Just Wrong
Sandra Dodd
Alysia wrote this in another topic, but I'm glad, because I was hoping to get help making a list of things learned in school that are not true now. Either things changed, or science moved on, or something.
-=-Even someone who is an expert in her field most likely doesn't know everything about that field. Schools can't provide information on everything a child could learn and know. And, a lot of times, what is taught in schools turns out to be wrong or outdated or biased or purposely containing gaps.-=-
Bias and purposeful gaps are understandable.
From my own schooling, there are two examples I've used sometimes when I give presentations:
Tanganyika--I learned about this African nation in 8th grade geography, and how to spell it, and it's neighbor Zanzibar, too, and drew maps, and passed a test. By the time I was grown, it wasn't a country anymore. It's l ikely that there were people who learned about it even after it was gone, because our state would use textbooks for five or six years, and by the time a textbook came along, it had been in preparation and production for a year or two (or more). Tanganyika was only a country for a few years. Oh. 1961 to 1964, says Wikipedia. Well hell. I learned about it in the 1966/67 school year. It wasn't my geography teacher's job to dispute the textbook, though. That would've been current events, and not his field.
Platypus--not a mammal. A class unto itself, literally. But at some point after I wasn't in school, they were reclassified as mammals. I learned that at the Indianapolis zoo one day after I already had three children and was at my first interstate unschooling gathering. So what I learned was alter changed. A mammal CAN lay an egg. That was news. Live birth was one of the characteristics of mammals I learned in school, and that a platypus had no relatives among other animals; certainly wasn't related to *me.*
And another couple of things changed:
Pluto is a planet, and it was discovered by a guy from New Mexico. Well... he was in Arizona when he discovered it, but he had been living in New Mexico for a while, and taught at our state university for a long time; so mostly true. But now Pluto isn't a planet. Poor Professor Tombaugh.
Hallowe'en: I was taught to spell Hallowe'en with that apostrophe in there, but quite soon after it was "never mind." It stands for a "v" (for those who want to know what apostrophes stand for), so even at that point, it was a fragment of the longer all hallow's eve(ning) so why have one apostrophe if there were more letters out than in?
We were told that humans have no instincts whatsoever, but only know what they learn from books.
By the time I was in college, I didn't believe it anymore, but a friend of mine who was born in 1964 said he was told that, in high school AND college.
What kinds of fallacies did some of you write down on tests papers to get an A?
Sandra
-=-Even someone who is an expert in her field most likely doesn't know everything about that field. Schools can't provide information on everything a child could learn and know. And, a lot of times, what is taught in schools turns out to be wrong or outdated or biased or purposely containing gaps.-=-
Bias and purposeful gaps are understandable.
From my own schooling, there are two examples I've used sometimes when I give presentations:
Tanganyika--I learned about this African nation in 8th grade geography, and how to spell it, and it's neighbor Zanzibar, too, and drew maps, and passed a test. By the time I was grown, it wasn't a country anymore. It's l ikely that there were people who learned about it even after it was gone, because our state would use textbooks for five or six years, and by the time a textbook came along, it had been in preparation and production for a year or two (or more). Tanganyika was only a country for a few years. Oh. 1961 to 1964, says Wikipedia. Well hell. I learned about it in the 1966/67 school year. It wasn't my geography teacher's job to dispute the textbook, though. That would've been current events, and not his field.
Platypus--not a mammal. A class unto itself, literally. But at some point after I wasn't in school, they were reclassified as mammals. I learned that at the Indianapolis zoo one day after I already had three children and was at my first interstate unschooling gathering. So what I learned was alter changed. A mammal CAN lay an egg. That was news. Live birth was one of the characteristics of mammals I learned in school, and that a platypus had no relatives among other animals; certainly wasn't related to *me.*
And another couple of things changed:
Pluto is a planet, and it was discovered by a guy from New Mexico. Well... he was in Arizona when he discovered it, but he had been living in New Mexico for a while, and taught at our state university for a long time; so mostly true. But now Pluto isn't a planet. Poor Professor Tombaugh.
Hallowe'en: I was taught to spell Hallowe'en with that apostrophe in there, but quite soon after it was "never mind." It stands for a "v" (for those who want to know what apostrophes stand for), so even at that point, it was a fragment of the longer all hallow's eve(ning) so why have one apostrophe if there were more letters out than in?
We were told that humans have no instincts whatsoever, but only know what they learn from books.
By the time I was in college, I didn't believe it anymore, but a friend of mine who was born in 1964 said he was told that, in high school AND college.
What kinds of fallacies did some of you write down on tests papers to get an A?
