"The only appropriate response is 'Hmmm interesting, let's look into this'."
Sometimes the appropriate response is, "I don't have time for this nonsense". There's always a cost/benefit assessment with one's time about how likely a claimed effect is to be real -- or how important.
Sure, in theory you're right. Schools aren't run by teachers anymore, the power has taken away by PHB administrator management who want to run it like a business. (Just like hospitals aren't run by doctors, etc.) I have a hard time seeing the trend reversing course, however; that's the trajectory of our political economy.
The guy's a temporary adjunct (as most college instructors are nowadays). He probably gets paid about $3000 for all the work all semester for this course. He may not even know 6 other people at the college, never mind have any way of getting them to work for him as proctors. Is all the extra work and re-design worth the $1K left in the semester? Just walking away seems at least arguably better for one's mental health.
I ran into this line in a Wikipedia article last weekend and just stared at it in amazement for a few minutes:
"Others may want a high school diploma to represent primarily a certificate of attendance, so that a student who faithfully attended school but cannot read or write will still get the social benefits of graduation."
"Also, at least one of his cheating allegations was investigated and overturned by their university's administration. This sounds mostly like sour grapes."
Nitpick: The Inside Higher Ed article linked above says, "The spokesman said that one cheating allegation referenced by Horwitz has already been investigated and that a **student committee** cleared the student of cheating." So apparently any enforcement is determined by students themselves?
"A competent prof would have taken the most egregious examples and kicked them out of his class"
Generally speaking, that is simply not within a professor's power to enact. At least where I teach, instructors officially have the right to remove a disruptive student from one single class session, but not ever from the course wholesale. Even that one-session right, when I've tried to enact that (a number of years ago), was not actually enforced or recognized by security or supported by administration staff.
Likewise, there's officially a disciplinary panel process, but the school has signaled in the past that they don't want us invoking that.
At least where I work, the administration in the past has sent a clear signal that -- while we officially do have such a disciplinary board -- they really don't want anyone invoking those procedures. Partly this is because now students are entitled to legal representation in those proceedings, and the whole process gets overwhelmingly complicated and expensive. The current recommended policy is "get the student to privately agree to a failing mark on that test", because that doesn't trigger the legal representation.
What this most reminds me of -- A drummer friend of mine was told, as a teenager by an older adult drummer in the 80's, not to take up the instrument because in the future all drumming would be done by electronic drum machines.
"After investing $1 billion in behavior detection techniques and training since 2007, the Transportation Security Administration has little to show for its efforts, the New York Times stated in a new report. According to the newspaper, critics of the TSA’s attempt to read body language claim there’s no evidence to suggest the agency has been able to link chosen passengers to anything beyond carrying drugs or holding undeclared currency, much less a terrorist attack. In fact, a review of numerous studies seems to suggest that even those trained to look for various tics are no more capable of identifying liars than normal individuals. 'The common-sense notion that liars betray themselves through body language appears to be little more than a cultural fiction,' Maria Hartwig, a psychologist at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York City, told the Times."
"they clearly have not actually reviewed the use of the dogs themselves..."
False; this was ruled on by SCOTUS in a 2013 case. They unanimously voted that drug-sniffing dog alerts are inherently trustworthy. A terrible decision, IMO.
But on the other hand I do teach a remedial basic arithmetic class here in New York City and today I had a roomful of college students, none of whom could even give an estimate for the value of 6 3/4 x 2 1/3. The U.S. culture is very jungle-y, poor folks are kind of thrown to the wolves, and we're perennially at the bottom of international rankings in math and science (and also low pay and preparation and support for teachers).
Well, as an ex-game-developer (and my s/o worked for game company funded by MS), I'm going to take a stab at reading between the lines and guess that they had a series of tiered project milestones that MS got to approve/disapprove for pretty much any reason they liked. So the developer is under the gun to make them happy however they can, or else the money tap gets shut off at the next milestone. A lot of companies are sufficiently near the edge (it's a very boom-or-bust industry) that they take a "hail mary" shot, betting everything on the score with the big company. It's basically the dark side of Pascal's Wager.
But the subtext does read to me like some pretty poor management on the part of the developer company. I've seen that a lot at game companies (weak or really inexperienced "management"). The good managers I've seen that made some money immediately parachuted out of the industry to something more predictable.
