<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Next Leap</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.keith.gs/2008/12/the-next-leap/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.keith.gs/2008/12/the-next-leap/?nucrss=1</link>
	<description>Philosophers only interpret the world - the point is to change it</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:15:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Not such a leap forward &#171; Damien Mulley</title>
		<link>http://www.keith.gs/2008/12/the-next-leap/comment-page-1/#comment-565</link>
		<dc:creator>Not such a leap forward &#171; Damien Mulley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Jan 2009 15:03:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.keith.gs/?p=383#comment-565</guid>
		<description>[...] you may want to subscribe to my site using a feedreader or email. Thanks for visiting - Damien.Keith pointed to a doc from the Irish Institute for European Affairs called The Next Leap. I barely agree with [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] you may want to subscribe to my site using a feedreader or email. Thanks for visiting &#8211; Damien.Keith pointed to a doc from the Irish Institute for European Affairs called The Next Leap. I barely agree with [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Neil</title>
		<link>http://www.keith.gs/2008/12/the-next-leap/comment-page-1/#comment-490</link>
		<dc:creator>Neil</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2008 11:06:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.keith.gs/?p=383#comment-490</guid>
		<description>I agree with almost all of this, save for the second part on education: &quot;Dumbing down that course isn’t an option when we need more people with better maths skills, so let’s do the opposite - improve the return on investment for students.  This isn’t a matter of helping out those who have an aptitude for maths &amp; physics.  It’s a matter of incentivising them to take those subjects instead of so called ‘easier’ ones&quot;

This I don&#039;t buy - for a couple of reasons.  Firstly, I reject the idea that the primary aim of an education system should be to produce third-level students of a particular skill-set.  Education between the ages of 4-18 should be about broadening the minds of our young people as widely as possible, while giving them a good grasp of key concepts in a range of disciplines.  It should not be about churning out semi-literate mathematical prodigies (or similar).

Secondly, if Maths is the hardest subject to do well in (and I for one disagree with you on this, though I think there are substantial flaws with our teaching of Maths).  Instead of incentivising more students to take Higher Level maths, why not raise the bar in other subjects to ensure that all subjects are examined at a suitably ambitious level?  (mind you, I believe that continuous assessment is the only way to truly raise standards, but that&#039;s another debate entirely).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with almost all of this, save for the second part on education: &#8220;Dumbing down that course isn’t an option when we need more people with better maths skills, so let’s do the opposite &#8211; improve the return on investment for students.  This isn’t a matter of helping out those who have an aptitude for maths &amp; physics.  It’s a matter of incentivising them to take those subjects instead of so called ‘easier’ ones&#8221;</p>
<p>This I don&#8217;t buy &#8211; for a couple of reasons.  Firstly, I reject the idea that the primary aim of an education system should be to produce third-level students of a particular skill-set.  Education between the ages of 4-18 should be about broadening the minds of our young people as widely as possible, while giving them a good grasp of key concepts in a range of disciplines.  It should not be about churning out semi-literate mathematical prodigies (or similar).</p>
<p>Secondly, if Maths is the hardest subject to do well in (and I for one disagree with you on this, though I think there are substantial flaws with our teaching of Maths).  Instead of incentivising more students to take Higher Level maths, why not raise the bar in other subjects to ensure that all subjects are examined at a suitably ambitious level?  (mind you, I believe that continuous assessment is the only way to truly raise standards, but that&#8217;s another debate entirely).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fluffy Links - Tuesday December 30th 2008 &#171; Damien Mulley</title>
		<link>http://www.keith.gs/2008/12/the-next-leap/comment-page-1/#comment-474</link>
		<dc:creator>Fluffy Links - Tuesday December 30th 2008 &#171; Damien Mulley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2008 05:11:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.keith.gs/?p=383#comment-474</guid>
		<description>[...] to my site using a feedreader or email. Thanks for visiting - Damien.Congrats to Keith on his great gig in the East. Best of [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] to my site using a feedreader or email. Thanks for visiting &#8211; Damien.Congrats to Keith on his great gig in the East. Best of [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