Sandra
Tam
The big one that stands out for me is "Cows have four stomachs". We were taught that in A level Biology, in which I got an A, in order to go to university and be a vet. Where I promptly learnt that it's not true :) They have one stomach area, with four compartments, one of which is the true stomach. There's a good summary here http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_stomachs_do_cattle_have
Tam
http://sprout-and-squidge.blogspot.com/
________________________________
From: Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...>
To: Always Learning <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, 20 August 2012, 15:33
Subject: [AlwaysLearning] Just Wrong
Alysia wrote this in another topic, but I'm glad, because I was hoping to get help making a list of things learned in school that are not true now. Either things changed, or science moved on, or something.
-=-Even someone who is an expert in her field most likely doesn't know everything about that field. Schools can't provide information on everything a child could learn and know. And, a lot of times, what is taught in schools turns out to be wrong or outdated or biased or purposely containing gaps.-=-
Bias and purposeful gaps are understandable.
From my own schooling, there are two examples I've used sometimes when I give presentations:
Tanganyika--I learned about this African nation in 8th grade geography, and how to spell it, and it's neighbor Zanzibar, too, and drew maps, and passed a test. By the time I was grown, it wasn't a country anymore. It's l ikely that there were people who learned about it even after it was gone, because our state would use textbooks for five or six years, and by the time a textbook came along, it had been in preparation and production for a year or two (or more). Tanganyika was only a country for a few years. Oh. 1961 to 1964, says Wikipedia. Well hell. I learned about it in the 1966/67 school year. It wasn't my geography teacher's job to dispute the textbook, though. That would've been current events, and not his field.
Platypus--not a mammal. A class unto itself, literally. But at some point after I wasn't in school, they were reclassified as mammals. I learned that at the Indianapolis zoo one day after I already had three children and was at my first interstate unschooling gathering. So what I learned was alter changed. A mammal CAN lay an egg. That was news. Live birth was one of the characteristics of mammals I learned in school, and that a platypus had no relatives among other animals; certainly wasn't related to *me.*
And another couple of things changed:
Pluto is a planet, and it was discovered by a guy from New Mexico. Well... he was in Arizona when he discovered it, but he had been living in New Mexico for a while, and taught at our state university for a long time; so mostly true. But now Pluto isn't a planet. Poor Professor Tombaugh.
Hallowe'en: I was taught to spell Hallowe'en with that apostrophe in there, but quite soon after it was "never mind." It stands for a "v" (for those who want to know what apostrophes stand for), so even at that point, it was a fragment of the longer all hallow's eve(ning) so why have one apostrophe if there were more letters out than in?
We were told that humans have no instincts whatsoever, but only know what they learn from books.
By the time I was in college, I didn't believe it anymore, but a friend of mine who was born in 1964 said he was told that, in high school AND college.
What kinds of fallacies did some of you write down on tests papers to get an A?
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Tam
http://sprout-and-squidge.blogspot.com/
________________________________
From: Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...>
To: Always Learning <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, 20 August 2012, 15:33
Subject: [AlwaysLearning] Just Wrong
Alysia wrote this in another topic, but I'm glad, because I was hoping to get help making a list of things learned in school that are not true now. Either things changed, or science moved on, or something.
-=-Even someone who is an expert in her field most likely doesn't know everything about that field. Schools can't provide information on everything a child could learn and know. And, a lot of times, what is taught in schools turns out to be wrong or outdated or biased or purposely containing gaps.-=-
Bias and purposeful gaps are understandable.
From my own schooling, there are two examples I've used sometimes when I give presentations:
Tanganyika--I learned about this African nation in 8th grade geography, and how to spell it, and it's neighbor Zanzibar, too, and drew maps, and passed a test. By the time I was grown, it wasn't a country anymore. It's l ikely that there were people who learned about it even after it was gone, because our state would use textbooks for five or six years, and by the time a textbook came along, it had been in preparation and production for a year or two (or more). Tanganyika was only a country for a few years. Oh. 1961 to 1964, says Wikipedia. Well hell. I learned about it in the 1966/67 school year. It wasn't my geography teacher's job to dispute the textbook, though. That would've been current events, and not his field.
Platypus--not a mammal. A class unto itself, literally. But at some point after I wasn't in school, they were reclassified as mammals. I learned that at the Indianapolis zoo one day after I already had three children and was at my first interstate unschooling gathering. So what I learned was alter changed. A mammal CAN lay an egg. That was news. Live birth was one of the characteristics of mammals I learned in school, and that a platypus had no relatives among other animals; certainly wasn't related to *me.*
And another couple of things changed:
Pluto is a planet, and it was discovered by a guy from New Mexico. Well... he was in Arizona when he discovered it, but he had been living in New Mexico for a while, and taught at our state university for a long time; so mostly true. But now Pluto isn't a planet. Poor Professor Tombaugh.
