There is no such thing as due process in Canada. There never was. Authorities can decide on a whim what they will do to you. There is also no recourse, no accountability, no freedom from intrusion. The 'reasonable grounds' dictate for search and seizure are based on some drones best imaginings of you at the time.
The Canadian government also collects information about the population on a regular basis ans stores it away in CPIC and among various vestigial databases.
There are no real controls over how CPIC data are used. Any disgruntled police officer can diddle the database with impunity. Any non-active or ex police member can still gain access to private records at any time.
Many police officers use the public databases for personal searches, outside the bounds of actual casework. They then pass this information on to private individuals, family and friends. Some do it for money.
The Canadian databases have serious data quality problems. Any complaint is placed in public databases and may later be used as evidence or 'leverage'.
Since complaints are logged and remain in databases for years. People use the complaint process as a way to harass others.
There is no logging of WHO entered data into Canada's public databases. This means that if there is an error or illegal manipulation of the database, no employees can be fired.
There is also no logging of WHO VIEWS Canada's public databases. This means that there are no employees fired for misusing Canadian databases.
As you can see I am not a big believer in Canada's privacy and human/civil rights performance when it comes to it's citizens.
** The Canadian Charter of Rights contains no reference to " due process of law" it substitutes for the Phrase " fundamental justice". The court interpreted "fundamental Justice as the substantive concept" . Main Problem: vague concept.
Ubiquitous and inexpensive broadband access will be a non issue in 10 years. I doubt fixing the education system would ever happen that fast.
>Oh, but you're going to require already struggling parents to pay for those too. And pay for chemistry and physics labs as well.
They already pay for it. Taxes.
>Wow, I agree finally but your suggestions do not solve the problems.
Well, you certainly aren't offering any solutions other than to stay static. Which is generally agreed to be a problem. Are you offering any solutions?
>All they do is pass on the cost to those unable to afford them.
Can the marginalized afford the education system we have now? If it's not working and people are remaining marginalized one would tend to guess no. A system where people can access learning at their own pace allows everyone the opportunity to learn no matter what circumstances they are in. (ie; use the computers at the public library)
>So parents have to buy them? And pay for net access? Will dial-up be fine? Or will broadband be needed? Because not everyone can even get it.
Parents pay anyway. Taxes and school tuition account for the bulk of public school financing. It certainly isn't free.
>But you said to get rid of books. Along with a bunch of other stuff.
No, I said get rid of the idea of *BUYING* textbooks, in favor of collaborative curriculum that is shared by everyone.
>Exactly where did I say anything about "Soylent Green" in the post you replied to? Hint, I didn't.
No, not this thread same topic though.
QUOTE: "Yea, who needs teachers and mentors? Who needs people watching them? Why should the disabled be taught? It will reduce short term cost, but it will increase long term costs, unless those who don't make it are disposed of. Soylent green [wikipedia.org] anyone? One size fits all rarely work for everyone. The same is true for education. Falcon"
>I prefer my social solutions to your technical non-solutions.
I'm not sure you have shared any of your 'social solutions' in this thread. Perhaps if you provided some examples it would be more clear what it is that you have such strong feelings about regarding this whole issue. So far you have provided no alternatives other than to say 'No! No! No!'.
>As if "If only enough technology is applied." Then again like most other posters, for >you there is only one solution, though yours is more tech.
Not necessarily *MORE* tech. Just better use of the tools/resources to get the job done. Perhaps a rethinking of why we teach the way we do.
>For others it's more standardized testing.
Standards work where measurements are required. That all depends on what everyone is trying to measure. SATs are standardized tests. College entrance exams for specific types of study are standardized tests.
I suppose the proof is in the result. When secondary students arrive at college, can they pass an SAT?
>For still others losers and slackers should >be left behind. Hell for all I know you may support those as well.
Not sure where you're going here... Are you referring to people with socialization problems or learning challenges?
