Ted Williams was the greatest hitter of the modern era of baseball. He sucked as a coach and a manager--because all the qualifications in the world doesn't mean that you can then get someone else to do it.
I don't disagree with you for the most part--but maybe you are pushing an extreme for the sake of argument? Mayer (UCSB) has some very, very good research showing how multimedia lessons, when well structured, can significantly enhance understanding and transfer. Yes, it's true that you won't have many resources for "gold standard" double-blind, same population proof for online education, but being in education, you must certainly know that no such study is even possible. Education research just can't happen that way.
Also, remember, OP is student teaching. Be gentle, there's plenty of time later to get beat up and depressed over ideas that don't quite work.
Please don't. I understand that this was a massive undertaking by a non-professional which merits some recognition, but it really isn't a good resource. Sure, it makes sense if you have learned all the topics, and it's pretty easy to follow, but I guarantee that it will fail to foster any transfer of knowledge, deep understanding or promote an interest in further investigation. This is Kumon, for free, and not even as well structured.
NASA has the best resources, but it can be tough to find them. My favorite, and most applicable for physical science (8th grade in most states), is the solar system simulator from JPL: Eyes on the Solar System But do search the link in parent, and be persistent as NASA's site sucks.
... that verifies diagnosis and treatment with colleagues or references (textbooks, reference works or the net), than one know-it-all who think he's infallible (which he isn't of course. Nobody is).
But how do you know where to look? Sure, we have very good search tools these days, but there is so much information out there that going into a blind search isn't going to be very helpful. So you would need to know enough to know what and how to find verification or help, and then know enough to evaluate if the source is trustworthy. And I would certainly want any doctor of mine to have these skills confirmed (tested) through the education and training system for their profession. No flawless recall needed, but there is a certain level of knowledge and proficiency that needs to exist, and that means testing.
I agree that cheating (as an aside, I actually prefer using lying, as cheating seems to have less weight these days) is a major problem, but I don't think you have it right about testing. Selected response assessments (common name: multiple choice) are still very valuable, and are indeed one of the best ways to assess a wide range of skills or knowledge. The fact that they are easy to score is a bonus, but more because it allows for deeper statistical analysis of items, strands and a means of comparing performance across many classes, schools, years, etc.
It would be more accurate to say that selected response assessments are overused, abused and frequently fail to meet the minimum standards for quality. However, this isn't the fault of the format, but the writers and people who use them. Performance based assessments (common name: project based, problem based assessment) still suffer from many problems: poor problem writing, unclear or incomplete scoring rubrics, bias in scoring, and more. Also, they are poor to determine the extend of student understanding. For instance, if you understand and can apply 80% of the subject material, but the second step of 20 for the solution is in the 20% you don't know, this scores as only completing 10% of the entire problem.
For a complete understanding of what a student knows, understands, has mastery of and can utilize, a variety of assessments are needed in a variety of formats. No single format is sufficient.
Cool to see they have a plan for getting info without causing harm. Hopefully it all works well.
The researchers involved on site have my respect. Here's some info about where they work:
Ave. winter temp: -65C, ave. summer temp: -30C
Altitude: 3488m
Record low temp: -89C. Good thing they are at altitude, as CO2 freezing point is -78C at 1atm.
Polar night for 130 days.
I like science... but I don't like science that much.
How about that the MiG-17 was generally considered a superior aircraft to the F-4 with a vastly inferior weapons platform? The Vietnamese aces all flew 17s rather than 21s and Yeager thought the 17 could have been a more potent plane than the F-4 when he flew one. The 17, of course, was a single engine plane that even relied pretty heavily on vacuum tubes in the electronics systems.
Of course there are few USAF pilots who don't think their shit doesn't stink, and I'm sure C-130 pilots think their stuff is awesome. However, the 16 is many years newer, and there are many who would not want anything to do with the 15, 18 and absolutely no one wants a 14 for anything these days. Everyone wants 22s.
But probably not for the reasons you think... It has very little to do with technical merits of each plane. The people who fly and work on the aircraft don't memorize and compare numbers--only young males not in the service do it. Your mission dictates your aircraft and some missions are more important these days than others. Getting 22s means you are really important. Not getting a new block of 16s, then attempting to switch to 15s means that you are afraid of BRAC.
