Well I would argue that whoever specifies the curriculum as a side-effect also determines what testing happens, since even independents can't test for anything other than what's in the curriculum.
Yes it does. It defnes both what to teach and the testing that ensures it was done. The only thing it doesn't speicify is how to teach that stuff, which is basically irrelevant compared to the what.
http://www.corestandards.org/a... >> Teachers know best about what works in the classroom. That is why these standards establish what students need to learn, but do not dictate how teachers should teach.
You're missing the real point here. I don't think anyone here is seriously against raising standards or having common standards as a principle in itself. The actual issue is, do you really want to continue with something that even Gates himself has admitted is a failed experiment?... Or even worse... to put the responsibility for defining the actual content of lessons, and the criteria by which students get lablelled for the rest of their lives, into the hands of a businessman who's priorty is continually proven to be corporate profit and social engineering to that end (regardless of how well he hides it behind a facade of charity)?. I sure as hell don't.
The problem is, the Gates foundation is not altruistic. Gates repeatedly demonstrates he still has vested profit-making interests that at least influence his projects if not obviously come first.
You don't want anyone who's motive even includes corporate gain, let alone is the main one, deciding how to educate our kids.
Common Core is actually most likely a long-play intended to benefit Gates the most. When Gates was at the helm of Microsoft he started them into strongly marketing to schools, the intent being direct influence over the mental processes of the entire next decision-making/product-buying generation. Common Core is just a better disguised approach to exactly the same goal.
>>> "We want to inspire a generation of citizen-scientists. If we can lower the barrier to entry so the only limit is creativity, that might help with finding treatments for neurological disorders."...and besides, making it easy to send uncomfortably large pulses of electricity directly into the middle of a cockroach's brain is waaay cool
Things _have_ changed a lot in the last 25 years. Many women prefer geeks now, but I do strongly suspect that its mostly because we usually have a significantly higher income than average, and also they think that as a group we are easily manipulated. Buyer beware.
So you and the Birkenhead Drill is saying its more OK that a child should grow up without a father than a mother? I don't think that is either true or fair.
>> Who here thinks watching porn causes men to not be able to get erections with women? Dumb.
Although I don't suffer from it, I can understand it.
If you get used to the perfect fantasy, (i.e. a model hired for her perfect physical appearance then filmed with perfect lighting and makeup and any slight imperfections post-processed out) , then a real woman with inevitable faults when compared to an unacheiveable perfection may not meet your unrealistic and artificially high expectations enough to sufficiently turn you on.
This is clearly a natural conclusion of women's and society's ongoing erosion of the value of masculinity and the traditional male role, and even the value of men's lives compared to women's lives.
It seems to me that all the attention in society is still on women''s rights, and if you even mention mens rghts many people think you're soft in the head or something, or worse yet, just done something "socially unacceptable".
For example, even though approximately equal numbers of men are kiled by prostate cancer as women killed by breast cancer, but were is the vast majority of the attention and money going? (http://dailycaller.com/2010/10/05/breast-cancer-receives-much-more-research-funding-publicity-than-prostate-cancer-despite-similar-number-of-victims/)
Its very subliminal too, for example next time you watch TV note how the media NEARLY ALWAYS portray men as more stupid and lazy than women, (in pretty much every commercial the butt of the "joke" is a dumb man who is shown up because he's too stupid to use the same product as the woman).
Basically societiy is continually reasserting a strong message to men that we are very much 2nd-class citizens and should just count ourselves lucky if some women even gives us the chance to date her, and it goes without saying that most women think most men should pay for everything during the date and do all the other things that demonstrate themeselves as being subsurvient.
For example did you know the Birkenhead Drill ("women and children first") was only invented in the early 1850s? Note I have no problem with children first as there is actually some logic to it, but the implicit belief that one person's life is more valuable than another's just because "vagina" is insulting and damaging.
I won't even get into the ongioing massively high suicide rate of young men that indicates a serious societal problem is still going unaddressed.
Is it really any wonder then, that most young men are desperately finding alternatives to the current value system of this society?
It seems clear from the way that Juilian Assange is being fucked over by the UK and Sweden on behalf of the US, that the US gov already has their hand far enough up the arse of significant western countries to make them their puppet.
What makes anyone seriously think that Irish won't also just bend over for the NSA as readily?
Newman has long sold himself as an intellectual maverick and independent thinker. "He gets mileage out of his climate scepticism," says a former senior Liberal. "It suits him to sustain it."
Newman's assertions - climate scientists call them "zombie arguments", because they keep on popping up - have all been comprehensively debunked, repeatedly and in detail, by national academies of science around the world, including the US National Academy of Sciences, the American Geophysical Union, the Royal Society of London and the Australian Academy of Science. Andy Pitman, a climate scientist from the University of NSW, tells me that, "Newman's arguments are so wrong they are inconsistent with some fundamental laws of physics."
>> What's NOT the solution is importing cheap, disposable labor from overseas...That does nothing but help the rich get richer
Agreed but unfortunately it is exactly those guys that are making these descisions and to add insult to injury they are getting rich from it.
