Below is my comment about Joe's reply. Carl
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Joseph B. Reid Sent: Saturday, August 03, 2002 1:11 PM To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:21515] Re: metric in schools >>John Kilopascal wrote in USMA 21513: >> >>I think that is wonderful, but..... If I were to approach the students of >>this teacher, and asked these students some questions, like: >> >>How tall are you? >>How much do you weigh? >>How far is it from point X to point Y? >>etc. >> >>Would these students answer me in SI or FFU? >> >>Now, this is only a math teacher. What about the other teachers? What >>units are they teaching? It is very easy to teach something and have it >>known by the students just for the test and later easily ignored or >>forgotten. Teaching SI in this haphazard fashion is as bad as having >>sporadic metric usage in construction. It actually hurts the cause. People >>will remember that at one time there was only one system in use in this >>country. Without a practical plan, all we have done is add more units to >>the collection, without taking the others away and thus in most peoples >>minds, metric has made life more confusing. >> >>All these little drips and drops here and there are not the answer. And >>never will be. >I beg to differ. Lord Beaverbrook, newspaer tycoon, remarked "There is no >such thing as bad publicity; there is only publicity". When those children >grow up and are faced with the full complexity of ifp they will realize >that there are simpler ways of measuring things. I believe that Canadians >accepted metric more easily because generations had met metric in high >school science classes. >Joseph B.Reid >17 Glebe Road West >Toronto M5P 1C8 Tel. 416 486-6071 Joe, I think you are right. I am an example of a person who grew up with metric units in school (some classes) but I used ifp for everyday use until I suddenly wondered why I was using the more difficult system. Even before I decided to back the metric system, I liked it and I would not have opposed a conversion effort. I already thought that metric was better. The survey I did implies that most people in my demographic group feel the same way. Even people I know who are not involved in math or science have nothing against it. I suspect that there is also a generational factor involved. I think that the metric unit that people are most comfortable with in the U.S. is the liter. I think that most people can visualize a liter without as much difficulty as meters, kilograms, etc. They probably understand it better than the fluid ounce. Who really knows how much 48 fl. oz. is, anyway? I didn't before I started paying attention to units recently. I would not be surprised if the gallon or the fluid ounce were some of the first units to fall into disuse. Obviously, we are not really close to that happening yet, but we are moving in the right direction. People ask me how much 75 km is, but they never ask how much a liter is. I agree that we need a paradigm shift more than "all these drips and drops", but there are several problems we face. Most Americans don't see a compelling need to metricate--we should encourage other countries to insist on metric units in imports of goods and information/entertainment. That will add pressure on our industries. Second, Americans tend think of the metric system as being "foreign", but it would be better if they thought of it as "modern" and thoroughly American. Already the liter is on its way there because of "drips and drops" of progress. Carl