...if they were familiar with that medium, then they could give you a very good estimate.
That's a keenly important conditional. My partner is a fine artist in fabric and mixed materials. She commonly has to spend weeks experimenting with new joint compounds, procedures, etc. (which can take days for one to dry to see if it works, etc.) For her next project she wants tapestry-sized plastic weaving to be glued stiff so it can be hung in space without a curtain rod. How long will it take to determine the right process? Is it even feasible? We don't know yet.
Arguably software development is more like that; you're always writing new material procedures on most new projects.
If management is asking the devs for their estimate, then how in the hell is it management fault for any of those timelines?
The last time I worked software, management took all my estimates and arbitrarily cut them in half, saying, "We're smarter than most other companies, so we can do it in half the time." Used that to close the contract with the outside client, etc.
Here's your problem (and it's a common one): You are primed to jump down someone's throat if they say "1st Amendment rights!" and correct them, saying "1st Amendment rights are only about government actions", which is true. But when someone says "This is censorship!" and you go "censorship is only about government actions", that is false.
The 1st Amendment is the specific restriction on government censorship. But many other bodies can and do practice censorship -- like TV networks and now Google.
This has been the dream for, like, a century now... but schools are simply not structured to permit that. Actually about 20 years ago in the USA we/they doubled-down on the issue; the phrase "tracking students" into different classes or programs by ability was effectively prohibited everywhere, and is considered inequitable, immoral, and kind of offensive to even mention in many educational circles. The standard response in recent decades is that the bright kids should spend their time group-tutoring the slower kids.
Slashdot Mirror
"I'm just waiting for drones that will simultaneously cut my lawn and deter burglars."
"The only appropriate response is 'Hmmm interesting, let's look into this'."
Sometimes the appropriate response is, "I don't have time for this nonsense". There's always a cost/benefit assessment with one's time about how likely a claimed effect is to be real -- or how important.
Sure, in theory you're right. Schools aren't run by teachers anymore, the power has taken away by PHB administrator management who want to run it like a business. (Just like hospitals aren't run by doctors, etc.) I have a hard time seeing the trend reversing course, however; that's the trajectory of our political economy.
The guy's a temporary adjunct (as most college instructors are nowadays). He probably gets paid about $3000 for all the work all semester for this course. He may not even know 6 other people at the college, never mind have any way of getting them to work for him as proctors. Is all the extra work and re-design worth the $1K left in the semester? Just walking away seems at least arguably better for one's mental health.
I ran into this line in a Wikipedia article last weekend and just stared at it in amazement for a few minutes:
"Others may want a high school diploma to represent primarily a certificate of attendance, so that a student who faithfully attended school but cannot read or write will still get the social benefits of graduation."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-stakes_testing
"Also, at least one of his cheating allegations was investigated and overturned by their university's administration. This sounds mostly like sour grapes."
Nitpick: The Inside Higher Ed article linked above says, "The spokesman said that one cheating allegation referenced by Horwitz has already been investigated and that a **student committee** cleared the student of cheating." So apparently any enforcement is determined by students themselves?
"A competent prof would have taken the most egregious examples and kicked them out of his class"
Generally speaking, that is simply not within a professor's power to enact. At least where I teach, instructors officially have the right to remove a disruptive student from one single class session, but not ever from the course wholesale. Even that one-session right, when I've tried to enact that (a number of years ago), was not actually enforced or recognized by security or supported by administration staff.
Likewise, there's officially a disciplinary panel process, but the school has signaled in the past that they don't want us invoking that.
Thanks for posting that.
At least where I work, the administration in the past has sent a clear signal that -- while we officially do have such a disciplinary board -- they really don't want anyone invoking those procedures. Partly this is because now students are entitled to legal representation in those proceedings, and the whole process gets overwhelmingly complicated and expensive. The current recommended policy is "get the student to privately agree to a failing mark on that test", because that doesn't trigger the legal representation.
What this most reminds me of -- A drummer friend of mine was told, as a teenager by an older adult drummer in the 80's, not to take up the instrument because in the future all drumming would be done by electronic drum machines.
