Experimenting with our children
I'm a scientist who runs experiments for a living. In order to run experiments on live animals, we have to prove that the benefits justify the risks. One would think as much would be expected before experiments on our children could be run. Asked to see the scientific justification for changing to semester science classes in the freshman and sophomore years, we're told "someone has to be first", which doesn't give me much confidence. Especially after learning about the problems kids who took the Integrated Math curriculum after it was rolled out have been having in college Calculus, and more recently seeing the problems with the CIPS science program in the Middle Schools.
Before making curriculum changes, the evidence pro and con should be analysed carefully. In looking at the present case, the changes appears to be based on intuition and wishful thinking rather than scientific data. If the Portage Science Program was in a shambles, I could see taking riskier chances, but Portage Schools have an excellent reputation, especially with science. Curriculum changes should be evidence-based, and I would encourage the Board of Education to critically review all proposals before voting to implement a plan that my intuition says will turn out to be a failed experiment. Let someone else's school district put their kids up to be guinea pigs.
To comment on this comment, click here.
See warnings about this in the No Child Left Behind literature, as described on the NCLB page.