由核三廠急停事故探討清華核工系課程規劃 高等教育是給魚還是給釣竿?

文字-A A +A

之前有朋友寄來與教育有關的資訊,我選擇忽略,因為接收的訊息已經太龐雜了,但週三因緣際會聽到弘化懷幼院院長的一席話,讓我開了一個專欄記錄在教育上的聽聞。正好網路論壇的聖徒對護臺鬥士蘇志銓的回應,與教育有關,特別蒐錄起來作為參考。

蘇志銓認為當測試進行時因為先前已經有一台壞掉了,剩下兩台仍能維持), 表示失去了雙重保護的設計基準,且沒有了後備系統的支援,此時執行滿載或八成功率負載,是愚蠢完全沒有常識的作法。他質疑這是肇因於核工系近50年課程規劃不當的後果,認為核工系及臺灣人民應該更深入的瞭解這個問題。

(。。。When the testing was performed, there were only (因為先前已經有一台壞掉了,剩下兩台仍能維持), this means there is no redundant and backup systems at all.
Performing testing with full (100%) or even 80% nuclear power load (without redundant and backup systems) is stupid (and no Common Sense at all).

Is this the results of the Real Issues of the NE-ESS Educations over the past 50 years?
I sincerely hope all NE-ESS Alumni and the People of Taiwan should look into such issues more deeply.)

而聖徒有不同的意見,認為本來高等教育就是給釣竿,不是要一步步牽著手來教,他以本身例子作見證。。。

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

聖徒:

。。。。

我沒記錯的話,當年進核工系,師長(忘記是哪一位了,極有可能是楊覺民老師)曾告知,因為核能廠用到的技術很雜,舉凡電子、電機、機械、控制等等都有,所以,核工系的學生,除了別的系學生不會學到的核能專門知識之外,每樣都會學一些,但都不會精。我覺得,要精的話,不是不可以,只要作學問的方法學會了,學生可以自己往下鑽!愚見以為,這應就是大學教育該做的,即,教學生如何釣魚,而不是直接將魚給他。如果從這個角度來看的話,我認為清華核工作的不錯!在我們那個年代(您和我差不多年紀,所以我們的年代差不多),台灣確是有學校直接將魚給學生,那些學校被統歸為一類稱為“專科學校”或“職業學校”,而清華是個“大學”!

即使如此,我還記得我曾經問過台大電機的學生一些電路學(我們班的電路學是楊覺民老師教的)裏學到的東西(小功率馬達),結果,被我問到的都不清楚這些東西。我們雖然只學了一年,不過,我到今天都還記得電風扇的電容馬達的工作原理!當然,有一個可能性是,我問到的Sample太偏了!不過,我寧願相信楊老師講的,這是由於我們暑期到台電實習,有動手做(就印象深)的結果!

以我個人在美國學Computer Science的經驗來講,我們在台灣清華開個COBLE的課一學就是一年(李家同老師的課)。在UIUC,CS開的一門Programming Language的課,一個學期(也就是半年)就教三種Languages!而,同時間,在Champaign的最好的community college(等於我們台灣的專科學校)也開了一門COBLE的課,也是個一年的課!基本上,在UIUC時的感覺就是他們要學生自己學(他們教你如何自己學)。我的C language就是百分之一百自學的!既然我後來可以靠著它為生,代表我應該自學的還不錯才是!仔細想來,後來在UIUC有辦法走下去多是靠的當年在清華時奠定的基礎!所以,如果人家問我清華教的好不好,我想您應已知我的答案了!

不好意思,我無意扯您後腿,但,我覺得應該要讓另一種聲音被聽到才是!倒是,我覺得我們台灣的學生,即使唸到PhD,普遍的,“critical thinking”的能力要不是沒有就是不夠!這點可能是我們未來的學校及社會教育可以加強的(假設大家都同意,“critical thinking”的能力是個must-have的能力)!怎麼加強我不知道,但,只要有心想要做到,自然就會做到!

關於這一點,我未退休前,在公司裏勉勵員工的做法就是,要大家對於自己必須負責的每一件事都視為是生命交關的事(比方說“如果沒做好,妻兒就要為抓去槍斃!”)。以這種心態做事,沒有事情是做不好的!

───────────────────────────────────────

以上是聖徒針對護臺鬥士蘇志銓以下信件有感而發:

Please educate NE-ESS future students (BS, MS, PhD) with Negative-Feedback (accepting different opinions) Stable Systems, instead of Positive-Feedback (only accepting the same kind of opinions) Unstable Systems within the small self-satisfied NE groups. The Positive-Feedback Unstable Systems (even in Social and Political Science) will eventually fail.