Hallowe'en: I was taught to spell Hallowe'en with that apostrophe in there, but quite soon after it was "never mind." It stands for a "v" (for those who want to know what apostrophes stand for), so even at that point, it was a fragment of the longer all hallow's eve(ning) so why have one apostrophe if there were more letters out than in?
We were told that humans have no instincts whatsoever, but only know what they learn from books.
By the time I was in college, I didn't believe it anymore, but a friend of mine who was born in 1964 said he was told that, in high school AND college.
What kinds of fallacies did some of you write down on tests papers to get an A?
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
One from my time (I'm 37 and went to grade school in the '80s) is brontosaurus. It was fairly recently that I was surprised to find out there is no such thing as a brontosaurus. Now it is apatosaurus and brachiasaurus (2 dinos that look like my old brontosaurus, but have some distint features from one another, like the length of their front legs). I can admit too that it stung a bit, to find out that what I had dutifully learned in school, and continued to believe in, was wrong.
-----Original Message-----
From: Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...>
Sender: [email protected]
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 08:33:41
To: Always Learning<[email protected]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
Subject: [AlwaysLearning] Just Wrong
Alysia wrote this in another topic, but I'm glad, because I was hoping to get help making a list of things learned in school that are not true now. Either things changed, or science moved on, or something.
-=-Even someone who is an expert in her field most likely doesn't know everything about that field. Schools can't provide information on everything a child could learn and know. And, a lot of times, what is taught in schools turns out to be wrong or outdated or biased or purposely containing gaps.-=-
Bias and purposeful gaps are understandable.
From my own schooling, there are two examples I've used sometimes when I give presentations:
Tanganyika--I learned about this African nation in 8th grade geography, and how to spell it, and it's neighbor Zanzibar, too, and drew maps, and passed a test. By the time I was grown, it wasn't a country anymore. It's l ikely that there were people who learned about it even after it was gone, because our state would use textbooks for five or six years, and by the time a textbook came along, it had been in preparation and production for a year or two (or more). Tanganyika was only a country for a few years. Oh. 1961 to 1964, says Wikipedia. Well hell. I learned about it in the 1966/67 school year. It wasn't my geography teacher's job to dispute the textbook, though. That would've been current events, and not his field.
Platypus--not a mammal. A class unto itself, literally. But at some point after I wasn't in school, they were reclassified as mammals. I learned that at the Indianapolis zoo one day after I already had three children and was at my first interstate unschooling gathering. So what I learned was alter changed. A mammal CAN lay an egg. That was news. Live birth was one of the characteristics of mammals I learned in school, and that a platypus had no relatives among other animals; certainly wasn't related to *me.*
And another couple of things changed:
Pluto is a planet, and it was discovered by a guy from New Mexico. Well... he was in Arizona when he discovered it, but he had been living in New Mexico for a while, and taught at our state university for a long time; so mostly true. But now Pluto isn't a planet. Poor Professor Tombaugh.
Hallowe'en: I was taught to spell Hallowe'en with that apostrophe in there, but quite soon after it was "never mind." It stands for a "v" (for those who want to know what apostrophes stand for), so even at that point, it was a fragment of the longer all hallow's eve(ning) so why have one apostrophe if there were more letters out than in?
We were told that humans have no instincts whatsoever, but only know what they learn from books.
By the time I was in college, I didn't believe it anymore, but a friend of mine who was born in 1964 said he was told that, in high school AND college.
What kinds of fallacies did some of you write down on tests papers to get an A?
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
-----Original Message-----
From: Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...>
Sender: [email protected]
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 08:33:41
To: Always Learning<[email protected]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
Subject: [AlwaysLearning] Just Wrong
Alysia wrote this in another topic, but I'm glad, because I was hoping to get help making a list of things learned in school that are not true now. Either things changed, or science moved on, or something.
-=-Even someone who is an expert in her field most likely doesn't know everything about that field. Schools can't provide information on everything a child could learn and know. And, a lot of times, what is taught in schools turns out to be wrong or outdated or biased or purposely containing gaps.-=-
Bias and purposeful gaps are understandable.
From my own schooling, there are two examples I've used sometimes when I give presentations:
Tanganyika--I learned about this African nation in 8th grade geography, and how to spell it, and it's neighbor Zanzibar, too, and drew maps, and passed a test. By the time I was grown, it wasn't a country anymore. It's l ikely that there were people who learned about it even after it was gone, because our state would use textbooks for five or six years, and by the time a textbook came along, it had been in preparation and production for a year or two (or more). Tanganyika was only a country for a few years. Oh. 1961 to 1964, says Wikipedia. Well hell. I learned about it in the 1966/67 school year. It wasn't my geography teacher's job to dispute the textbook, though. That would've been current events, and not his field.
Platypus--not a mammal. A class unto itself, literally. But at some point after I wasn't in school, they were reclassified as mammals. I learned that at the Indianapolis zoo one day after I already had three children and was at my first interstate unschooling gathering. So what I learned was alter changed. A mammal CAN lay an egg. That was news. Live birth was one of the characteristics of mammals I learned in school, and that a platypus had no relatives among other animals; certainly wasn't related to *me.*
And another couple of things changed:
Pluto is a planet, and it was discovered by a guy from New Mexico. Well... he was in Arizona when he discovered it, but he had been living in New Mexico for a while, and taught at our state university for a long time; so mostly true. But now Pluto isn't a planet. Poor Professor Tombaugh.
Hallowe'en: I was taught to spell Hallowe'en with that apostrophe in there, but quite soon after it was "never mind." It stands for a "v" (for those who want to know what apostrophes stand for), so even at that point, it was a fragment of the longer all hallow's eve(ning) so why have one apostrophe if there were more letters out than in?
We were told that humans have no instincts whatsoever, but only know what they learn from books.
By the time I was in college, I didn't believe it anymore, but a friend of mine who was born in 1964 said he was told that, in high school AND college.
What kinds of fallacies did some of you write down on tests papers to get an A?
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Robyn Coburn
The echidna is also a monotreme - an egg laying mammal. There was never
a question that platypus and echidna weren't mammals when I was at
school in Australia, in the 1970's - but they were also monotremes, as
distinct from marsupials. Presumably we had more accurate info at the
time because they are native to us.
--
Robyn L. Coburn
www.craft-it-easy.com
www.iggyjingles.blogspot.com
www.robyncoburn.blogspot.com
www.allthingsdoll.blogspot.com
Scraperfect.com Design Team
a question that platypus and echidna weren't mammals when I was at
school in Australia, in the 1970's - but they were also monotremes, as
distinct from marsupials. Presumably we had more accurate info at the
time because they are native to us.
--
Robyn L. Coburn
www.craft-it-easy.com
www.iggyjingles.blogspot.com
www.robyncoburn.blogspot.com
www.allthingsdoll.blogspot.com
Scraperfect.com Design Team
Schuyler
I have my father-in-law's old children's encyclopedia set from the 1940's. Enid Blyton was one of the editors. They are filled with facts that aren't built on particularly stable ground. They are also fabulously colonial. I love them. I love the way they underscore how imperfect and changing our knowledge and experience is. I like that there are folks out there challenging brontosaurus. I'm not so keen on unstable governments as often that's accompanied by war and the occasional genocide. I am sure that there are facts in those books that have held the test of 70 years, but there are more that are not. The sun sets regularly on the British Empire these days. I suppose the downside is that teachers pass on knowledge as truth disregarding the bias of the publishing company or the government in charge of setting the curriculum or the limited understanding that may exist about the subject.
Schuyler
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Schuyler
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Laureen
I had an awesome geology professor at University, who told us to sell
our books back as soon as we could at the end of the semester, because
by the time we had time in our lives to look back at the book again,
half of everything in it was wrong. He then held up his college
textbook, and read out of it for the rest of the hour, making us all
laugh at all the things he'd learned that were now understood to be
wrong, like that the planet's crust was like an apple's skin, and that
magnetism was constant.
His final statement was "remember these things I'll teach you for
today, but remember mostly to question, because as much of what I'm
teaching you will be proven wrong as what I was taught was wrong.
Just... stay light on your brain."
--
~~L!
s/v Excellent Adventure
http://www.theexcellentadventure.com/
our books back as soon as we could at the end of the semester, because
by the time we had time in our lives to look back at the book again,
half of everything in it was wrong. He then held up his college
textbook, and read out of it for the rest of the hour, making us all
laugh at all the things he'd learned that were now understood to be
wrong, like that the planet's crust was like an apple's skin, and that
magnetism was constant.
His final statement was "remember these things I'll teach you for
today, but remember mostly to question, because as much of what I'm
teaching you will be proven wrong as what I was taught was wrong.
Just... stay light on your brain."
--
~~L!
s/v Excellent Adventure
http://www.theexcellentadventure.com/
Ann-Marie
Yup. The platypus and the echidna are both monotremes - mammals which lay eggs. I found that out in my twenties, which also changed what I thought I knew about mammals!
Ann-Marie
Ann-Marie
--- In [email protected], Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
> Platypus--not a mammal. A class unto itself, literally. But at some point after I wasn't in school, they were reclassified as mammals. I learned that at the Indianapolis zoo one day after I already had three children and was at my first interstate unschooling gathering. So what I learned was alter changed. A mammal CAN lay an egg. That was news. Live birth was one of the characteristics of mammals I learned in school, and that a platypus had no relatives among other animals; certainly wasn't related to *me.*
>
Sandra Dodd
-=-So what I learned was alter changed. -=-
Later changed. Alter changed, altered/changed.... later alternative. Sorry.
We were taught the one right, healthy safe way to brush our teeth, in health class, when I was nine. And then they changed it every three years. Variably hard bristles or soft bristles, and variably straight up and down, or down on top teeth, up on bottom, or circular motions to get under gums, or don't disturb gums, and later "floss the heck out of everything."
I think what that means is that no one way solves all dental problems, but they keep changing the recommendations, "they" being (in this telling) the American Dental Association and providers of pamphlets and instructional materials for schools and clinics and dentists' offices.
It might not matter, but we "had to" learn these things and be tested on the right answers, in school.
Later, the teaching and testing was in dentists' offices.
I grew up with "four food groups" charts, and was required to learn and recite, and draw, and cut-and-paste into four groups.
When my kids were young, it was "the food pyramid" with lots of grain, bread, pasta.
I honestly don't know what the official "This Is CRUCIAL" model is that kids are taught in school, but I bet there is one. Probably circular, or star shaped or something that's neither a four-square box or a triangle. :-)
And in my lifetime, every part of a hamburger and every part of pizza has been considered good, or terrible; will-kill-you or the best part of it. Even the grease has been reviled and then redeemed.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Later changed. Alter changed, altered/changed.... later alternative. Sorry.
We were taught the one right, healthy safe way to brush our teeth, in health class, when I was nine. And then they changed it every three years. Variably hard bristles or soft bristles, and variably straight up and down, or down on top teeth, up on bottom, or circular motions to get under gums, or don't disturb gums, and later "floss the heck out of everything."
I think what that means is that no one way solves all dental problems, but they keep changing the recommendations, "they" being (in this telling) the American Dental Association and providers of pamphlets and instructional materials for schools and clinics and dentists' offices.
It might not matter, but we "had to" learn these things and be tested on the right answers, in school.
Later, the teaching and testing was in dentists' offices.
I grew up with "four food groups" charts, and was required to learn and recite, and draw, and cut-and-paste into four groups.
When my kids were young, it was "the food pyramid" with lots of grain, bread, pasta.
I honestly don't know what the official "This Is CRUCIAL" model is that kids are taught in school, but I bet there is one. Probably circular, or star shaped or something that's neither a four-square box or a triangle. :-)
And in my lifetime, every part of a hamburger and every part of pizza has been considered good, or terrible; will-kill-you or the best part of it. Even the grease has been reviled and then redeemed.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
teresa
A school that I worked at three years ago--a small private school--had a policy on what kinds of foods kids could and couldn't bring in their lunches. It was a no soda, no candy, no "junk food" kind of a thing. I was an after-school counselor at the time, and I wanted to offer baking once a week, but they didn't want me to do too much with white flour.
It wasn't what the kids were taught, per say, but definitely part of the "implied curriculum." I remember an 8th grader whose older brother had developed his own all-natural energy drink pointed out to me one day that even though the school wanted to say it was "healthy," it was really only one idea of healthy that they counted.
Teresa
It wasn't what the kids were taught, per say, but definitely part of the "implied curriculum." I remember an 8th grader whose older brother had developed his own all-natural energy drink pointed out to me one day that even though the school wanted to say it was "healthy," it was really only one idea of healthy that they counted.
Teresa
--- In [email protected], Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
>
> Alysia wrote this in another topic, but I'm glad, because I was hoping to get help making a list of things learned in school that are not true now. Either things changed, or science moved on, or something.
>
> -=-Even someone who is an expert in her field most likely doesn't know everything about that field. Schools can't provide information on everything a child could learn and know. And, a lot of times, what is taught in schools turns out to be wrong or outdated or biased or purposely containing gaps.-=-
>
> Bias and purposeful gaps are understandable.
>
> From my own schooling, there are two examples I've used sometimes when I give presentations:
>
> Tanganyika--I learned about this African nation in 8th grade geography, and how to spell it, and it's neighbor Zanzibar, too, and drew maps, and passed a test. By the time I was grown, it wasn't a country anymore. It's l ikely that there were people who learned about it even after it was gone, because our state would use textbooks for five or six years, and by the time a textbook came along, it had been in preparation and production for a year or two (or more). Tanganyika was only a country for a few years. Oh. 1961 to 1964, says Wikipedia. Well hell. I learned about it in the 1966/67 school year. It wasn't my geography teacher's job to dispute the textbook, though. That would've been current events, and not his field.