As a Brit now living in the US it boggles my mind how such short-term thinking remains so prevlent in the US and even more counter-intuitively, how it succeeds so much.
Perhaps its because apprently nearly all Amricans view literally everything as being short-term and throwaway. I don't know if its cause or effect since compared to the rest of the world, hardly any product or service you buy in the US is all short-term too. Nothing has any quality, or iis done if it just improves the future, or is built to to last beyond the point of sale. For example, I noticed that compared to living in the EU, in the US you very much more often have to return things becuase they're faulty or broken, and many companies blatantly treat their own customers as inconvenineces. I suppose growing up in that environment makes Americans just think that what would be unacceptably low-quality anywhere else is actually whats normal, and that effects US companies thinking too.
I honestly can't see how as a business model that thinking is even sustanable let alone successful, yet it really must be since it wouldnt be so prevalent otherwise.
Don't blame the tool for your mistakes. There's nothing in C that forces anyone to write hacks. If you can only write write hack-free code when there's a garbage collector then you need to be looking for another profession.
>> the capsule separated cleanly, propelled itself to a safe distance, deployed its parachutes, and lowered gently down to a water landing, where it remained floating.
Wait, the author of the article thinks the fact that it floats is the most amazing part?
I for one welcome the opportuniy for big corps to save money by reducing the need to hire skilled drivers to control the 40 tons of metal travelling at 60+MPH sometimes inches away from other cars. What could possibly go wrong!
Ugh you appear to be one of those many dudes that just do web stuff but try hard to make it sound much cleverer and more important than it really is by using a bunch of crapspeak.
For example self-healing software sounds very AI but its just crapspeak for fault-tolerant, which is pretty much how any _good_ software engineer would intuitively design a system without even thinkng twice about why. I remember when it was just called common sense and experience.
Working in niche areas is great while it lasts (I know because I do too), but there's always a high chance that something new will entirely invalidate your niche's entire reason for existence within a year or two, especially if is all based around knowledge of one particularly obscure tool or technology. Enjoy the ride but stay fresh with other more geneally marketable skills too, so that when the bubble inevitably bursts you're still employable for youir other skills
Slashdot Mirror
Not true. It speciifes what each student should know at each grade level. Therefore, that determines the curriculum.
From 71234.56789@compuserve.com:
That reminds me, I must get one of those new v.92 mod^D
I tried this out in the lab but it melted my interocitor.
Well I would argue that whoever specifies the curriculum as a side-effect also determines what testing happens, since even independents can't test for anything other than what's in the curriculum.
Yes it does.
It defnes both what to teach and the testing that ensures it was done. The only thing it doesn't speicify is how to teach that stuff, which is basically irrelevant compared to the what.
http://www.corestandards.org/a...
>> Teachers know best about what works in the classroom. That is why these standards establish what students need to learn, but do not dictate how teachers should teach.
You're missing the real point here. I don't think anyone here is seriously against raising standards or having common standards as a principle in itself. ... Or even worse... to put the responsibility for defining the actual content of lessons, and the criteria by which students get lablelled for the rest of their lives, into the hands of a businessman who's priorty is continually proven to be corporate profit and social engineering to that end (regardless of how well he hides it behind a facade of charity)?. I sure as hell don't.
The actual issue is, do you really want to continue with something that even Gates himself has admitted is a failed experiment?
The problem is, the Gates foundation is not altruistic. Gates repeatedly demonstrates he still has vested profit-making interests that at least influence his projects if not obviously come first.
You don't want anyone who's motive even includes corporate gain, let alone is the main one, deciding how to educate our kids.
Common Core is actually most likely a long-play intended to benefit Gates the most. When Gates was at the helm of Microsoft he started them into strongly marketing to schools, the intent being direct influence over the mental processes of the entire next decision-making/product-buying generation. Common Core is just a better disguised approach to exactly the same goal.
>>> "We want to inspire a generation of citizen-scientists. If we can lower the barrier to entry so the only limit is creativity, that might help with finding treatments for neurological disorders." ...and besides, making it easy to send uncomfortably large pulses of electricity directly into the middle of a cockroach's brain is waaay cool
Things _have_ changed a lot in the last 25 years. Many women prefer geeks now, but I do strongly suspect that its mostly because we usually have a significantly higher income than average, and also they think that as a group we are easily manipulated. Buyer beware.
They should make a lump of phosphorus foam and try floating it on water.
So you and the Birkenhead Drill is saying its more OK that a child should grow up without a father than a mother? I don't think that is either true or fair.
>> Who here thinks watching porn causes men to not be able to get erections with women? Dumb.
Although I don't suffer from it, I can understand it.
If you get used to the perfect fantasy, (i.e. a model hired for her perfect physical appearance then filmed with perfect lighting and makeup and any slight imperfections post-processed out) , then a real woman with inevitable faults when compared to an unacheiveable perfection may not meet your unrealistic and artificially high expectations enough to sufficiently turn you on.
This is clearly a natural conclusion of women's and society's ongoing erosion of the value of masculinity and the traditional male role, and even the value of men's lives compared to women's lives.