Russian Ark is my favorite film. It is the ultimate antidote to modern movie ideals, even though there was a fair amount of technology used (cgi enhanced scenes like the storage room, hard tech like the steady cam). All those people, costumes and sets! And only a single night to do it.
I don't think there has been a better or more flexible design that the Pismo G3. Swappable drive/battery bays, easy access to nearly all the parts under the keyboard. I could have mine completely apart in 5 min. It even had a separate sound card and a replaceable processor board. Ahh the days when Apple designed pro hardware instead of gadget interfaces...
I was starting to reply to a bunch of comments, but figured I'd just start anew since the misunderstandings are widespread. It seems like very few here have experience with public sector RFPs and RFQs. Even if you worked for a company that has submitted responses I wouldn't be surprised if you got it wrong. We (school district) just canceled because all 10 vendors were non-responsive by not reading and answering the requirements.
You write up an RFP when you know your problem and you need a solution. Language often specifies a technology, but allows for equivalent substitutions. Protests often happen over debate of what qualifies as equivalent, but if the DOI was looking for a solution, they would write an RFP.
But they weren't looking for a solution, they were looking for a vendor, and already knew what solution they wanted. That's when you write an RFQ, specify exactly the technology you want and then let everyone submit pricing. The disadvantage is that you have to choose the low quotation. In an RFP, you do not have to take the low proposal, even in the public sector.
So it might feel wrong, but way before the RFQ was even written the DOI determined that they wanted the Microsoft solution and just wanted pricing. Google lost before it even started. Which is probably short sighted by the DOI, but well within the law. As a public sector person who deals with this, it's not easy to get what you know you need at a price you want. Most public entities aren't being corrupt, but like someone else mentioned, the spirit of the law has long been lost and both sides spend inordinate amounts of time and money just trying to game the system. Like the vendor who protested that his 7200rpm SATA drive SAN was equivalent to the 15k SAS version and that he won on price... ugh.
I think that if you wish to allow students to use appropriate technology, then it's acceptable to draw the line somewhere and your school may give some guidance on that. When I taught at UCSC only a simple scientific calculator was allowed for all lower division physics, engineering and math courses. Therefore, everyone owned one, and knew about it ahead of time. I don't advocate this, but it works. I like to allow students to use the most powerful appropriate technology.
My last semester of teaching at UCSC I noticed some suspicious behavior in the Calc 19A (first quarter, higher track, 250 students) final. I made a quick note of names, and when grading the tests found that there were duplicate wrong answers, answers with work that was going in a different direction, conspicuously absent steps and random work placement on the page, all which seem to confirm that they were cheating. Sent the formal letter requesting a meeting with the students and got back an admission of guilt from each. Cheating using wireless connectivity isn't any different than passing notes, sharing a calculator with answers not cleared off or peering over a shoulder. The students still look suspicious, and have bad work and answers that betray their dishonesty.
I completely agree with everything you are saying. It would work great if our schools were populated with slashdot type students. Unfortunately, reality is otherwise. I think if you spent some time in schools you would be shocked at how apathetic they are when we get 'em.
However, I do think there is a serious problem with the direction schools are going with the use and teaching of technology. The emphasis has been on acquiring more and more computer workstations. Tech education now consists of word, powerpoint, and internet searches. Somewhere we (educators) need to turn it around and start doing better than just training end users.
If you have this problem with technology then someone at your district and or county office is doing it wrong. For the purposes of E-Rate, EETT and other automatic and compulsory grants you must have a technology plan with a minimum outlook of 3 years and a maximum of 5. Only computers that are "current technology" count, defined as equipment purchased new in the last 5 years. Your 7 year old pentiums don't count, and my guess is that you are missing out on federal and state funding due to a lack of planning and management of technology resources. People don't like paying administrators, but a good one is important for these reasons.
Transparency isn't the problem. All budget matters are open to anyone who wants to sit through a school board meeting. How many have you attended? Unfortunately, no one cares or speaks up until it's too late.