>
> Platypus--not a mammal. A class unto itself, literally. But at some point after I wasn't in school, they were reclassified as mammals. I learned that at the Indianapolis zoo one day after I already had three children and was at my first interstate unschooling gathering. So what I learned was alter changed. A mammal CAN lay an egg. That was news. Live birth was one of the characteristics of mammals I learned in school, and that a platypus had no relatives among other animals; certainly wasn't related to *me.*
>
> And another couple of things changed:
>
> Pluto is a planet, and it was discovered by a guy from New Mexico. Well... he was in Arizona when he discovered it, but he had been living in New Mexico for a while, and taught at our state university for a long time; so mostly true. But now Pluto isn't a planet. Poor Professor Tombaugh.
>
> Hallowe'en: I was taught to spell Hallowe'en with that apostrophe in there, but quite soon after it was "never mind." It stands for a "v" (for those who want to know what apostrophes stand for), so even at that point, it was a fragment of the longer all hallow's eve(ning) so why have one apostrophe if there were more letters out than in?
>
> We were told that humans have no instincts whatsoever, but only know what they learn from books.
>
> By the time I was in college, I didn't believe it anymore, but a friend of mine who was born in 1964 said he was told that, in high school AND college.
>
> What kinds of fallacies did some of you write down on tests papers to get an A?
>
> Sandra
>
keetry
==I honestly don't know what the official "This Is CRUCIAL" model is that kids are taught in school, but I bet there is one. Probably circular, or star shaped or something that's neither a four-square box or a triangle. :-)==
I think it's a food plate/circle divided into wedges now but I don't know what's on it.
My neighbor was showing me the list of approved foods that she was allowed to send to school with her 4 year old child for lunch and snacks. I think it might be state government requirements because she said the school is waiting to see if a bill will pass to negate it. It was a pretty short list and did not include any kind of "treat". My neighbor said she wishes she could send something her child will actually eat because the vegetables will just be thrown out and her child will go hungry. That's certainly not conducive to learning.
Alysia
I think it's a food plate/circle divided into wedges now but I don't know what's on it.
My neighbor was showing me the list of approved foods that she was allowed to send to school with her 4 year old child for lunch and snacks. I think it might be state government requirements because she said the school is waiting to see if a bill will pass to negate it. It was a pretty short list and did not include any kind of "treat". My neighbor said she wishes she could send something her child will actually eat because the vegetables will just be thrown out and her child will go hungry. That's certainly not conducive to learning.
Alysia
Sharkeydawn
-----I honestly don't know what the official "This Is CRUCIAL" model is that kids are taught in school, but I bet there is one. Probably circular, or star shaped or something that's neither a four-square box or a triangle. :-)-------
Here in the UK there is a huge emphasis on "5 a day" as in everyone should eat five portions of fruit or vegetables each day. It is pushed heavily in schools/children's centres etc and to other groups perceived to need that knowledge (I have been asked to help get the message across to a group of women who don't speak English, for example).
It's apparently based on World Health Organisation advice, though their original advice recommends nine portions per day. I believe the government advice in Australia is nine. Here that was thought to be off-puttingly high. Five was deemed achievable. In Japan it's 17.
At the same time different "truths" are being doled out in different places.
Interesting article here http://m.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2006/may/25/healthandwellbeing.health?cat=lifeandstyle&type=article
Dawn
Sent from my iPhone
Here in the UK there is a huge emphasis on "5 a day" as in everyone should eat five portions of fruit or vegetables each day. It is pushed heavily in schools/children's centres etc and to other groups perceived to need that knowledge (I have been asked to help get the message across to a group of women who don't speak English, for example).
It's apparently based on World Health Organisation advice, though their original advice recommends nine portions per day. I believe the government advice in Australia is nine. Here that was thought to be off-puttingly high. Five was deemed achievable. In Japan it's 17.
At the same time different "truths" are being doled out in different places.
Interesting article here http://m.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2006/may/25/healthandwellbeing.health?cat=lifeandstyle&type=article
Dawn
Sent from my iPhone
michelle_m29
We spent an entire year (either the fourth or sixth grade -- I had the same teacher in the same classroom both years, so they blur together) doing social studies projects on the Tasaday <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tasaday>
I never found out until my mid-20s that they were a hoax -- and had been dismissed as a hoax just a few years after we spent so much time learning about them. That bugs me more than Pluto, or the Bronotaurus.
Michelle
I never found out until my mid-20s that they were a hoax -- and had been dismissed as a hoax just a few years after we spent so much time learning about them. That bugs me more than Pluto, or the Bronotaurus.
Michelle
Robin Bentley
But if you read to the end of the Wikipedia article, they weren't a
hoax after all.
Robin B.
hoax after all.
Robin B.
