Perhaps, but if the standards were raised they might work a little harder in their other classes to get into it. I just have a problem with school's teaching nearly everything but what is important. We may have kids who know why Suzie has two moms, how to hunt, how to raise cattle, or how to bake a cake, but we don't have kids who are strong in subject areas that will make us successful.

 

Depends on your definition of success. Above with your examples, I see a farmer that is supporting his family in a loving way. Is he not successful because he can't do the pythagorem therom?

 

I submit that the last 3 you mention can be just as important as 90% of the stuff taught in HIGH SCHOOL math classes.

Wow. Teach them how to shoot and kill with a weapon, but make the weapons safety aspect of the training kind of secondary, huh? That's not a recipe for disaster.

 

Read the article then we can try to have a conversation about it.

Read the article then we can try to have a conversation about it.

Have to say that was gonna be my response.

Depends on your definition of success. Above with your examples, I see a farmer that is supporting his family in a loving way. Is he not successful because he can't do the pythagorem therom?

 

Sure, but do we need half of our graduating classes pinning their hopes on farming?

 

I submit that the last 3 you mention can be just as important as 90% of the stuff taught in HIGH SCHOOL math classes.

 

First, that kind of stuff really should be taught in middle school. Second, no one may need to use that sort of math right out of high school, but it is the foundation for advanced math. We can't expect every kid to graduate with a basic high school education and work at the factory until they retire. Sure, some kids are cut out for that; that's what they need to do. But other kids are cut out for the growing jobs in science and math that Americans can't seem to do. It would appear that we are more concerned with learning about sex, hunting, farming, and cooking.

Sure, but do we need half of our graduating classes pinning their hopes on farming?

 

 

 

First, that kind of stuff really should be taught in middle school. Second, no one may need to use that sort of math right out of high school, but it is the foundation for advanced math. We can't expect every kid to graduate with a basic high school education and work at the factory until they retire. Sure, some kids are cut out for that; that's what they need to do. But other kids are cut out for the growing jobs in science and math that Americans can't seem to do. It would appear that we are more concerned with learning about sex, hunting, farming, and cooking.

 

And let those kids on that path do that. I never said not to. All kids going to a postsecondary level of education would need a basic level of education.

 

Who said half of our classes are doing only that? What is wrong with every kid knowing some basics of gardening, so that they could put out a garden in their yard (especially living in a rural area) and help be a better consumer by providing some of their food themselves?

Again, you're looking at only the firearms aspect of the class. I believe the article said the weapons would, or could, be made incapable of firing. What I envision is a class where students are taught a respect for the outdoors, conservation practices, safety (not only in firearms handling but dealing with weather, terrain, and animals), and each other. An actual "hunt" could be conducted regardless of season by use of a camera. Wild game cooking classes could be taught. Last but not least, it could cause some kids to get off the couch and outside. I see nothing but upside for this program and I hope gun phobias don't stop it short.

 

Well, I'm certain you're not talking about me, as I've likely fired a weapon thousands of times more than you. I certainly have no fear of firing a weapon. I'm a member of the NRA, own many guns, and have trained many agents in firearms - but having my school hold a firearms class - call it a "hunter training" or whatever you want - for 7th graders just doesn't sound right to me. The class can include all those wonderful topics you laid out - and they are indeed valuable topics - but which part of the class do you think 12-13 year olds will REALLY be interested in? Give them a gun with dummy rounds in it and it will certainly stoke the fires of interest in what a gun is like to shoot with live ammunition in it. Again, not saying that is a terrible thing, if done properly. I just don't think I want my school system teaching it.

Have to say that was gonna be my response.

 

I did. But thanks nonetheless.

Depends on your definition of success. Above with your examples, I see a farmer that is supporting his family in a loving way. Is he not successful because he can't do the pythagorem therom?

 

I submit that the last 3 you mention can be just as important as 90% of the stuff taught in HIGH SCHOOL math classes.

 

To answer your question, a high school graduate that can't do the pythagorean theorem and a whole lot more has not had a successful high school education. This attitude of teach them to count to twenty with their shoes off, balance a checkbook and turn them loose on the world condemns these kids to a lifetime of low earnings and our country to economic second class. So yes, teach them advanced math, science, literature, history, english and anything else you can think of.

So yes, teach them advanced math, science, literature, history, english and anything else you can think of.

 

Including hunting?:lol:

 

I don't even know how you guys got off on this subject. I would think the course would be extracurricular, not replacing math or science.

Including hunting?:lol:

 

I don't even know how you guys got off on this subject. I would think the course would be extracurricular, not replacing math or science.

 

I have no problem with teaching hunting at school. Just don't replace a class with it. Make it a club. When my sons were in high school they joined the fishing club.

To answer your question, a high school graduate that can't do the pythagorean theorem and a whole lot more has not had a successful high school education. This attitude of teach them to count to twenty with their shoes off, balance a checkbook and turn them loose on the world condems these kids to a lifetime of low earnings and our country to economic second class. So yes, teach them advanced math, science, literature, history, english and anything else you can think of.

 

I am thinking more along the lines of things they are going to use every single day. Percents, fractions, adding, subtracting, multiplying, division, measurements, etc etc.

 

And where did I say that those things wouldn't be offered to those that wanted it.

 

I consider my life a success. I have never used the pythagorean theorem outside of the classroom once in my life. And I am not condemned to a low earning job.

Including hunting?:lol:

 

I don't even know how you guys got off on this subject. I would think the course would be extracurricular, not replacing math or science.

 

I would prefer the word elective over extracurricular. Extracurricular denotes an afterschool club. Elective would/could be taught during the day and students could receive credit.

 

And btw, I could see a good opportunity to teach some science and math with this curriculum. Teach them to load their own shells, I would guess, would include science and math skills.

 

Teaching them to aim at long distance targets could teach them some physics skills.

TA, fishing club sounds cool. I bet that would be a lot of fun.

 

LBBC, yeah, plus biology, science, meteorology, Home Ec., and health. We could even tie it in with FCA. (gotta pray for the big one)

Has scouting and hunt clubs become obsolete?

 

So we have national standards to not allow firearms on school property which is a stronger standard in the state of Kentucky (check around for the blue colored signs on school property) but want advocacy to allow them in for use and instruction?!

I would prefer the word elective over extracurricular. Extracurricular denotes an afterschool club. Elective would/could be taught during the day and students could receive credit.

 

And btw, I could see a good opportunity to teach some science and math with this curriculum. Teach them to load their own shells, I would guess, would include science and math skills.

 

Teaching them to aim at long distance targets could teach them some physics skills.

 

And if there is ever an accident, don't forget the great opportunity for biology instruction.:lol: