Georgia: Bastion of education

[Elegiac]

I just don't know where it would fit in with the current state of history education. It's not a US centric problem, and we generally don't cover much past WWII anyway. World history is already stretched pretty thin given the amount of stuff they have to cover. Even AP world history was like a pu pu platter. A little sampling of everything, depth free.

Well, when I was teaching it I would make a point of covering climatological factors at various points in history.

[Garnier Fructis]

You mean deny an interpretation of science heavily biased by agenda.

Outright denying science would be ...like ...calling a man a women even though their chromosomes say otherwise.

It really isn't an agenda driven interpretation, which you would know if you would bother to 1) look at the history of subject over the last 100 years and 2) bothered to actually read some material on it from a legitimate scientific source. The foundation of the subject is the natural sciences: physics, chemistry, biology.

Because of rank refusal to consider the scientific case, number 1 is much more compelling. The idea that we don't have an effect was the default position at the start of the whole damn thing.

[Mormolyce]

Overreaction. First, the whole debate is fairly recent, and school textbooks are updated every couple hundred millennium.

Well the debate (ie retarded politicisation) might be recent (ish) but climate change has been under scientific study for almost a century now.

[dawawe]

Climate change is taught in Earth Science. A separate class taught in middle school (8th grade)

Text books are also printed for all states, i believe. It would cost too much to do it on a state by state basis.

[SunspotAnims]

I also went to school in Georgia. Climate change, atmosphere pollution, etc. were actually rather important topics for my science teachers to cover since, like, Earth Science in elementary school all the way to the dedicated Environmental Science class in high school. I can't speak for that school but I can at least say in my experience that the stereotypes placed on Southern teachers don't tend to be accurate and really undermine the dedication a lot of my teachers have had to educate us about that stuff.

[Theinquisition]

I also went to school in Georgia. Climate change, atmosphere pollution, etc. were actually rather important topics for my science teachers to cover since, like, Earth Science in elementary school all the way to the dedicated Environmental Science class in high school. I can't speak for that school but I can at least say in my experience that the stereotypes placed on Southern teachers don't tend to be accurate and really undermine the dedication a lot of my teachers have had to educate us about that stuff.

But.....haven't you heard? Good teachers only live in washington, vermont, and Massachusetts

[Masoner]

Overreaction. First, the whole debate is fairly recent, and school textbooks are updated every couple hundred millennium. Second, it doesn't matter, because textbooks don't cover EVERYTHING. Putting a topic like that in there is just asking for much more bullshit than a parent going "huh".

It's the year 2015, nearly 2016 and the idea that people get their knowledge from books is so damn ... dumb. You can take college level courses online for free. If I had a child that is exactly what I'd have them do.

[Elegiac]

It's the year 2015, nearly 2016 and the idea that people get their knowledge from books is so damn ... dumb. You can take college level courses online for free. If I had a child that is exactly what I'd have them do.

Considering you refuse to spend the money to help public education catch up with the pace of technology, go figure.

[Templar 331]

She's 8. There's a ton of stuff to learn about the ecosystem before human based climate change. I'm more curious about what is in the book than what isn't in there. I'd be more worried about the accuracy of the book and what is taught from there.

[Garnier Fructis]

It's the year 2015, nearly 2016 and the idea that people get their knowledge from books is so damn ... dumb. You can take college level courses online for free. If I had a child that is exactly what I'd have them do.

I just graduate with a double major in STEM with a near perfect GPA, and I learned primarily from books. Looking at a recording of disjointed scribbling on a blackboard was about as useless as it got for me.

Lectures. Ebooks. Books. Don't be picky about what you need to use to learn.

[Crissi]

Im not too sure 8 is a good change to teach something that complicated. Introduce the basics of the greenhouse cycle, and then grow it form there.

[twiddler]

She's 8. There's a ton of stuff to learn about the ecosystem before human based climate change. I'm more curious about what is in the book than what isn't in there. I'd be more worried about the accuracy of the book and what is taught from there.

What isn't included in the work can easily provide the same amount of obfuscation as what is there and is false.

[Emageht Tsoluoy]

In all honesty, not one class during my entire education, got more than halfway through any textbook for any subject.

The following years textbooks usually started with the assumption that people knew the previous years knowledge, and so the first quarter of every year was spent crunching through all the material we missed so we could understand the current curriculum. Which contributed to the reason we never got halfway through a textbook...

Unless you spent your class time ignoring the teacher and doing the problems ahead of everyone else...

Then eventually you start drawing pictures of naked people everywhere.

[Crissi]

In all honesty, not one class during my entire education, got more than halfway through any textbook for any subject.

The following years textbooks usually started with the assumption that people knew the previous years knowledge, and so the first quarter of every year was spent crunching through all the material we missed so we could understand the current curriculum. Which contributed to the reason we never got halfway through a textbook...

Unless you spent your class time ignoring the teacher and doing the problems ahead of everyone else...

Then eventually you start drawing pictures of naked people everywhere.

That was me. I totally got ahead in my history and science textbooks because they were fun.

[Templar 331]

What isn't included in the work can easily provide the same amount of obfuscation as what is there and is false.

If it is in relation to a later subject to be taught, sure. But climate science isn't exactly a simple matter. Yes "more CO2 means hotter planet" is simple, but the complex workings of climate change and our impact on the Earth is a bit large for a child at 8 to grasp. So why teach something they might not understand and risk failing them?

- - - Updated - - -

In all honesty, not one class during my entire education, got more than halfway through any textbook for any subject.

The following years textbooks usually started with the assumption that people knew the previous years knowledge, and so the first quarter of every year was spent crunching through all the material we missed so we could understand the current curriculum. Which contributed to the reason we never got halfway through a textbook...

With as much subject matter that's in those books and with as little time to learn it I don't see how anyone could expect a class to finish them.

Unless you spent your class time ignoring the teacher and doing the problems ahead of everyone else...

Then eventually you start drawing pictures of naked people everywhere.

I drew robots and star ships. :P

[twiddler]

If it is in relation to a later subject to be taught, sure. But climate science isn't exactly a simple matter. Yes "more CO2 means hotter planet" is simple, but the complex workings of climate change and our impact on the Earth is a bit large for a child at 8 to grasp. So why teach something they might not understand and risk failing them?

Not the point.

[Rudol Von Stroheim]

For starters, we don't teach self hate in schools. We don't teach slavery or the treatment of Indians to promote self hatred, we teach them because whitewashing or ignoring bad things that have happened is unacceptable. It's the same for climate change. 99% of the people who accept Climate Change couldn't give a rat's ass whether people hate themselves or not, because frankly it's not productive and certainly doesn't help the fix the problem.

This belongs in an earth sciences class in late middle school through mid high school. And it would be in a science class, and in science classes there won't be any preaching of how you should feel about yourself because that's wholly irrelevant.

I'm sorry but man-made really doesn't.

[Templar 331]

Not the point.

Misinformation is worst than no information. You will spend more time relearning something than you would learning it the right way the first time. And even then you will catch yourself putting the wrong answer down.

[Elegiac]

I'm sorry but man-made really doesn't.

Why? It's as well substantiated as gravity or evolution.

[Rudol Von Stroheim]

Why? It's as well substantiated as gravity or evolution.

Because it is irrelevant, you gain nothing by teaching them as much. All you'll do is instill a notion that they should cut off of their nose to spite their face.

That's the problem most people have with the man-made movement craze. Is it's just that, a senseless craze with little solutions and a lot of self-destructive notions.