A strong argument can be made that nations currently outperforming the U.S. have (a) a single national common curriculum structure, (b) teacher training in college which is focused on the specifics of teaching that curriculum, (c) textbooks in support of that curriculum, and (d) ongoing support and mentoring for a professional class of teacher.
With the history states rights in the U.S., of course, you can't have a common curriculum, and schools of education can't dig into the specifics of any particular subject matter, so it's pretty much all lost in an abstract cloud (of which some Slashdotters will sing praises, but it doesn't work too well in practice). And teachers are mostly thrown at the wall like cannon fodder (I think the turnover rate in the first year teaching in the U.S. is like 50%).
Is a common, nationally-supported curriculum possible in the U.S.? Possibly not. And we tend to be more accepting of a lottery-like structure to our society with some huge winners and a lot of hopeless losers.
Disagree. I'd say this was an trend/expectation long before the last-few-years recession. You can go back to the Reagan era and see public plans by that administration's officials to convert public schools to more business-focused and responsive services.
Isn't this short-term thinking endemic to the financial industry in the first place? I mean, programmers joke about unmaintainable code as personal job security -- but hard-charging finance guys would actually act on that.
I assume they understand the incentives of their job, and have the training and/or personality to ruthlessly focus on that. They have bonuses and commissions to collect, yes? They get no additional income from well-written code, or something that assists their replacement next quarter or next year. They don't really give a crap if the next guy's job is feasible or not -- then he can serve as a scapegoat in the political throw-under-the-bus game. That's my impression (not involved in finance except for stories from a friend in insurance IT).
"All programmers are optimists. Perhaps this modern sorcery especially attracts those who believe in happy endings and fairy godmothers... But however the selection process works, the result is indisputable: 'This time it will surely run,' or 'I just found the last bug.' So the first false assumption that underlies the scheduling of systems programming is that all will go well, i.e., that each task will take only as long as it 'ought' to take. The pervasiveness of optimism among programmers deserves more than a flip analysis..." [Fred Brooks, Mythical Man-Month, p. 14-15]
So really this observation is really just a slightly-different flavor of something that is characteristic of all programmers.
I had one job where I was assigned a particular game feature. So I took a week and I did it. My technical manager took it and played with it and came back to me completely shocked: I couldn't find any bugs! he says. (Also: I was continually being chastised for long schedules, and having my estimates arbitrarily cut in half by the manager.) That job convinced me I had to get out of the industry.
"BTW the last time I was being questioned for service on a jury I asked the judge about it and I was dismissed and thanked for my time. I have yet to be called for jury duty again."
"governments (at least the USA) is really bad at keeping secrets"
I would love to know how anyone (conspiracy theorist or non-conspiracy theorist) thinks they can evaluate this one way or another. I'd love to estimate the odds of government leaking a given secret, O=f/g (f the number of secrets leaked, g the number of secrets kept). We can reliably count f. But the idea that we can count g is self-contradictory.
I think there was a case last year where, for a day, Google returned someone else's blog as #1 when searching for Facebook (FB itself was #2). The blog comments instantaneously filled with hundreds of angry, misspelled, all-caps rants by people infuriated that Facebook wasn't letting them log in. It was hilarious (wish I could find it now).
But the next million times it happens (or pre-empted from happening due to chilling effects), it won't land on Slashdot's main page. So the expected-value analysis is probably still in Facebook's favor.
That's not a bad question. My impression is that this used to be the case (I always hear about suggestions for enforcing reading the text prior to class discussion), but discipline got to a point where no one could actually expect that to happen anywhere. Everyone's supposed to succeed and pass the class (no failures, no send-back in grade levels). So in-class time became remediation to the lowest common denominator.
A final observation: Much of my job is basic algebra remediation at the community college level. Open admissions, and it's the first time ever these students have confronted a fixed, hard requirement on skill level to pass. So basically I'm the brick wall at which all these secondary students are being thrown, crash-dummy style. And it's heart breaking. 70% failure rate nationwide for courses like this. (My students somewhat better than that.) Cycled through again and again, sometimes for years, unable to pass basic algebra. Piling up state/federal loans as they do so.
Slashdot Mirror
A strong argument can be made that nations currently outperforming the U.S. have (a) a single national common curriculum structure, (b) teacher training in college which is focused on the specifics of teaching that curriculum, (c) textbooks in support of that curriculum, and (d) ongoing support and mentoring for a professional class of teacher.
With the history states rights in the U.S., of course, you can't have a common curriculum, and schools of education can't dig into the specifics of any particular subject matter, so it's pretty much all lost in an abstract cloud (of which some Slashdotters will sing praises, but it doesn't work too well in practice). And teachers are mostly thrown at the wall like cannon fodder (I think the turnover rate in the first year teaching in the U.S. is like 50%).