On Aug 21, 2012, at 12:28 PM, michelle_m29 wrote:
> We spent an entire year (either the fourth or sixth grade -- I had
> the same teacher in the same classroom both years, so they blur
> together) doing social studies projects on the Tasaday <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tasaday
> >
>
> I never found out until my mid-20s that they were a hoax -- and had
> been dismissed as a hoax just a few years after we spent so much
> time learning about them. That bugs me more than Pluto, or the
> Bronotaurus.
>
Robin Bentley
And I read the whole thing because I'd never even heard of the
Tasaday. I was in high school by then :-)
Tasaday. I was in high school by then :-)
On Aug 21, 2012, at 1:04 PM, Robin Bentley wrote:
> But if you read to the end of the Wikipedia article, they weren't a
> hoax after all.
>
> Robin B.
>
> On Aug 21, 2012, at 12:28 PM, michelle_m29 wrote:
>
>> We spent an entire year (either the fourth or sixth grade -- I had
>> the same teacher in the same classroom both years, so they blur
>> together) doing social studies projects on the Tasaday <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tasaday
>>>
>>
>> I never found out until my mid-20s that they were a hoax -- and had
>> been dismissed as a hoax just a few years after we spent so much
>> time learning about them. That bugs me more than Pluto, or the
>> Bronotaurus.
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
LydiaK
I learned about the echidna just this week! My kids are really into Sonic the Hedgehog recently--my son especially likes to play the games and my daughter loves watching the old cartoon from the early nineties on Netflix. One of the characters is Knuckles the Echidna; and in the course of doing some research on the back stories of the different characters we learned about echidnas, which I had never heard of before and had originally assumed was a made up animal! I am constantly amazed at how much i have learned from my kids' interests. I remember learning about the platypus being a mammal on a nature show I happened upon as a kid, and found them really fascinating as well.
Lydia Koltai
Lydia Koltai
Lesa Owens
Having never heard of them before I read the wikipedia article and then googled it. The Museum of Hoaxes has an interesting article that seems to put the truth somewhere in the middle by saying some parts of the story are true, some are not. According to the info there, there was a lot of political intrigue going on that influenced the truth one or the other about this *alleged* stone aged tribe...
Lesa~
------------------------------
Lesa~
------------------------------
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 1:04 PM PDT Robin Bentley wrote:
>But if you read to the end of the Wikipedia article, they weren't a
>hoax after all.
>
>Robin B.
>
>
keetry
== And I read the whole thing because I'd never even heard of the
Alysia
> Tasaday. I was in high school by then :-)I just read the whole thing because I had never heard of them. I was in elementary and middle school during the initial controversy, I guess. Interesting and confusing. So, it still hasn't been determined if they were/are a separate ethnic group but the most recent linguistic "evidence" seems to point toward that?
>
> On Aug 21, 2012, at 1:04 PM, Robin Bentley wrote:
>
> > But if you read to the end of the Wikipedia article, they weren't a
> > hoax after all.==
Alysia
Schuyler
There is a more story-led telling of the Tasaday hoax here: http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/archive/permalink/the_stone-age_tasaday. The concluding paragraph at that page is: To sum up: The Tasaday weren't a true stone-age tribe. But nor were they farmers coerced into playing a stone-age tribe. Instead, they were very poor people living close to Nature in the Philippine jungle who became swept up in and manipulated by global events beyond their control. This version of events isn't as compelling as the versions that made headlines in 1971 and 1986, but it is a good illustration of how the truth is often far messier and more complicated than it appears at first glance.
If you want first source stuff you can read Lawrence Reid's papers on the Tasaday (as well as on other linguistic groups in the Philippines) at his webpage here: http://www2.hawaii.edu/~reid/publications.html. He has a paper that precedes the Tasaday reviews on how hunter-gatherer groups don't live in isolation: http://www2.hawaii.edu/~reid/Combined%20Files/A30.1991.%20Headland-Reid--Holocene%20foragers.pdf. It is interesting to see linguistics used as a dating method, like carbon dating. How language differences build up in a predictable way that you can date a population split. It's a very readable paper.
Schuyler
________________________________
From: keetry <keetry@...>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Thursday, 23 August 2012, 0:59
Subject: [AlwaysLearning] Re: Just Wrong
== And I read the whole thing because I'd never even heard of the
Alysia
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
If you want first source stuff you can read Lawrence Reid's papers on the Tasaday (as well as on other linguistic groups in the Philippines) at his webpage here: http://www2.hawaii.edu/~reid/publications.html. He has a paper that precedes the Tasaday reviews on how hunter-gatherer groups don't live in isolation: http://www2.hawaii.edu/~reid/Combined%20Files/A30.1991.%20Headland-Reid--Holocene%20foragers.pdf. It is interesting to see linguistics used as a dating method, like carbon dating. How language differences build up in a predictable way that you can date a population split. It's a very readable paper.
