As IF Times

link News from The Associated Press.

Here’s another anecdotal piece of evidence that America’s education standards are slipping badly.  Over 40 years ago, NASA was able to do the math, fine tune the engineering and manage the logistics of not only sending men to the moon and then also bring them back.   You would think that in the ensuing years since then, the technique of doing this kind of stuff would be pretty much nailed down.

This is not to denigrate the work and knowledge required to do this kind of thing, after all, launching something into orbit isn’t exactly as easy as turning  an ignition key.  It does however give hope to the skeptics who always thought the moon landing was created on a Hollywood sound stage.  It appears that NASA has failed in two consecutive attempts to launch and keep a satellite in orbit.  Huh? Haven’t they been launching satellites into orbit by the trainload for the past 50 years?  Most banana republics have been sending up their own satellites, so the science must be pretty routine.

This may have a link to America’s educational standards.  We’re all aware of the stories of college grads who can’t read or “write good”.  Maybe the approach of ‘whole learning’ is not as effective as specific learning.  In the old days, when asked to do a math problem, we had to get the right answer on the button.  Nowadays, when you say that pi is about 3 and a bit, that’s close enough.   After all, it’s not about the answer, it’s how you arrived at it.  It’s the academic equivalent of, it’s not the destination, it’s the journey. 

Of course one may argue that things were simpler back in the day.  Arguably true.  Back then, most boys would be somewhat familiar with the mechanical workings of a car.  You could fix almost anything with a screwdriver and a pair of pliers.  Nowadays, most boys couldn’t tell a dipstick from a pogo stick.  In our modern times, the mechanics of cars are so tied into computer technology, you’d have to be an expert in Windows to diagnose one.  Still, you’d think that the body of knowledge of things would be a platform upon which  to build further knowledge. 

The evolution of not just what but whom is being taught in school today certainly has an impact on the resulting workforce.  For instance, it’s been known that students of foreign backgrounds are more likely to populate the hard science and math classes than domestic students who veer into the social sciences.  From the website, Universities in the USA.com  we get the following statistics:

While overall international enrollment in U.S. universities and colleges increased by 3% in fall 2009, science and engineering (S&E) showed a rise of 4% (259,000 students). The increase in S&E enrollment accounted for a steady 44% of total international enrollment.

Notable increases in other fields are:

1. Mathematics – 10.3%
2. Economics – 9.3%
3. Engineering – 6.5%
4. Business – 2.8%
5. Computer Sciences – 2.6%

In addition, another interesting statistic:

The top 10 countries of citizenship for international students in US universities both in science and engineering and non-S&E fields are:

1st – India

2nd – China

3rd – South Korea

4th – Saudi Arabia

5th – Nepal

6th – Japan

7th – Turkey

8th – Mexico

9th – Canada

10th – Taiwan

Overall, the enrollment of international science and engineering students increased from China, India, the Middle East, and Africa. Two countries-India, with 68,000 S&E students, and China, with 54,000-accounted for almost half (47%) of all foreign S&E students in the United States in December 2009.

Maybe the U.S. has gone too far in the pursuit of developing the next hot consumer app for smart phones.  Maybe they need to reacquaint themselves with excellence in other areas of science and industry.  It’s possible that we’ve swung too far from formerly being a production and innovation society towards being  a massive consumer society.  That may partly explain the decline of U.S. industrial output.  If we have to one day go to some banana republic and ask, “how do you get a satellite into orbit again?” it would be a tad embarrassing.

link Islamist rebel urges total war with Russia.

Not that pleas  for a united front against the enemies of Islam are new, but refreshingly this time, it’s not against the Great Satan but against Russia.  I’m not sure how Russia stands in the Satan pecking order but since Great has been taken, the logical position is Pretty Big Satan, or Next Biggest Satan.   This may stir the competitive sensibilities of the Russians who do not like to be inferior to anyone.

A new twist in this plea for a united war is that they are calling for women to join the fight as well.  This can be regarded as progressive for that movement because in the past, women have never been considered as anything other than chattel.  Now they are at least being addressed as people.   I’m not sure how tempting the invitation is however, given that if they eventually win and an Islamist regime ensues, women will have the privelege of being subjugated and treated as less than human as a reward.  Hmm.  Wonder if option B is better?

This offer is no less preposterous than the situation that exists in the U.S.  When you think of the platform of the progressive movement, their model is just as ludicrous.  If you vote for them, they will spread the wealth and make sure that rules and regulations are in place that won’t allow any wealth creation.  The implication is that corporations and wealthy people will be taxed so that the ‘average’ person can have a good wage, whatever that is.  Those with some basic grasp of economics may figure out that if no one is rewarded for taking a chance on business, then no one will start one.   All of a sudden, the only employers are the various tentacles of  government, which of course are the people themselves.  In essence, people will be taxed at ever higher rates in order to pay… themselves. 

Oddly, in the case of the Islamists, some women will heed the call for the struggle.  Even more sadly, as has been proven over and over again, voters here are happy to be bought with their own money.  For example, as rabid a guy as Michael Moore is, he can still claim people who sympathize with his worldviews.   It shows that you don’t have to create elaborate stories to fool  the people.  You only need tell part of the truth to a gullible audience.