This innovation was from over 40 years ago:) and is pretty much how it was done until the "new methods" of the late 1960s started making inroads. Education has done nothing but go downhill ever since. What's really needed, thus, is a return to tried and true methods of the past, that turned out so many well-educated generations, and just as important, a much smaller number of sheer losers than we see in today's era of "self esteem training" and "tangible rewards".
Well, see, that's why we're in this mess today... because short-term thinking has become the norm, rather than the exception. It wasn't that way when I was young -- people looked to the long-term a lot more back then, and only children and losers were short-term thinkers. But today's society is made up mostly of unmatured children.:(
My high school used the theory that the best reward for good work was -- more work. If you did well in class A, you were allowed to take more-advanced class B. This actually caused some competition for advancement in math and sciences, where there were only NN-many seats available.
As a professional dog trainer, I find the exact same system works best (dogs are much like kids) -- where the best reward for good work is *an opportunity to do more work*. This leads to a lifelong *desire to work* achieved by neither bribes nor praise.
One clue came out of the interviews Fryer's team conducted with students in New York City. The students were universally excited about the money, and they wanted to earn more. They just didn't seem to know how. When researchers asked them how they could raise their scores, the kids mentioned test-taking strategies like reading the questions more carefully. But they didn't talk about the substantive work that leads to learning. "No one said they were going to stay after class and talk to the teacher," Fryer says. "Not one."
I took special note of that section as well. It appears to me that it didn't incentivize the kids to learn more for the sake of knowledge or their future, but rather, toward acquiring more skill at gaming the system so they could earn more in the short term.
This isn't the first time such a project has been conducted. I read about a similar inner-city program from 20+ years back, that paid kids to stay in school and earn good grades. Turned out that even those who stayed in school and got paid the most, wound up being losers just as often as the unpaid kids. Five years later they were no better off; under 15% had gone on to make anything worthwhile of their lives.
Yes, as I recall it was determined to be a hoax, in that she hadn't quite been where she said and some other things were bogus that I don't recall offhand. However, it's still a remarkable piece of photo-journalism (and an excellent lesson on how a well-staged emotional piece can sway mass perceptions, accurate or not), and it's still available online.
I'm amazed at how many comments both above and below yours seem to think it was all atrocities suffered by an innocent Japan at the hands of the evil Americans. What sort of revisionist history are they teaching these days, anyway??!
I'd guess a lot of it comes from American politicians spinelessly agreeing that everything bad in the world is all our fault, which encourages that viewpoint.:(
I've been driving since 1973ish, and I've always been a pretty good and surroundings-aware driver. But I noticed after I started playing DOOM that I was now much more aware of what was happening on feeder streets, side streets, and other more-distant areas not directly around/afore/aft my truck. I take this as a realworld translation of the fact that much of DOOM's hazard comes from monsters well out of your immediate field of vision, so you learn to keep track of them regardless.
I'm sure there are a number of the species that I haven't seen, not really being a film buff:) Tho the aforementioned Hawk the Slayer stands out in the reviews, because it has 30 years of people saying the exact same things about it!
[goes off, looks up Deathstalker II] I see it's not much younger:) but does sound like a direct descendant:D
"All it said was in this study, men who smoked also had lower IQ's. There's 2 ways that could happen. Smoking lowers your IQ, or the more likely (on the average) lower IQ people smoke."
Which doesn't rule out BOTH being the case. Maybe a larger number of low-IQs smoke in the first place, AND it lowers your IQ no matter where it started. In fact I'd guess that's more likely the case than not.
Actually I was just reading something about that earlier today (I think it was on or linked from vdare.com) and turns out the military uses IQ tests, has a bottom cut-off point somewhere in the middling-lower range of average (NOT way down there), and turns down about 40% of applicants for inadequate IQ. Seems they've found there's a strong correlation between survival in combat (because you do things RIGHT) and higher IQ, and training replacement soldiers is a lot more expensive than keeping the ones you've already trained alive. Besides, trainees still on base win no battles.
There were plenty of other really bad films, even similar and similarly bad films, that somehow failed to achieve whatever weird magic Hawk the Slayer had. Ever seen it?
Tho I tend to agree about both Tolkien and Shakespeare -- both are -- well, boring. Same with Steinbeck, whom I loathed because I cannot remember ever being so bored with a book, other than possibly Dickens. OTOH when I was in school I used to read Henry James, Victor Hugo, and the like, and I was so fascinated by Crime and Punishment that I read the whole thing in a single sitting.
I think the difference may be that sometimes slow-moving nonetheless manages a continuous increment of *something* (and kids, being anal-retentive, will notice and obsessively catalog those tiny increments), whereas other times it's just a travelogue and doesn't really go anywhere.
Funny thing, the people who cry "untrained penis extender lovers" and "having a gun makes you liable to shoot someone" and the like don't see any disconnect between that attitude and "smoking pot doesn't make you likely to do hard drugs", a view most of them also seem to espouse. In their minds, anything they're afraid of makes [whoever competently owns scary thing] more likely to do [scary act they're afraid of].