Actually, no. There are bond oversight committees for any pubic project like this. Paying down the bond with bond money is not allowed. All money from the bond must be spent in a manner that is consistent with how the bond was written.
Again, not saying that it's right, but pubic funds and public funded projects are never as simple as people make them out to be. As a public school employee, nothing would make me happier than more local discretion over use of funds, but generally the public doesn't want that either. They just don't want anything spent.
Not Dr., but patient spopepro with the 5150 to prove it. It took a while to find the right meds, so I know the questions and indications of interest.
But not wanting to resort to anecdotes, how about the national library of medicine. Scroll down to where it says "Bupropion is a monocyclic antidepressant structurally related to amphetamine." There are other references there as well.
I'd normally dismiss issues around "addiction" that isn't, but rather strong habits, but I'm all for research. Did anything actually happen here? I can't tell because the article is so bad.
Did the medicated group play while getting treatment? Would a forced break from playing cause the same effect? Control group? 6 weeks is a really short time to get acclimated to a new antidepressant, how about a follow up?
Bupropion is rarely used for anti-anxiety. As a dopamine and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor it has the tendency to increase anxiety. Another side effect is an increase in libido (and not a small one). They're probably all out getting laid instead of playing.
Cocaine is an excellent anti-depressant. Prozac and similar are Selective Serotonin Re-uptake Inhibitors... Cocaine is a Serotonin Re-uptake Inhibitor. Not selective, and damn powerful.
Cuing a computer as a conductor is creative work, while playing an instrument is drudgery? You are so far away from any sort of artistic reality it's difficult to think you are anything other than a troll. Chances are (supported by other comments here) that you haven't paid for any live performance of any kind in the last 10 years, which does devalue your thoughts somewhat.
The problem is: It's not repetitive. Time in a production is not kept strict. Actors botch things all the time. Now, if you were able to automate the actors, the stage manager, the run crew, the lighting and probably the audience as well, then the automated music will work perfectly.
There is a major difference. The big moment that happens at 93:27:34 in the movie will always happen at 93:27:34. There is no such dependability in live performance.
I've made a few paychecks as a pit musician and I can't imagine how the synths will be controlled. If it is a person at a keyboard with a super advanced tone module then you are really just replacing a few musicians with a single one, not exactly groundbreaking, and it's frequently done with a standard piano covering parts that can't be hired (your local production of Fiddler on the Roof likely has a piano covering the accordion part).
If this is a computer, like the one FTFA that is mentioned to keep crashing, well, I can't see this actually being ok for any real performance where people are paying money. Crashing is one thing, but even if the program works perfectly, now everything has to cue off the computer. What if someone is late on an entrance? What if there is a technical problem? What if an actor drops a couple lines? An entire verse? There is a very delicate interplay between the actors, the stage manager, the conductor and the musicians to make everything match up every time. It's why opera is, for my money, the most stressful job I have ever taken as a musician.
That is the interesting thing about Psystar: they don't provide anything that a moderately tech-savvy user can't do themselves. I found the process of using Chameleon + Retail DVD easier than many linux installs. Psystar is specifically targeting a crowd that doesn't want, and probably doesn't know how, to do it themselves.
I suspect this is part of the reason of the hackintosh crowd hating on Psystar. Aside from the probably illegally used code, it is likely that Psystar customers will cause noise with apple, resulting in some sort of crackdown. Most of us just hope things stay quiet and under the radar.
My dad is a T-2 incomplete paraplegic. He operates the brake and throttle through one hand control (that is mechanically connected to the pedals, making the vehicle possible to operate in a standard manner) and operates the wheel through a spinner knob (formerly known as a "necker knob") with the other hand. There are other controls out there, including joystick control
My dad did need to have the van inspected and retake his drivers test, and I do believe that the NHTSA requires a prescription for the legal installation of these tools. However, my dad only needed to show that he was capable of passing the drivers test with these adaptive tools.
I also seem to remember seeing that fully able people using hand controls had faster reaction times. 15 years ago, can't remember the source.
