> Instead, the point is to help kids to develop a background in math, physics, chemistry, etc. whose basic foundations haven't changed in the fundamental way in

> Instead, the point is to help kids to develop a background in math, physics, chemistry, etc. whose basic foundations haven't changed in the fundamental way in the past 50 years. Nice theory, and I agree wholeheartedly. It takes a special kind of teacher though to implement that against the push back of students ("what will this ever be good for?"), parents ("get our of your ivory tower and teach my kids skills that will give them a good job") and politicians ("we need more specialists and it must cost $0"). That would be easier if that pedagogical approach were the norm and vocational training the exception, but in addition to these three interest groups, such a teacher often also has to deal with other teachers who are not interested in a trouble maker colleague who may create additional work for them.