It seems to me that all the attention in society is still on women''s rights, and if you even mention mens rghts many people think you're soft in the head or something, or worse yet, just done something "socially unacceptable".
For example, even though approximately equal numbers of men are kiled by prostate cancer as women killed by breast cancer, but were is the vast majority of the attention and money going?
(http://dailycaller.com/2010/10/05/breast-cancer-receives-much-more-research-funding-publicity-than-prostate-cancer-despite-similar-number-of-victims/)
Its very subliminal too, for example next time you watch TV note how the media NEARLY ALWAYS portray men as more stupid and lazy than women, (in pretty much every commercial the butt of the "joke" is a dumb man who is shown up because he's too stupid to use the same product as the woman).
Basically societiy is continually reasserting a strong message to men that we are very much 2nd-class citizens and should just count ourselves lucky if some women even gives us the chance to date her, and it goes without saying that most women think most men should pay for everything during the date and do all the other things that demonstrate themeselves as being subsurvient.
For example did you know the Birkenhead Drill ("women and children first") was only invented in the early 1850s? Note I have no problem with children first as there is actually some logic to it, but the implicit belief that one person's life is more valuable than another's just because "vagina" is insulting and damaging.
I won't even get into the ongioing massively high suicide rate of young men that indicates a serious societal problem is still going unaddressed.
Is it really any wonder then, that most young men are desperately finding alternatives to the current value system of this society?
...and you seriously believe that charge wasn't cooked up then do you?
Have you read the "evidence" and the background on the case and the witnesses? I seriously suggest you do.
It seems clear from the way that Juilian Assange is being fucked over by the UK and Sweden on behalf of the US, that the US gov already has their hand far enough up the arse of significant western countries to make them their puppet.
What makes anyone seriously think that Irish won't also just bend over for the NSA as readily?
From http://www.smh.com.au/national...:
Newman has long sold himself as an intellectual maverick and independent thinker. "He gets mileage out of his climate scepticism," says a former senior Liberal. "It suits him to sustain it."
Newman's assertions - climate scientists call them "zombie arguments", because they keep on popping up - have all been comprehensively debunked, repeatedly and in detail, by national academies of science around the world, including the US National Academy of Sciences, the American Geophysical Union, the Royal Society of London and the Australian Academy of Science. Andy Pitman, a climate scientist from the University of NSW, tells me that, "Newman's arguments are so wrong they are inconsistent with some fundamental laws of physics."
>> What's NOT the solution is importing cheap, disposable labor from overseas...That does nothing but help the rich get richer
Agreed but unfortunately it is exactly those guys that are making these descisions and to add insult to injury they are getting rich from it.
As a Brit now living in the US it boggles my mind how such short-term thinking remains so prevlent in the US and even more counter-intuitively, how it succeeds so much.
Perhaps its because apprently nearly all Amricans view literally everything as being short-term and throwaway. I don't know if its cause or effect since compared to the rest of the world, hardly any product or service you buy in the US is all short-term too. Nothing has any quality, or iis done if it just improves the future, or is built to to last beyond the point of sale. For example, I noticed that compared to living in the EU, in the US you very much more often have to return things becuase they're faulty or broken, and many companies blatantly treat their own customers as inconvenineces. I suppose growing up in that environment makes Americans just think that what would be unacceptably low-quality anywhere else is actually whats normal, and that effects US companies thinking too.
I honestly can't see how as a business model that thinking is even sustanable let alone successful, yet it really must be since it wouldnt be so prevalent otherwise.
Don't blame the tool for your mistakes. There's nothing in C that forces anyone to write hacks.
If you can only write write hack-free code when there's a garbage collector then you need to be looking for another profession.
yeah and if (even one of) their engines stop, planes immediately drop out the sky like a rock.
>> the capsule separated cleanly, propelled itself to a safe distance, deployed its parachutes, and lowered gently down to a water landing, where it remained floating.
Wait, the author of the article thinks the fact that it floats is the most amazing part?
I for one welcome the opportuniy for big corps to save money by reducing the need to hire skilled drivers to control the 40 tons of metal travelling at 60+MPH sometimes inches away from other cars. What could possibly go wrong!
It already seems like yet another item destined to be quickly relegated to my already-full cupboard o' crap.
Ugh you appear to be one of those many dudes that just do web stuff but try hard to make it sound much cleverer and more important than it really is by using a bunch of crapspeak.
For example self-healing software sounds very AI but its just crapspeak for fault-tolerant, which is pretty much how any _good_ software engineer would intuitively design a system without even thinkng twice about why. I remember when it was just called common sense and experience.
Working in niche areas is great while it lasts (I know because I do too), but there's always a high chance that something new will entirely invalidate your niche's entire reason for existence within a year or two, especially if is all based around knowledge of one particularly obscure tool or technology.
Enjoy the ride but stay fresh with other more geneally marketable skills too, so that when the bubble inevitably bursts you're still employable for youir other skills
if its academic or for fun, yes.
If its just to get a job then no, unless you want to gamble with the chance of getting a job in a niche market.