There was a club at my middle school(!) run by a guitar playing teacher who had a contact at Fender. He would get all kinds of rejected parts for free or cheap and we would build our own electric guitars (building the body from scratch, assembling the rest). It was awesome... but my guitar was not. Not that I'm still upset about it...
Slashdot Mirror
So he can do it. Good for him.
Ted Williams was the greatest hitter of the modern era of baseball. He sucked as a coach and a manager--because all the qualifications in the world doesn't mean that you can then get someone else to do it.
I don't disagree with you for the most part--but maybe you are pushing an extreme for the sake of argument? Mayer (UCSB) has some very, very good research showing how multimedia lessons, when well structured, can significantly enhance understanding and transfer. Yes, it's true that you won't have many resources for "gold standard" double-blind, same population proof for online education, but being in education, you must certainly know that no such study is even possible. Education research just can't happen that way.
Also, remember, OP is student teaching. Be gentle, there's plenty of time later to get beat up and depressed over ideas that don't quite work.
Please don't. I understand that this was a massive undertaking by a non-professional which merits some recognition, but it really isn't a good resource. Sure, it makes sense if you have learned all the topics, and it's pretty easy to follow, but I guarantee that it will fail to foster any transfer of knowledge, deep understanding or promote an interest in further investigation. This is Kumon, for free, and not even as well structured.
NASA has the best resources, but it can be tough to find them. My favorite, and most applicable for physical science (8th grade in most states), is the solar system simulator from JPL: Eyes on the Solar System But do search the link in parent, and be persistent as NASA's site sucks.
... that verifies diagnosis and treatment with colleagues or references (textbooks, reference works or the net), than one know-it-all who think he's infallible (which he isn't of course. Nobody is).
But how do you know where to look? Sure, we have very good search tools these days, but there is so much information out there that going into a blind search isn't going to be very helpful. So you would need to know enough to know what and how to find verification or help, and then know enough to evaluate if the source is trustworthy. And I would certainly want any doctor of mine to have these skills confirmed (tested) through the education and training system for their profession. No flawless recall needed, but there is a certain level of knowledge and proficiency that needs to exist, and that means testing.
I agree that cheating (as an aside, I actually prefer using lying, as cheating seems to have less weight these days) is a major problem, but I don't think you have it right about testing. Selected response assessments (common name: multiple choice) are still very valuable, and are indeed one of the best ways to assess a wide range of skills or knowledge. The fact that they are easy to score is a bonus, but more because it allows for deeper statistical analysis of items, strands and a means of comparing performance across many classes, schools, years, etc.
It would be more accurate to say that selected response assessments are overused, abused and frequently fail to meet the minimum standards for quality. However, this isn't the fault of the format, but the writers and people who use them. Performance based assessments (common name: project based, problem based assessment) still suffer from many problems: poor problem writing, unclear or incomplete scoring rubrics, bias in scoring, and more. Also, they are poor to determine the extend of student understanding. For instance, if you understand and can apply 80% of the subject material, but the second step of 20 for the solution is in the 20% you don't know, this scores as only completing 10% of the entire problem.
For a complete understanding of what a student knows, understands, has mastery of and can utilize, a variety of assessments are needed in a variety of formats. No single format is sufficient.
Cool to see they have a plan for getting info without causing harm. Hopefully it all works well.
The researchers involved on site have my respect. Here's some info about where they work:
Ave. winter temp: -65C, ave. summer temp: -30C
Altitude: 3488m
Record low temp: -89C. Good thing they are at altitude, as CO2 freezing point is -78C at 1atm.
Polar night for 130 days.
I like science... but I don't like science that much.
How about that the MiG-17 was generally considered a superior aircraft to the F-4 with a vastly inferior weapons platform? The Vietnamese aces all flew 17s rather than 21s and Yeager thought the 17 could have been a more potent plane than the F-4 when he flew one. The 17, of course, was a single engine plane that even relied pretty heavily on vacuum tubes in the electronics systems.
Of course there are few USAF pilots who don't think their shit doesn't stink, and I'm sure C-130 pilots think their stuff is awesome. However, the 16 is many years newer, and there are many who would not want anything to do with the 15, 18 and absolutely no one wants a 14 for anything these days. Everyone wants 22s.