Is a common, nationally-supported curriculum possible in the U.S.? Possibly not. And we tend to be more accepting of a lottery-like structure to our society with some huge winners and a lot of hopeless losers.
http://www.aft.org/newspubs/periodicals/ae/winter1011/index.cfm
Disagree. I'd say this was an trend/expectation long before the last-few-years recession. You can go back to the Reagan era and see public plans by that administration's officials to convert public schools to more business-focused and responsive services.
"X is available" != "X is available for everyone"
Which is the most common oversight in all these utopian dreams of technology.
Isn't this short-term thinking endemic to the financial industry in the first place? I mean, programmers joke about unmaintainable code as personal job security -- but hard-charging finance guys would actually act on that.
I assume they understand the incentives of their job, and have the training and/or personality to ruthlessly focus on that. They have bonuses and commissions to collect, yes? They get no additional income from well-written code, or something that assists their replacement next quarter or next year. They don't really give a crap if the next guy's job is feasible or not -- then he can serve as a scapegoat in the political throw-under-the-bus game. That's my impression (not involved in finance except for stories from a friend in insurance IT).
"All programmers are optimists. Perhaps this modern sorcery especially attracts those who believe in happy endings and fairy godmothers... But however the selection process works, the result is indisputable: 'This time it will surely run,' or 'I just found the last bug.' So the first false assumption that underlies the scheduling of systems programming is that all will go well, i.e., that each task will take only as long as it 'ought' to take. The pervasiveness of optimism among programmers deserves more than a flip analysis..." [Fred Brooks, Mythical Man-Month, p. 14-15]
So really this observation is really just a slightly-different flavor of something that is characteristic of all programmers.
I had one job where I was assigned a particular game feature. So I took a week and I did it. My technical manager took it and played with it and came back to me completely shocked: I couldn't find any bugs! he says. (Also: I was continually being chastised for long schedules, and having my estimates arbitrarily cut in half by the manager.) That job convinced me I had to get out of the industry.
I have an occasional argument with my friends: "Do people enjoy addictive drugs or not?"
I (who doesn't do any drugs) say yes. My friends (who may not be so straightedge) say no. Surprisingly debatable.
And your dogs.
"BTW the last time I was being questioned for service on a jury I asked the judge about it and I was dismissed and thanked for my time. I have yet to be called for jury duty again."
Same here.
Yes, like Lenin said: "The worse, the better."
Or as I call it: the "Shoot myself in the foot" theory of political strategy.
"governments (at least the USA) is really bad at keeping secrets"
I would love to know how anyone (conspiracy theorist or non-conspiracy theorist) thinks they can evaluate this one way or another. I'd love to estimate the odds of government leaking a given secret, O=f/g (f the number of secrets leaked, g the number of secrets kept). We can reliably count f. But the idea that we can count g is self-contradictory.
I call this the "shoot myself in the foot" theory of political action.
I don't think ever seen anything in my life work out that way. Maybe oppress a pretty white woman somehow, that occasionally gets results.
Basically agree, but I'll pick "evil policy". It's intentionally obfuscatory.
And thank you!
Thank you!
Of course, that's just an automated message that gets sent out identically any time someone is banned.
I think there was a case last year where, for a day, Google returned someone else's blog as #1 when searching for Facebook (FB itself was #2). The blog comments instantaneously filled with hundreds of angry, misspelled, all-caps rants by people infuriated that Facebook wasn't letting them log in. It was hilarious (wish I could find it now).
But the next million times it happens (or pre-empted from happening due to chilling effects), it won't land on Slashdot's main page. So the expected-value analysis is probably still in Facebook's favor.
I'm pretty sure I voted for a candidate who promised the exact opposite of what he's done for 2+ years.
Drugs over-prescribed? Never take a pill!
No problem, we've got your pill right here for the low-low price of $800/month.
Great point.
Interesting thought experiment to extrapolate what might be done about it...
That's not a bad question. My impression is that this used to be the case (I always hear about suggestions for enforcing reading the text prior to class discussion), but discipline got to a point where no one could actually expect that to happen anywhere. Everyone's supposed to succeed and pass the class (no failures, no send-back in grade levels). So in-class time became remediation to the lowest common denominator.
A final observation: Much of my job is basic algebra remediation at the community college level. Open admissions, and it's the first time ever these students have confronted a fixed, hard requirement on skill level to pass. So basically I'm the brick wall at which all these secondary students are being thrown, crash-dummy style. And it's heart breaking. 70% failure rate nationwide for courses like this. (My students somewhat better than that.) Cycled through again and again, sometimes for years, unable to pass basic algebra. Piling up state/federal loans as they do so.
Maybe his English tests were great but he couldn't apply it.
Look at me! I assume that my personal experience is universally applicable. I'm awesome!
"Uplay Passport-enhanced games"
Or rather: Uplay Passport-crippled games.