You are right, sometimes those two things work together to undermine a students progress. You mention 'slackers' and 'losers'. What quantifies those people as those things? If it's a lifestyle choice then nothing can help unless the lifestyle changes. If it's a bullying problem that is not their fault then removing the negative social atmosphere may be a solution.
Just to be clear though, if there is the *ability* to learn a subject, and a *willingness* to learn a subject by doing the necessary work, any average person can be successful at learning provided the *environment* is conducive. If there are endemic social challenges that interfere with a students learning progress, no matter how hard or intelligent that student is, then that same problem will exist no matter what technique is applied in teaching.
I am suggesting that there are possibly more effective ways to teach than the 500 year old hierarchal system we have now.
That, in itself, does not preclude teachers in some form. The two are not mutually exclusive. It may, however, mean that teachers won't work in exactly the same way as they do now.
You still need teachers and mentors. They are just utilized in a different context. Most teachers would prefer to apply teaching skills to a tutorial focus rather that standing and performing in front of a classroom full of people who would rather be elsewhere.
The current schooling system was designed 500 years ago modeled after feudal monastic education. It's moribund. There are better ways to present information.
Teachers would be online within the home educational system as tutors. They would also handle examinations and curriculum modeling within the scope of their academic specialties.
Why in this day and age should we have to pay for big buildings to present information that any kid can get online, and more consistently so. What for?
What we have right now is the one size fits all system. We bathe children in the mediocrity of 'big education'. Large systems can only be mediocre, that's the very nature of big-anything.
Lab materials can be used in scheduled lab times, or at home.
In the current system, if we removed the I.T. budget, the sports budget, and used those for basic academic education and basic physical education, schools would be farther ahead. Ever seen the budget for replacing football helmets?
If we got rid of schools all together and just designed and maintained home learning programs the system would only need to pay for tutors, occasionally for those who need them.
Schools shouldn't need to buy computers. It's an appliance. If you're working from the network at home, or even using a library without requiring a computer, there should be no need for the government to supply computers.
I agree though, the way it was written is a bit contradictory. Oh well, 5 minutes and slashdot...
Even with HTML books, you don't need a computer for each child.
For a guy to exaggerates about 'Soylent Green' you sure make a big deal out of a comment regarding the social fixation with schools past and present. Do you own stock in public schools or something?
spoken like a true believer... It's a bit of a stretch to go from changing the way we apply education to everyone making soylent green. Besides, self directed learning is the goal for postsecondary education anyway. You're teaching people to teach themselves.
Instead of publicly funding institutionalized warehousing of children/students why not get rid of the centralized public school buildings system all together.
There is no necessity for these big human warehouses. If people want daycare, they should pay for their own daycare.
Education can be done at home with an internet connection and standard, secure, self paced, curriculum. Testing and socialization should be done in shared, controlled facilities. Bookwork at home.
This would reduce costs and improve long term outcomes.
There should be a constitutional 500K to 1M maximum limit to any litigation in law. That would clear out all the ambulance chasers, copyright lawyers, etc., and make it O.K. to do a chemistry experiment in school again.
This same problem was what kept US companies, like Cessna and Piper, from making airplanes for decades. When Clinton put a cap on liability, suddenly the US had small aircraft companies manufacturing again.
If there were a way to get rid of the "litigation industry" in the US, everyone would be better off.
we put a disproportionate amount of funding into these technologies but the results are telling us that the technology, except in narrow circumstances, provides very little educational return.
Either it is the wrong technology, or it is being used incorrectly.
1.) Use the technical resources that are available
a.) Stop BUYING textbooks and use HTML
b.) Stop using Schools (buildings) and just have major tests and socialization in regular locations
2.) Stop *overestimating* the value of one per child computer technology in education
a.) It's a distraction
b.) If it were of real educational value it would be working by now
c.) The money is better spent on ubiquitous lab materials for hands on experience
3.)Teach critical thinking skills starting from K
a.)you can't have analytical people unless you teach them to think and rethink
4.)Get rid of generalists in primary and secondary education
a.) Math teachers who can't do math ruin it for kids
b.) Science...same thing
When kids are able to leave junior high without understanding fractions there's a problem
5.) Stop using schools to warehouse kids while parents are working.
a.) The education system needs to stop trying to be all things to everyone because this makes it nothing to anyone
b.) focus on the basic skills and dump the extracurricular nonsense.
c.) Sell the real estate and send the kids home to learn with specific goals
d.) Schedule socialization for students at shared local facilities
e.) Schedule field trips for students like tours.
f.) There's a global computer network. Textbooks and schools/warehouses are obsolete.
g.) Reduces bullying and focuses on positive socialization.
