on 2002-11-28 07.35, Nat Hager III at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > And as an > educational tool, it would help children understand "Grampa's units" during > a transitional period.
Dear Nat, On the other hand, if children do not understand "Grampa's units", then they will never have to clutter their minds with any 'transitional period' at all. For example, if a child learns, from experience, that a two litre bottle of Cola is more than a one litre bottle of Cola then that child will never have the need or the desire to learn that dry ounces are different to wet ounces; that there are 16 ounces in some pounds and 20 ounces in other pounds; and that gallons in the USA are different to gallons in other parts of the world. It is my experience with metrication that it can be done in the matter of a few days at most � if it is done well. If it is done with allowances for such things as 'transitional periods', then it will be done slowly � if at all. Please note that when I say slowly, I mean slooooowly. A well planned, properly conducted metrication program can take as little as ten days, whereas an unplanned, poorly conducted program can take in excess of 200 years. As examples I would cite the metrication of carpenters in Australia in 1975 (the formal program took 50 minutes and the informal experiential part took less than two weeks) as a successful case. To contrast this, I would cite the transition of the New York Stock Exchange to decimal currency that took 206 years from 1793 to 2001. I agree with Marcus. This is a fundamental issue in metrication and I don't believe that it can be treated lightly. Cheers, Pat Naughtin CAMS Geelong, Australia