Schuyler
________________________________
From: keetry <keetry@...>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Thursday, 23 August 2012, 0:59
Subject: [AlwaysLearning] Re: Just Wrong
== And I read the whole thing because I'd never even heard of the
> Tasaday. I was in high school by then :-)I just read the whole thing because I had never heard of them. I was in elementary and middle school during the initial controversy, I guess. Interesting and confusing. So, it still hasn't been determined if they were/are a separate ethnic group but the most recent linguistic "evidence" seems to point toward that?
>
> On Aug 21, 2012, at 1:04 PM, Robin Bentley wrote:
>
> > But if you read to the end of the Wikipedia article, they weren't a
> > hoax after all.==
Alysia
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Rinelle
I’ve been trying to think of something I learnt in school that turned out to be wrong, but coming up with nothing. Then I remembered my high school biology teacher telling us about goldfish swimming from one end of the tank to another, and their memory being so short that when they turned around, they didn’t recognise their tank.
In retrospect, since my dad bred fish and we raised a lot of goldfish over the years, I should have known this didn’t make sense. But still, the idea persisted. Until a recent episode of Mythbusters, where they tested and busted it.
Not really wrong, but I remember reading about atoms in my first high school science textbook, and feeling totally ripped off that no one had mentioned until then that everything in the whole world was composed of atoms!
Tamara
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
In retrospect, since my dad bred fish and we raised a lot of goldfish over the years, I should have known this didn’t make sense. But still, the idea persisted. Until a recent episode of Mythbusters, where they tested and busted it.
Not really wrong, but I remember reading about atoms in my first high school science textbook, and feeling totally ripped off that no one had mentioned until then that everything in the whole world was composed of atoms!
Tamara
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
(This is not new writing, but it was buried under under open e-mails on my desktop.)
======================================
-=-But if you read to the end of the Wikipedia article, they weren't a
hoax after all.-=-
There was fraud.
There was intentional subversion and bullshit.
To have presented that study, and that book, as scientifically valid involved hoax at one level and irresponsible gullibility at another. At that point, the degree of reality-show (pre-video-in-the-jungle) doesn't matter. There was a turd in the lemonade. Big one.
One of the worst effects of all, probably, was the taint it put back on social sciences. For many years, any social science (psychology, sociology, anthropology) no matter how much study and biology and such backed it up, was considered "soft science" and "pseudo-science" (when they weren't saying worse). So whenever one leaves any residue in the lemonade, it's a big step back.
We were told about this tribe in an anthropology class in 1973 or so. It was quite a while before they they took it back, and I'm sure they didn't contact every anthro student who'd ever heard of them and say "never mind." :-)
Sandra
======================================
-=-But if you read to the end of the Wikipedia article, they weren't a
hoax after all.-=-
There was fraud.
There was intentional subversion and bullshit.
To have presented that study, and that book, as scientifically valid involved hoax at one level and irresponsible gullibility at another. At that point, the degree of reality-show (pre-video-in-the-jungle) doesn't matter. There was a turd in the lemonade. Big one.
One of the worst effects of all, probably, was the taint it put back on social sciences. For many years, any social science (psychology, sociology, anthropology) no matter how much study and biology and such backed it up, was considered "soft science" and "pseudo-science" (when they weren't saying worse). So whenever one leaves any residue in the lemonade, it's a big step back.
We were told about this tribe in an anthropology class in 1973 or so. It was quite a while before they they took it back, and I'm sure they didn't contact every anthro student who'd ever heard of them and say "never mind." :-)
Sandra
dezignarob
Something I recently learned is wrong, but is still taught all over the place is that idea about the taste buds in different areas on the tongue being for different tastes. Unfortunately the map of the tongue is still being promulgated out on the internet, as well as in old text books.
http://www.livescience.com/7113-tongue-map-tasteless-myth-debunked.html
Robyn L. Coburn
www.craft-it-easy.com
www.robyncoburn.blogspot.com
http://www.livescience.com/7113-tongue-map-tasteless-myth-debunked.html
Robyn L. Coburn
www.craft-it-easy.com
www.robyncoburn.blogspot.com
plaidpanties666
This isn't so much something that's taught in school as something "everyone knows". Where I live, in TN, there's a little bitty bug called the chigger which leaves very itchy bites. "Everyone knows" that it burrows under the skin... except it doesn't at all. We had an infestation up at the commune one year and did some research and found that burrowing under the skin is a myth - maybe a confusion between chiggers and scabies, since scabies do get under the skin (and they're passed by physical contact, like pubic lice - so there may be social reasons for the confusion).
---Meredith
---Meredith