I would start with the relationship between cubic centimeters which are the same as milliliters and the fact that 1000 cc or 1000 ml are one liter. Easy to show in principle with 1 cm square blocks and litre blocks or litre bottles.
Next is the fact that 1 mm of rain is one liter per square meter. Imagine a 10 cm square block carved into 1 mm thick slices, You'd have 1000 ten centimeter blocks which would make up a square centimeter. Makes farming east, if you get 10 mm of rain you get 10 L/m2. Pressure. 100 kPa (100 000 Pa) equal one atmosphere, Outer space zero pascals. 10 km altitude is about 15 kPa or 15% of sea level pressure. Very similar to the pressure on Mars apparently. Distance. The odometers on cars measure can measure to 0.1 km which is 100 m. In some countries (Australia) they have odometers with two digits to the right of the decimal point and hence measure every 10 m. I have a bicycle odometer that does the same. Just a couple of examples. Mike Payne On 16/03/2012, at 11:44 , Metric Rules Info wrote: > Good Morning All: > > I am the Executive Director of a new nonprofit created to drive Science, > Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) curricula towards greater > focus and coherence; we believe that no single change would impact this > objective more successfully than metric-only STEM instruction. I am getting > some state- level traction and I have been asked to submit a paper stating my > case. The GREAT news is that interest has come relatively fast (6 months) but > the flip side is that I have not been able to fully flush out my thoughts and > gather facts/ feedback on some key points. I am hoping that this very > knowledgeable group will help me craft the most effective, but accurate, > messages. > > Any and all comments (positive or negative) are greatly appreciated. > > US customary units- I have stopped calling it the US customary system. The > word system used to describe customary units is a misleading term; it’s not a > true system. It is more correctly described “as a hodge-podge of traditional > artifacts and international legacies clustered and upheld through our > continued teaching of them.” I intentionally used the word “teaching” > instead of “usage” because the reason customary units are still part of > consumption is because that’s what most American’s were taught in school and > we are focused on education. I then attempt to demonstrate this point with > the below table. Questions- What do you think of my new “catch-phrase” to > describe our collection of customary units and the visual representation of > it? I agree, there must be a better way to visually illustrate it but I can > figure it out? > > US customary (length) > 1 mile= 8 furlongs=320 rods=1760yd= 5280ft= 63,360in > 1 furlong= 125MI= 40 rods= 220yd= 660ft= 7920in > 1 rod= .003125MI = 0.025 furlong = 5.5yd= 16.5ft = 198in > Yard (standard)= 000568181818MI= 00454545455 furlong= 0.181818182 rods, =3ft, > =36in > 1 foot= 0.000189393939MI, =.00151515152 furlong, =.0606060606 rod, 1/3yd, > =12in > 1 inch= 1.57828283 × 10-5 miles=.000126262626 furlong, =.00505050505 rod, > =.0277777778yd, .0833333333ft > > SI units- I am trying to convey the true system of SI units. I state that > not only are the SI units connected but that the SI measures themselves have > defined relationships. I am particularly interested to know if a spatial > measurement (length, area, & volume) correlation/ relationship exists? If so, > how would you explain it to a 6 year old. And how would you explain the > relationship between meter and liter to a 6 year old? My background is not > in Science; I am learning as I go and would greatly appreciate any > interesting connection points between SI measures. I have noticed lots of > research around the question of why US students have so much trouble > understanding spatial measurement. Is one factor the use of our customary > units? Would metric-only instruction significantly improve a student’s > understanding of spatial measurement? If so, how? > > Healthcare- Any numbers about accidental injuries/ deaths related to > conversion errors. This feeds into the issue of educating a workforce to > “think” and live in an inch-pound world but financially rewarding occupations > that function in a Metric one. (Side note, I became interested in the > inch-pound/ metric debate after my then infant son was prescribed a double > dose of medication, from what we assume was a weight conversion error. > Unfortunately, he was born with some medical issues but he is now a healthy, > funny little man) > > Military- Any numbers about accidental injuries/ deaths (or even > miscommunications) related to, again, educating people to “think” in > inch-pound world then asking them to function in a (stressful) metric > environment. Also, I would like to think about an approach (or defense) to > any possible “this is anti-American conversations” by pointing out that the > military uses metric units extensively. How could I make this point > delicately but clearly? Any thoughts? > > Like you, I personally believe full metrication is the best approach. That > said, Metric Rules is only focused on addressing deficiencies in STEM > instruction. By not directly promoting consumption and production changes, I > hope to keep the conversation centered on the best path towards creating a > STEM-literate workforce. I wish to stay out of the quagmire of politics. I > truly appreciate your consideration and time answering these questions. I am > new to this movement but this I know, it will take our entire team for us to > be successful! The complexity and general disinterest is simply too great. > Metric-only STEM instruction would only be a base hit (although I think it’s > a double) compared to the homerun of full conversion. But, at this point, I > am just happy to be in the game…. > > Cordially, > Bridget Nagarajan > Metric Rules > Metric Only STEM Education in the USA > <image001.png><image002.png><image003.png><image004.png> > > The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to > which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged > material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or > taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or > entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received > this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any > computer. > >
