TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
> re: We messed up the education system.
>
> Yes we did, but for a couple of good reasons. ...
>
> 2. We decided affirmative action was the right thing. (Our mistake was
> relaxing completion as well as entrance standards, which turns out to not
> really meet the spirit of the good intentions--"affirmative" means you catch
> up.)
Chantel writes:
Affirmative action is not the relaxing of *valid* standards. In its truest
sense, affirmative action plans are designed to determine why inequities exist
and to rectify them. The plans generally start with a statistical analysis to
determine whether discrimination exists. Part of the reason that inequities
exist are because there are artificial standards that are erected -- and these
standards may create barriers for particular groups of people. For example, at
one time (and this may still be the case) some prestigious universities and
colleges gave admissions preferences to children of alumni. If most of the
alumni belong to a certain class or racial/ethnic group, then people in that
group are given an advantage over other applicants. Part of the affirmative
action plan would probably include a provision to determine whether this
"alumni" clause is a valid criterion or if it is a barrier. A school may then
choose to either weight that criterion less heavily or to remove it. What the
affirmative action laws say is that if two applicants are equal (again, this is
after the admissions criteria have been examined), you can select the applicant
from the affected group (racial/gender/ethnic). This plan is effective until it
accomplishes a specific, measurable goal. For example, a goal might be that the
undergraduate population of the university reflects the population of qualified
applicant pool. There is much more to this, such as identifying systemic
problems etc., but I've just tried to provide a cursory overview.
All of that being said, I disagree that affirmative action caused the downfall
of the educational system. My first question, of course, would have to be which
educational system, since much affirmative action policy in the 70's was a
direct result of the overturning of the "seperate but equal" Plessy vs.
Furgueson case and subsequent civil rights legislation. My next questions would
be -- how are we measuring and comparing whether students learn more now than
before affirmative action? Have there been series of studies on school systems
that have *correctly* implemented affirmative action plans that support this
view? Are we taking into account the myriad of other changes have occured in
the structure of the school system and in society in the past 30 years? I think
that to blame it on affirmative action -- or on a strategy to keep young men out
of vietnam is not only not accurate, but I think it is a simplistic given the
complexity of this problem.
So, what are the solutions to the problems of our education system? Why are so
many students coming out without critical thinking skills? And what about the
validity of the underlying question -- is this a bigger problem among young
people today than in the past? I don't think any of these questions will get
answered here; but it is interesting to think about and makes for a good
discussion. I am part of the under 40 crowd. I was very privileged to be able
to attend the best classes that my schools offered. We moved a lot, so I
attended many public schools; including schools in the lone star state of
Texas. Sometimes I was challenged to think, sometimes I wasn't. In my
opinion, you have to decide that you want to think. Thinking critically is hard
work. It is much easier to follow instructions or to regurgitate information.
We can't make someone think, although I do believe that we can challenge
students and do a better job of offering choices. I'm pretty sure that if I
hadn't moved as much, or if I hadn't been able to take the classes I took, I
wouldn't have been as challenged. But, even if we provide opportunities to
students and challenge them, they have to decide to think.
And, for a tech writing tie-in .... since technical writing often requires that
we think critically -- maybe tech writing students should consider taking a
class in logic or critical thinking before graduation? Or perhaps, we can
brainstorm about the different ways techincal communicators can develop critical
thinking skills -- outside of the classroom?
Chantel
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Develop HTML-based Help with Macromedia Dreamweaver! (STC Discount.)
**NEW DATE/LOCATION!** January 16-17, 2001, New York, NY. http://www.weisner.com/training/dreamweaver_help.htm or 800-646-9989.
Take XML and Tech Writing courses online! Our instructor-led courses
(4-6 hrs/wk) give you "hands on" experience at your convenience. STC members
get 20% off! http://www.online-learning.com/index.html.
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
