2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

Our sons sometimes go on binges. They'll dig into a topic and work on it until they decide they have had enough.
Sometimes they do this because they are just interested, sometimes because a contest is coming up. Each has won awards for things they decided to study and apply.

At public school, the day was (is) chopped up into periods. Kids have to quit what they are doing whether they are done or not. In preparation for that, assignments are themselves chopped up into tiny doses. When my kids grab a book and a web browser, they can dig as deep and wide as they wish.

Usually, what they study is not covered by regular schools for kids of their AGE, so they have learned to socialize with people regardless of age, including adults. I love to see them arrange to consult with adult experts. Some of the intellectual relationships seem quite nice for all involved.

Occasionally, we parents nudge the kids to study some subject which does show up on college entrance exams (e.g. English grammar). We can help, if they wish. It's up to them to convince us that they have learned at least as much as their age cohort. It's usually easy to focus on the subject for a while and "meet those standards" without much angst. One technique that usually works is to pick up an old text book and study it. For our kids, this seems more palatable when it is not being doled out in tiny lessons and 45 minute periods. I have noticed that they are learning how to scope-out a subject and learn what they need to expediently. It's one thing to do an assignment, but it's quite another to develop your own way to organize the info. We give them hints when needed, such as "take notes", "make a list of vocabulary", etc., but they are getting better and doing it independently. YES!

Conclusion: they are learning a lot more academically by doing it themselves, and they socialize with various people.

posted 4 years, 9 months ago
view in context

It is NOT true that a young tree sequesters carbon faster than an older tree.
Big trees add wood at a much faster rate.

I mentored a kid for a science fair project where he took the data and did the math.
Tree rings (layers, actually) do get thinner as a tree gets older, but each new layer covers the entire outside of the tree.
Each succeeding layer is larger than the layer inside on a healthy tree.
The increase in area more than compensates for the decrease in thickness.

The data showed that this was true, at least for Douglas Fir, regardless of how large the tree was already.
The very largest tree growth observed was on the outside of a log about 2 meters in diameter.

posted 4 years, 9 months ago
view in context

I agree heartily with your sentiment.

posted 4 years, 11 months ago
view in context

I applaud your sentiment, as I too love science.
I disagree that we do science attitudes any favors by dilution.
Consider how well it has worked with the so-called "political science".

"Mathematics" is happily often referred to simply as "math".
A phrase like "the science of mathematics" would simply not get used by the text-message generation. "som"? Nah!

The phrase "food science" does get used, but quite properly, mainly when someone is studying food. Science Olympiad has an event called that. Merely eating is NOT food science, whether human or insect larva are doing the eating.

You mention a baby a couple of times. They learn at an amazing rate, and it is amazing to watch their brains bootstrap. Even if we do not understand all the details of how they do it, it does not follow that they are doing science.

I don't want to stray too far off-topic to suggest other ways of encouraging scientific acceptance. (this space intentionally not expanded)
I am not convinced that we really want everyone trying to do science, or worse yet, doing exactly what they do already but calling it science. I am proud to be a geek. It does not bother me much that the auditorium at UP is not even packed when the finals of a science bowl comes around.

posted 4 years, 11 months ago
view in context

Already I see and hear a lot of worrying about how to get the unwilling to pass, especially math, which is considered hard by the educators.

Please do not let this effort turn into another draining of interesting classes
in math, science, technology
in favor of remedial actions.

posted 4 years, 11 months ago
view in context

PPS addresses the needs of gifted kids just enough to stay one step ahead of the state supreme court.
Flee if you can, for the love of your gifted child.

posted 4 years, 11 months ago
view in context

We are happy to see that
seat time and lower age requirements
are dropped from the graduation requirement.

Let the bright kids get out early with their sanity.
Pass the insipid tests, and you're done.

posted 4 years, 11 months ago
view in context

Little priority?
Double the usual funding seems like a lot of priority.
They might not be smart, but they've got great lobbyists.

posted 5 years, 1 month ago
view in context

One of our young friends has Asperger's.
The school has him in special ed, and schools have the economic incentive to keep him there.
He's VERY good in math, but seldom gets to be in interesting math classes
(this is true for most kids who are very good in some subject(s), but the TAG show was earlier)
He does not need special help in math, but he wants to go to advanced classes because he gets along well with peers. It is easy for him to communicate when talking math. The kid is good.
He's also decent in sciences.
He has to spend much of his time with a special ed group where he really does not fit.
He does NOT need remedial help with reading, at least not the kind he gets.
There are categories of literature which are hard for him to decipher: he knows the words, but does not connect with the hidden themes, morals, and all the literary devices which the English teachers expect of his age-peers.
He can't write worth beans.
He does not fit in the regular language classes.
But he can read technical and scientific writing just fine, and then discuss it. Fellow geeks can handle a pause while he puts together his thoughts.
Sitting in the special ed room really does not serve his needs for developing communication skills. It frustrates the H___ out of him. But the school gets paid extra for that.

