Measure how many biscuits she swallows in every mouthful.

Each project includes: designing the experiment, some patience, recording the results, some simple arithmetic, and possibly a write-up.

This makes it fun for all - instead of moaning and grumbling.

Going back to the school doing computer games - its OK by me if it links into some fundamental basic skill like geometry, or programming.

[Bishop Hill]

I like those ideas Jack. My approach is similar - work on the assumption that they're not going to learn much in school and do a bit at home when they're not too tired. Unfortunately this is not as often as I'd like.

[Jack Hughes]

Read this and weep....

http://www.21stcenturyscience.org/the-courses/core-science-science-for-scientific-literacy,907,NA.html

Its the new science curriculum. Kind of like science without the science.

Do these morons really think we can just study liberal arts while anything difficult is done by the japanese or the chinese or possibly the germans ?
Its even worse - children will be studying liberal arts and thinking they are doing science.

[Bishop Hill]

My wife edited a GCSE science textbook some years ago. It was terrifying. Lots of greenery. No science.

[TDK]

There has been a trend for the past few decades to (a) notice that a subject doesn't engage pupils (b) solve this by diluting the content by making it more "relevant".

Thus you notice that science (or geography) has become little more than political preaching. The desirable outcome - engagement - is a wedge to get the politics in the curriculum.

How on earth is this different?

I recall reading about something similar except this time the objective was to encourage black kids to study maths: black maths. The same solution was offered - make the material more relevant. The content was all about identity politics. I can't find it now, but Larry Elder discusses a something similar http://www.larryelder.com/education/mathebonics.htm

[Jack Hughes]

I don't think 'diluting' the subject is the right word. Replacing the subject with left-wing politics seems like a closer fit.

[Bishop Hill]

TDK

There's two different meanings of "relevant" in there I would say. In your comment it means something like "with a pretence of making it special to your group identity". But in real life it means something like "driven by a real world interest". Once school is out of the way, that's the way people learn - they develop an interest in something and then set about getting the skills or knowledge to take that interest further.