"After investing $1 billion in behavior detection techniques and training since 2007, the Transportation Security Administration has little to show for its efforts, the New York Times stated in a new report. According to the newspaper, critics of the TSA’s attempt to read body language claim there’s no evidence to suggest the agency has been able to link chosen passengers to anything beyond carrying drugs or holding undeclared currency, much less a terrorist attack. In fact, a review of numerous studies seems to suggest that even those trained to look for various tics are no more capable of identifying liars than normal individuals. 'The common-sense notion that liars betray themselves through body language appears to be little more than a cultural fiction,' Maria Hartwig, a psychologist at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York City, told the Times."
http://rt.com/usa/tsa-spent-billion-body-language-937/
Scientific testing says otherwise.
http://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/welcome/features/2010-2011/02/20110223_drug_dogs.html
"they clearly have not actually reviewed the use of the dogs themselves..."
False; this was ruled on by SCOTUS in a 2013 case. They unanimously voted that drug-sniffing dog alerts are inherently trustworthy. A terrible decision, IMO.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-sides-with-drug-sniffing-dog/2013/02/19/1d9f7414-7aac-11e2-82e8-61a46c2cde3d_story.html
This is basically what I came to say. This summary is one of the worst ever.
Really, one should be talking about approaching infinite absolute value, i.e., distance from the origin (which cannot be negative).
Sure, that's the next class up for us. About half my job. Developed a quiz site on the topic:
http://www.automatic-algebra.org/orderofoperations.htm
That does sound bad and you have my sympathies.
But on the other hand I do teach a remedial basic arithmetic class here in New York City and today I had a roomful of college students, none of whom could even give an estimate for the value of 6 3/4 x 2 1/3. The U.S. culture is very jungle-y, poor folks are kind of thrown to the wolves, and we're perennially at the bottom of international rankings in math and science (and also low pay and preparation and support for teachers).
Well, as an ex-game-developer (and my s/o worked for game company funded by MS), I'm going to take a stab at reading between the lines and guess that they had a series of tiered project milestones that MS got to approve/disapprove for pretty much any reason they liked. So the developer is under the gun to make them happy however they can, or else the money tap gets shut off at the next milestone. A lot of companies are sufficiently near the edge (it's a very boom-or-bust industry) that they take a "hail mary" shot, betting everything on the score with the big company. It's basically the dark side of Pascal's Wager.
But the subtext does read to me like some pretty poor management on the part of the developer company. I've seen that a lot at game companies (weak or really inexperienced "management"). The good managers I've seen that made some money immediately parachuted out of the industry to something more predictable.
Funnier if the 4th thing is actually R?
So is the system in the linked 2007 article no longer used, never was used...?
...if they were familiar with that medium, then they could give you a very good estimate.
That's a keenly important conditional. My partner is a fine artist in fabric and mixed materials. She commonly has to spend weeks experimenting with new joint compounds, procedures, etc. (which can take days for one to dry to see if it works, etc.) For her next project she wants tapestry-sized plastic weaving to be glued stiff so it can be hung in space without a curtain rod. How long will it take to determine the right process? Is it even feasible? We don't know yet.
Arguably software development is more like that; you're always writing new material procedures on most new projects.
If management is asking the devs for their estimate, then how in the hell is it management fault for any of those timelines?
The last time I worked software, management took all my estimates and arbitrarily cut them in half, saying, "We're smarter than most other companies, so we can do it in half the time." Used that to close the contract with the outside client, etc.
Here's your problem (and it's a common one): You are primed to jump down someone's throat if they say "1st Amendment rights!" and correct them, saying "1st Amendment rights are only about government actions", which is true. But when someone says "This is censorship!" and you go "censorship is only about government actions", that is false.
The 1st Amendment is the specific restriction on government censorship. But many other bodies can and do practice censorship -- like TV networks and now Google.
True. You really need to look at the cowboys/covered wagon period of the American Old West, that's the appropriate model.
Cited in the NY Times article; not in the papers published by Dr. Soon.
People Skills: http://youtu.be/mGS2tKQhdhY?t=52s
This has been the dream for, like, a century now... but schools are simply not structured to permit that. Actually about 20 years ago in the USA we/they doubled-down on the issue; the phrase "tracking students" into different classes or programs by ability was effectively prohibited everywhere, and is considered inequitable, immoral, and kind of offensive to even mention in many educational circles. The standard response in recent decades is that the bright kids should spend their time group-tutoring the slower kids.