His kid-friends (including one of my kids) think it's unfair.
His parents do not want to make waves.
I think he might blossom into a functional-enough adult if the schools did not make such a "special" deal out of him.
Schools should encourage him (all kids) to learn as much as they can, especially where they excel, and be realistic where a kid is lacking.
We don't all need to be poets, physicians, artists, jocks, and mathematicians.
Being good at only one of those is still ... good.

Between the extra funding of special ed and the constraints of NCGA (No Child Gets Ahead), we've got a system which is leaving our friend behind.
He will almost surely never be a great communicator, perhaps never even meet those darned benchmarks in language, but he has potential which should be nurtured.

posted 5 years, 1 month ago
view in context

We can readily agree that No Child Gets Ahead
is a cruel joke which does much harm to many
and little good to any.

It is sad that you must deal primarily with needs which should be taken care of outside of school.
I find it totally unreasonable that a kid
who shows up sleepy and without breakfast (etc.)
should be expected to perform as well as kids who come ready to learn.
If the kids who do want to learn are held back to the speed of the slowest, least-ambitious or least-well-cared-for students,
MANY (most?) children are being left behind in their education.

It is doubly troubling that a kid who brings extra state funds makes such
poor use of the opportunity. Don't just leave them behind: throw them out.
There's got to be a more cost-effective long-term care strategy which is better for the kids and which does not dilute what schools should be doing. (Education)

posted 5 years, 1 month ago
view in context

A recent article in the Ogreonion reminds us that special ed students get twice as much funding as "regular" students.
And funny thing: a lot of them do not earn regular diplomas.
Are the inmates running the asylum?
Are regular students' diplomas watered down to where it does not even imply reading capability?
Is this a good way to use limited educational resources?
Consider the lively discussion generated by the TAG show. There is a lot more to discuss.

posted 5 years, 1 month ago
view in context

David: reply/post here if you need technical assistance.
This page will NOT get bookmarked... it's a once-only visit
although I would be happy to toss ideas into an ongoing brainstorm.

A wiki site would make a lot more sense than this linear blog.

posted 5 years, 1 month ago
view in context

A simple search with Google finds several plausible articles which say that
your statement about armed forces and ATVs is a fabrication.
The Consumer Product Safety Commission is one source, but look at several. It's quick.
Unless you suppose that a soldier who dies while or after riding in a Humvee should be chalked up to the vehicle's fault.

There may be a truth lurking somewhere in what you say (and I even agree with some of it), but your credibility is blown.

posted 5 years, 1 month ago
view in context

Sure.
It's a simple case of public health.
This is an easy case: only the crap-peddlers benefit from choosing crappy diets.
The kids, and to a less-direct extent, everyone else would be better off if they (we) ate healthier diets.

posted 5 years, 1 month ago
view in context

Do you advocate the converse: that we all be obliged to pay and otherwise remove the resources from healthy children, stunting their potential, to provide extreme care for readily preventable mistakes?
Hmmm: that pretty well describes the status quo, doesn't it? 8-(
The resources of the planet are not infinite.
A conservative choice allocates them wisely.

posted 5 years, 1 month ago
view in context

They found one way to remove themselves from the gene pool.
That's a good thing.
Perhaps it will also help clean the meme pool?

posted 5 years, 1 month ago
view in context

The Caucasus Mountains are in southern Russia and Georgia.
There are people who live there, as there have been for thousands of years.
It's as compelling to call pink people "Caucasian" or "white" as it is to
call Aboriginal Americans "Indians",
or the light-brown people of mixed heritage "black".
That is, the words fail to make sense for almost all of us.

How about a solution based on measurement:
when the color of a person matters, take a photo of the middle of their back
with the skin perpendicular to the unclouded sun,
adn report the RBG value of the color thus recorded.

I don't intend to measure my friends this way, although
I might shoot a photo if they are doing something interesting.

posted 5 years, 1 month ago
view in context

Perhaps the best way to counter racism is to do something else.

This whole hour has reminded me of the phenomenal time-waster I experienced in the person of a black woman who came to work in a high-tech company.
She seemed to think that we all wanted to talk all day about race in America instead of creating systems.
It fell upon the non-token black guy (he was the uber-manager) to try to get her to focus on the job. He failed, and wound up removing her. Opportunity lost.

Anybody who is interesting has something to talk about besides the job. People who are completely predictable are boring, regardless of what their single topic is.

posted 5 years, 1 month ago
view in context

ashalas: I fear you're right.

NCGA: No Child Gets Ahead
It's logically equivalent to NCLB
Both are quite negative advocacies:
the measure of progress is in what is NOT done.

Thinking People: please help counter the power of sloganeering.
If we hear NCLB repeated enough times,
we could become inured to its pernicious effects.
Every child deserves to learn, not just the slow ones.

Some people are quick to accuse "elitism" anytime someone notices that some people are more ______ than others
(where ______ is practically any aspect you care to observe).
Almost:
If ______ is not desirable, they might scream "discrimination".

In our PC-filtered vocabulary,
is there a less-desirable epithet than the N-word?
("Nerd", of course)
Avoid discrimination: support the continued education of nerds.

posted 5 years, 3 months ago
view in context