At 03:55 PM 03/30/99 -1000, you wrote:
>I guess the same argument could be made for history, art, music, language,
>philosophy, etc. There are few jobs that require a deep knowledge of those
>subjects. But then we don't get "educated people" we get employees.
>Equally to be valued, but different. There's certainly a place for that,
>but is it the college?
>
>My main problem with this is not that not everyone is able complete a
>"college education," as I have always understood that term (sort-of), but
>rather that our system doesn't seem to provide many good alternatives to
>those who need them, and does not seem to value them very highly when it
>does. When I encounter students (and it happens almost daily) who haven't
>the appropriate preparation (or life experiences, or time, or lifestyles,
>or behavior habits), and who just can't seem to learn math, no matter how
>hard they try, I feel helpless. There just seems to be nowhere for them to
>go. But would it not be condescending to lower our standards, or remove or
>substitute degree requirements, in order to accommodate those who can't
>meet the same standards as other students? Do we want to develop degrees
>with asterisks?
>
>John M. Flanigan <johnf@hawaii.edu> The equation is the final arbiter.
>Assistant Professor, Mathematics --Werner Heisenberg
>Kapi'olani Community College The scoreboard is the final arbiter.
>4303 Diamond Head Road --Bill Walton
>Honolulu HI 96816 History is the final arbiter.
>(808) 734-9371 --Edward Gibbon
>
****************************************************************************
* To post to the list: email mathedcc@archives.math.utk.edu *
* To unsubscribe, send mail to: majordomo@archives.math.utk.edu *
* In the mail message, enter ONLY the words: unsubscribe mathedcc *
* Words in the Subject: line are NOT processed! *
* Archives at http://archives.math.utk.edu/hypermail/mathedcc/ *
****************************************************************************