Same here. Cats can be incredibly stupid about it the first couple times, but once they get hungry they figure it out. The problem is that having people *come after them* (attempting to 'rescue' the cat) actively *prevents* the cat from figuring it out, since cats panic when they perceive themselves as 'cornered'. Go away and leave the cat alone, and eventually it will calm down and then it can figure out how to get down by itself. But so long as you're between it and the ground, the cat is going to act "trapped" in the tree (unless it's the rare cat that trusts you completely).
Unfortuantely our modern 'rescue' mentality is much the same for kids or cats -- and never lets them learn anything on their own!!
I think their solution will be somewhat different -- either drive around blaring tapes of gunshots ALL the time, or after a shooting, shoot all the way down the street to confuse the location.
Definitely the case -- "best" and "favourite" don't necessarily overlap at all. Quintessential film example, that everyone seems to agree on: Hawk the Slayer.
Almost every review says essentially the same thing (and so do I): "This is absolutely the most fascinating utterly terrible movie I've ever seen. It is B-movies incarnate. It's so dreadful it makes my brain smoke and my eyes bleed. I love it and have watched it 50 times."
One thing I did notice about the Amazon reviews, is that the negative reviews seemed to be mostly from non-readers, judging by the grammar and -- well, impatience. They evidently didn't read these books by choice, but rather by coercion (probably school). I've read some of them by choice and a few by coercion (school) but I'm a reader, and that tilts things differently.
Good point. I also wondered how much of this is sour grapes - "howcum HE can afford to be an unpaid intern, and *I* can't??"
In any case, it's not like someone holds a gun to your head and makes you do it. If you don't like this facet of your chosen profession's typical apprenticeship (which it really is, paid or not), maybe you should pick a different profession.
At least you'd have the choice of not flying with that airline, if you don't like their policies. Right now your only choice is to not fly at all, because they're all subject to the same gov't-imposed policies.
I think I'd trust an airline's enlightened self-interest over the government's desire to scrutinize and control the people's movements.
Slashdot Mirror
This innovation was from over 40 years ago :) and is pretty much how it was done until the "new methods" of the late 1960s started making inroads. Education has done nothing but go downhill ever since. What's really needed, thus, is a return to tried and true methods of the past, that turned out so many well-educated generations, and just as important, a much smaller number of sheer losers than we see in today's era of "self esteem training" and "tangible rewards".
Making murder illegal because it is theft of someone's property (their life) is different from because it is "immoral". Discuss.
Quebec is France for people who are bad at either geography or navigation. ;)
Well, see, that's why we're in this mess today... because short-term thinking has become the norm, rather than the exception. It wasn't that way when I was young -- people looked to the long-term a lot more back then, and only children and losers were short-term thinkers. But today's society is made up mostly of unmatured children. :(
Now get off my lawn! ;)
My high school used the theory that the best reward for good work was -- more work. If you did well in class A, you were allowed to take more-advanced class B. This actually caused some competition for advancement in math and sciences, where there were only NN-many seats available.
As a professional dog trainer, I find the exact same system works best (dogs are much like kids) -- where the best reward for good work is *an opportunity to do more work*. This leads to a lifelong *desire to work* achieved by neither bribes nor praise.
I took special note of that section as well. It appears to me that it didn't incentivize the kids to learn more for the sake of knowledge or their future, but rather, toward acquiring more skill at gaming the system so they could earn more in the short term.
This isn't the first time such a project has been conducted. I read about a similar inner-city program from 20+ years back, that paid kids to stay in school and earn good grades. Turned out that even those who stayed in school and got paid the most, wound up being losers just as often as the unpaid kids. Five years later they were no better off; under 15% had gone on to make anything worthwhile of their lives.
Yes, as I recall it was determined to be a hoax, in that she hadn't quite been where she said and some other things were bogus that I don't recall offhand. However, it's still a remarkable piece of photo-journalism (and an excellent lesson on how a well-staged emotional piece can sway mass perceptions, accurate or not), and it's still available online.
http://www.kiddofspeed.com/
Take a look at her other sites too.
I'm amazed at how many comments both above and below yours seem to think it was all atrocities suffered by an innocent Japan at the hands of the evil Americans. What sort of revisionist history are they teaching these days, anyway??!
I'd guess a lot of it comes from American politicians spinelessly agreeing that everything bad in the world is all our fault, which encourages that viewpoint. :(
Breath of fresh air after all the kneejerking "ugly american" rants we get from village idiots all over the globe :)
Russia just isn't a prime location for zombies. If you want to find zombies, try these articles for starting points:
http://www.archaeology.org/online/features/hierakonpolis/zombies.html
http://www.archaeology.org/online/interviews/zombies/
I've been driving since 1973ish, and I've always been a pretty good and surroundings-aware driver. But I noticed after I started playing DOOM that I was now much more aware of what was happening on feeder streets, side streets, and other more-distant areas not directly around/afore/aft my truck. I take this as a realworld translation of the fact that much of DOOM's hazard comes from monsters well out of your immediate field of vision, so you learn to keep track of them regardless.