But probably not for the reasons you think... It has very little to do with technical merits of each plane. The people who fly and work on the aircraft don't memorize and compare numbers--only young males not in the service do it. Your mission dictates your aircraft and some missions are more important these days than others. Getting 22s means you are really important. Not getting a new block of 16s, then attempting to switch to 15s means that you are afraid of BRAC.
Russian Ark is my favorite film. It is the ultimate antidote to modern movie ideals, even though there was a fair amount of technology used (cgi enhanced scenes like the storage room, hard tech like the steady cam). All those people, costumes and sets! And only a single night to do it.
I don't think there has been a better or more flexible design that the Pismo G3. Swappable drive/battery bays, easy access to nearly all the parts under the keyboard. I could have mine completely apart in 5 min. It even had a separate sound card and a replaceable processor board. Ahh the days when Apple designed pro hardware instead of gadget interfaces...
You write up an RFP when you know your problem and you need a solution. Language often specifies a technology, but allows for equivalent substitutions. Protests often happen over debate of what qualifies as equivalent, but if the DOI was looking for a solution, they would write an RFP.
But they weren't looking for a solution, they were looking for a vendor, and already knew what solution they wanted. That's when you write an RFQ, specify exactly the technology you want and then let everyone submit pricing. The disadvantage is that you have to choose the low quotation. In an RFP, you do not have to take the low proposal, even in the public sector.
So it might feel wrong, but way before the RFQ was even written the DOI determined that they wanted the Microsoft solution and just wanted pricing. Google lost before it even started. Which is probably short sighted by the DOI, but well within the law. As a public sector person who deals with this, it's not easy to get what you know you need at a price you want. Most public entities aren't being corrupt, but like someone else mentioned, the spirit of the law has long been lost and both sides spend inordinate amounts of time and money just trying to game the system. Like the vendor who protested that his 7200rpm SATA drive SAN was equivalent to the 15k SAS version and that he won on price... ugh.
I think that if you wish to allow students to use appropriate technology, then it's acceptable to draw the line somewhere and your school may give some guidance on that. When I taught at UCSC only a simple scientific calculator was allowed for all lower division physics, engineering and math courses. Therefore, everyone owned one, and knew about it ahead of time. I don't advocate this, but it works. I like to allow students to use the most powerful appropriate technology.
My last semester of teaching at UCSC I noticed some suspicious behavior in the Calc 19A (first quarter, higher track, 250 students) final. I made a quick note of names, and when grading the tests found that there were duplicate wrong answers, answers with work that was going in a different direction, conspicuously absent steps and random work placement on the page, all which seem to confirm that they were cheating. Sent the formal letter requesting a meeting with the students and got back an admission of guilt from each. Cheating using wireless connectivity isn't any different than passing notes, sharing a calculator with answers not cleared off or peering over a shoulder. The students still look suspicious, and have bad work and answers that betray their dishonesty.
I completely agree with everything you are saying. It would work great if our schools were populated with slashdot type students. Unfortunately, reality is otherwise. I think if you spent some time in schools you would be shocked at how apathetic they are when we get 'em.
However, I do think there is a serious problem with the direction schools are going with the use and teaching of technology. The emphasis has been on acquiring more and more computer workstations. Tech education now consists of word, powerpoint, and internet searches. Somewhere we (educators) need to turn it around and start doing better than just training end users.
If you have this problem with technology then someone at your district and or county office is doing it wrong. For the purposes of E-Rate, EETT and other automatic and compulsory grants you must have a technology plan with a minimum outlook of 3 years and a maximum of 5. Only computers that are "current technology" count, defined as equipment purchased new in the last 5 years. Your 7 year old pentiums don't count, and my guess is that you are missing out on federal and state funding due to a lack of planning and management of technology resources. People don't like paying administrators, but a good one is important for these reasons.
Transparency isn't the problem. All budget matters are open to anyone who wants to sit through a school board meeting. How many have you attended? Unfortunately, no one cares or speaks up until it's too late.
Actually, no. There are bond oversight committees for any pubic project like this. Paying down the bond with bond money is not allowed. All money from the bond must be spent in a manner that is consistent with how the bond was written.