。。。。。。

The real issues are that the NE-ESS students are not super-genius (including me, even my score of Taiwan College Entrance Exam of 1972 was 13 points higher the entrance score of the Electrical Engineering Department of National Taiwan University).
However, the courses of the NE-ESS Department of National Tsing-Hua University, HsinChu, Taiwan, have been (or were) unreasonable.
The NE-ESS Department (or NE Department) required NE students to take almost major courses of Engineering and Science majors within the four years.
NE-ESS Department used the same books (when I was in NTHU) as those used by the Electrical Engineering Department of National Taiwan University.
Then NE-ESS Department cut times to teach these books and courses.
For example, Circuit Analysis book was taught one semester by NE-ESS, but the same book was taught two semesters by the EE Department of National Taiwan University.
The Electronics book was taught two semesters by NE-ESS, but the same book was taught three semesters by the EE Department of National Taiwan University.

In this way, no NE-ESS students (including me, even I got high scores in these courses and graduated as one of the top students in BSNE (1976) and MSNE (1980G)) could really absorb and understand these courses.
Because Taiwan has only one NE-ESS Department, this is why I gave up the EE Department of National Taiwan University and chose the NE-ESS Department of NTHU as my first choice in 1972.

The results of such NE-ESS educations over the past 50 years have taught many (but not all) NE-ESS Alumni thinking they are only ones who know Nuclear Engineering and the Safety of Nuclear Power Plants.
Worse cases are these people think also know other engineering and science fields because they have taken the same courses and used the same books (but they were taught in less time).

。。。。。

I copy the text from the news again to show some (but not all) NE-ESS Alumni have done stupid things without Common Sense.
========================================
the recent 「狀況類似車諾比」 核三跳機急停 at the TaiPower #3 Nuclear Power Plant.

http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/2013/new/dec/5/today-t1.htm?Slots=T#

I directly quoted the text from the news below.
台電核能發言人蔡富豐表示,核三廠十月中進行大修,上月二十八日才完成併聯發電,昨天進行例行檢修,將反應器功率由滿載降為八十%,由於三台主飼水泵一台檢修中,一台突然跳脫,造成蒸氣產生器水位過低以致反應器跳機急停。
原能會核技處處長徐明德說明,一台飼水泵可維持的功率是五十%,三台飼水泵只要有兩台正常運作,就能維持反應爐百分之百的功率;因為先前已經有一台壞掉了,剩下兩台仍能維持,但昨天又一台跳脫,導致功率只剩五十%,但是反應爐運轉功率在八十%,此時補水能力不足,低水位達到警訊限值,因而急停。
==============================

Because Nuclear Power Plants are intrinsic unstable and dangerous systems, they need very stringent designs, implementations, and operations (Standards of Operations, SOPs) of Redundant and High-Availability Systems to prevent the occurrence of Nuclear Power Plant Disasters.

Why do I say that Nuclear Power Plants are intrinsic unstable and dangerous systems?
Nuclear Power Plants need cooling water circulation to remove radiation heat (even they are totally shutdown, or even their spent (or used) nuclear fuel rods).
Otherwise, Nuclear Reactor Core Meltdown like the ones in Japan Nuclear Power Plant Disasters two years ago, now and in the future.
NE-ESS Senior Kent (BSNE1971, MSNE1976G) can explain these radiation dangers in Chinese much better than me.

I really do not understand why such stupid testing at TaiPower Nuclear Power Plant #3 could occur.
台電核能發言人蔡富豐表示,核三廠十月中進行大修,上月二十八日才完成併聯發電,昨天進行例行檢修,將反應器功率由滿載降為八十%,由於三台主飼水泵一台檢修中,一台突然跳脫,造成蒸氣產生器水位過低以致反應器跳機急停。
原能會核技處處長徐明德說明,一台飼水泵可維持的功率是五十%,三台飼水泵只要有兩台正常運作,就能維持反應爐百分之百的功率;因為先前已經有一台壞掉了,剩下兩台仍能維持,但昨天又一台跳脫,導致功率只剩五十%,但是反應爐運轉功率在八十%,此時補水能力不足,低水位達到警訊限值,因而急停。

When the testing was performed, there were only (因為先前已經有一台壞掉了,剩下兩台仍能維持), this means there is no redundant and backup systems at all.
Performing testing with full (100%) or even 80% nuclear power load (without redundant and backup systems) is stupid (and no Common Sense at all).

Is this the results of the Real Issues of the NE-ESS Educations over the past 50 years?
I sincerely hope all NE-ESS Alumni and the People of Taiwan should look into such issues more deeply.
Thank you.

 

 

FB留言板

PeoPo 討論區

回應文章建議規則:

  • 文章屬於開放討論空間,回應文章的議題與內容不代表本站的立場
  • 於明知不實或過度謾罵之言論,本站及文章撰寫者保留刪除權
  • 請勿留下身份證字號、住址等個人隱私資料,以免遭人盜用,本站不負管理之責
  • 回應禁止使用HTML語法
0

加入時間: 2007.10.20

好奇寶寶

加入時間: 2007.10.20
5,346則報導
249則影音
6則OnTV

作者其他報導

由核三廠急停事故探討清華核工系課程規劃 高等教育是給魚還是給釣竿?

搜尋表單

目前累積了145,167篇報導,共11,080位公民記者

目前累積了145,167篇報導

11,080位公民記者