Haha, yep, that's about the typical review for it :D
I'm sure there are a number of the species that I haven't seen, not really being a film buff :) Tho the aforementioned Hawk the Slayer stands out in the reviews, because it has 30 years of people saying the exact same things about it!
[goes off, looks up Deathstalker II] I see it's not much younger :) but does sound like a direct descendant :D
"All it said was in this study, men who smoked also had lower IQ's. There's 2 ways that could happen. Smoking lowers your IQ, or the more likely (on the average) lower IQ people smoke."
Which doesn't rule out BOTH being the case. Maybe a larger number of low-IQs smoke in the first place, AND it lowers your IQ no matter where it started. In fact I'd guess that's more likely the case than not.
Actually I was just reading something about that earlier today (I think it was on or linked from vdare.com) and turns out the military uses IQ tests, has a bottom cut-off point somewhere in the middling-lower range of average (NOT way down there), and turns down about 40% of applicants for inadequate IQ. Seems they've found there's a strong correlation between survival in combat (because you do things RIGHT) and higher IQ, and training replacement soldiers is a lot more expensive than keeping the ones you've already trained alive. Besides, trainees still on base win no battles.
There were plenty of other really bad films, even similar and similarly bad films, that somehow failed to achieve whatever weird magic Hawk the Slayer had. Ever seen it?
Tho I tend to agree about both Tolkien and Shakespeare -- both are -- well, boring. Same with Steinbeck, whom I loathed because I cannot remember ever being so bored with a book, other than possibly Dickens. OTOH when I was in school I used to read Henry James, Victor Hugo, and the like, and I was so fascinated by Crime and Punishment that I read the whole thing in a single sitting.
I think the difference may be that sometimes slow-moving nonetheless manages a continuous increment of *something* (and kids, being anal-retentive, will notice and obsessively catalog those tiny increments), whereas other times it's just a travelogue and doesn't really go anywhere.
Super post. Absolutely true!
Funny thing, the people who cry "untrained penis extender lovers" and "having a gun makes you liable to shoot someone" and the like don't see any disconnect between that attitude and "smoking pot doesn't make you likely to do hard drugs", a view most of them also seem to espouse. In their minds, anything they're afraid of makes [whoever competently owns scary thing] more likely to do [scary act they're afraid of].
Same here. Cats can be incredibly stupid about it the first couple times, but once they get hungry they figure it out. The problem is that having people *come after them* (attempting to 'rescue' the cat) actively *prevents* the cat from figuring it out, since cats panic when they perceive themselves as 'cornered'. Go away and leave the cat alone, and eventually it will calm down and then it can figure out how to get down by itself. But so long as you're between it and the ground, the cat is going to act "trapped" in the tree (unless it's the rare cat that trusts you completely).
Unfortuantely our modern 'rescue' mentality is much the same for kids or cats -- and never lets them learn anything on their own!!
I think their solution will be somewhat different -- either drive around blaring tapes of gunshots ALL the time, or after a shooting, shoot all the way down the street to confuse the location.
Definitely the case -- "best" and "favourite" don't necessarily overlap at all. Quintessential film example, that everyone seems to agree on: Hawk the Slayer.
Almost every review says essentially the same thing (and so do I): "This is absolutely the most fascinating utterly terrible movie I've ever seen. It is B-movies incarnate. It's so dreadful it makes my brain smoke and my eyes bleed. I love it and have watched it 50 times."
One thing I did notice about the Amazon reviews, is that the negative reviews seemed to be mostly from non-readers, judging by the grammar and -- well, impatience. They evidently didn't read these books by choice, but rather by coercion (probably school). I've read some of them by choice and a few by coercion (school) but I'm a reader, and that tilts things differently.
That's a damned good point... the higher the wages, the more tax dollars for the government to collect. So the gov't has a vested interest here.
Good point. I also wondered how much of this is sour grapes - "howcum HE can afford to be an unpaid intern, and *I* can't??"
In any case, it's not like someone holds a gun to your head and makes you do it. If you don't like this facet of your chosen profession's typical apprenticeship (which it really is, paid or not), maybe you should pick a different profession.
"I'm surprised they aren't summarily castrating people without proof these days. After all, won't someone think of the children..."
With that policy, there soon won't be any children to think of!!
At least you'd have the choice of not flying with that airline, if you don't like their policies. Right now your only choice is to not fly at all, because they're all subject to the same gov't-imposed policies.
I think I'd trust an airline's enlightened self-interest over the government's desire to scrutinize and control the people's movements.
You both misspelled "fruitcake".