Again, not saying that it's right, but pubic funds and public funded projects are never as simple as people make them out to be. As a public school employee, nothing would make me happier than more local discretion over use of funds, but generally the public doesn't want that either. They just don't want anything spent.
Not Dr., but patient spopepro with the 5150 to prove it. It took a while to find the right meds, so I know the questions and indications of interest.
But not wanting to resort to anecdotes, how about the national library of medicine. Scroll down to where it says "Bupropion is a monocyclic antidepressant structurally related to amphetamine." There are other references there as well.
I'd normally dismiss issues around "addiction" that isn't, but rather strong habits, but I'm all for research. Did anything actually happen here? I can't tell because the article is so bad.
Did the medicated group play while getting treatment? Would a forced break from playing cause the same effect? Control group? 6 weeks is a really short time to get acclimated to a new antidepressant, how about a follow up?
Bupropion is rarely used for anti-anxiety. As a dopamine and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor it has the tendency to increase anxiety. Another side effect is an increase in libido (and not a small one). They're probably all out getting laid instead of playing.
Cocaine is an excellent anti-depressant. Prozac and similar are Selective Serotonin Re-uptake Inhibitors... Cocaine is a Serotonin Re-uptake Inhibitor. Not selective, and damn powerful.
Cuing a computer as a conductor is creative work, while playing an instrument is drudgery? You are so far away from any sort of artistic reality it's difficult to think you are anything other than a troll. Chances are (supported by other comments here) that you haven't paid for any live performance of any kind in the last 10 years, which does devalue your thoughts somewhat.
The problem is: It's not repetitive. Time in a production is not kept strict. Actors botch things all the time. Now, if you were able to automate the actors, the stage manager, the run crew, the lighting and probably the audience as well, then the automated music will work perfectly.
There is a major difference. The big moment that happens at 93:27:34 in the movie will always happen at 93:27:34. There is no such dependability in live performance.
I've made a few paychecks as a pit musician and I can't imagine how the synths will be controlled. If it is a person at a keyboard with a super advanced tone module then you are really just replacing a few musicians with a single one, not exactly groundbreaking, and it's frequently done with a standard piano covering parts that can't be hired (your local production of Fiddler on the Roof likely has a piano covering the accordion part).
If this is a computer, like the one FTFA that is mentioned to keep crashing, well, I can't see this actually being ok for any real performance where people are paying money. Crashing is one thing, but even if the program works perfectly, now everything has to cue off the computer. What if someone is late on an entrance? What if there is a technical problem? What if an actor drops a couple lines? An entire verse? There is a very delicate interplay between the actors, the stage manager, the conductor and the musicians to make everything match up every time. It's why opera is, for my money, the most stressful job I have ever taken as a musician.
That is the interesting thing about Psystar: they don't provide anything that a moderately tech-savvy user can't do themselves. I found the process of using Chameleon + Retail DVD easier than many linux installs. Psystar is specifically targeting a crowd that doesn't want, and probably doesn't know how, to do it themselves.
I suspect this is part of the reason of the hackintosh crowd hating on Psystar. Aside from the probably illegally used code, it is likely that Psystar customers will cause noise with apple, resulting in some sort of crackdown. Most of us just hope things stay quiet and under the radar.
My dad is a T-2 incomplete paraplegic. He operates the brake and throttle through one hand control (that is mechanically connected to the pedals, making the vehicle possible to operate in a standard manner) and operates the wheel through a spinner knob (formerly known as a "necker knob") with the other hand. There are other controls out there, including joystick control
My dad did need to have the van inspected and retake his drivers test, and I do believe that the NHTSA requires a prescription for the legal installation of these tools. However, my dad only needed to show that he was capable of passing the drivers test with these adaptive tools.
I also seem to remember seeing that fully able people using hand controls had faster reaction times. 15 years ago, can't remember the source.
There was a club at my middle school(!) run by a guitar playing teacher who had a contact at Fender. He would get all kinds of rejected parts for free or cheap and we would build our own electric guitars (building the body from scratch, assembling the rest). It was awesome... but my guitar was not. Not that I'm still upset about it...