We're not in a wagon train anymore. People/society need to get out of the one room schoolhouse and *with* the program.
Muslims also believe in the bible. Abraham is also one of Islam's great prophets as is jesus.
So, to preclude stoning by Muslims on the basis of it being in the bible and not in the quran is foolish and indicates a complete lack of understanding of the culture and it's relationship with other abrahamic religions .
Judaism, Christian Judaism, Islam, Bahai, all reference the bible in some fashion.
Sorry, nobody sues Ford or G.M. if some fool tampers with the engine or brakes on your car.
Home owners are currently *not* covered by fire insurance if they leave 'appliances' on while away from home. This demonstrates that the onus is on the home owner to make sure their 'vacuum cleaner' and computer are stowed properly.
This is just another example of how people think regular laws, that already apply to the use of machines in the commission of crime, somehow don't apply because the new 'excavator', with a video camera bolted on, now has four hydraulic booms instead of one.
Throw out your 'Terminator' DVDs, it's just a lawn mower with an expert system running.
In Canada there are special tax breaks for churches as non-profit organizations. This is an indirect tax on the general population since these large, religion based, corporate organizations do not operate on the same level tax structure as other business. Everyone ends up subsidizing them. In the case of the Catholic church than money just ends up ascending the org-chart to the global organization. Our tax dollars hard at work.
Slashdot Mirror
I only ask this because it seems like the same desperate grasping kind of maneuver.
Incidentally, if HP tanks, who will own the BeOS rights?
ie: Palm bought Be Inc. and then HP bought Palm...
Maybe it's a Be Inc. corporate virus spreading.....
It just infects companies who consume the previously infected 'host' .
There is no such thing as due process in Canada. There never was. Authorities can decide on a whim what they will do to you.
There is also no recourse, no accountability, no freedom from intrusion. The 'reasonable grounds' dictate for search and seizure are based on some drones best imaginings of you at the time.
The Canadian government also collects information about the population on a regular basis ans stores it away in
CPIC and among various vestigial databases.
There are no real controls over how CPIC data are used. Any disgruntled police officer can diddle the database with impunity.
Any non-active or ex police member can still gain access to private records at any time.
Many police officers use the public databases for personal searches, outside the bounds of actual casework. They then pass this
information on to private individuals, family and friends. Some do it for money.
The Canadian databases have serious data quality problems. Any complaint is placed in public databases and may later be used as evidence or
'leverage'.
Since complaints are logged and remain in databases for years. People use the complaint process as a way to harass others.
There is no logging of WHO entered data into Canada's public databases. This means that if there is an error or illegal manipulation of the database, no employees can be fired.
There is also no logging of WHO VIEWS Canada's public databases. This means that there are no employees fired for misusing Canadian databases.
As you can see I am not a big believer in Canada's privacy and human/civil rights performance when it comes to it's citizens.
I believe applicable the term is G.I.G.O. (wikipedia)
**
The Canadian Charter of Rights contains no reference to " due process of law" it substitutes for the Phrase " fundamental justice". The court interpreted "fundamental Justice as the substantive concept" . Main Problem: vague concept.
source: http://www.unb.ca/democracy/English/Ideas/DueProcess/DueProcess.html
**
Yes. Then he can copyright the 'Post Idea World' idea and sue everyone who coins it for money.
The 'medium' is not the 'message', it's a trap.
I'll take on the job.
>"You're not a leader until you've failed"
You've got that right...and my respect.
I started off very poor. I try to keep my mind straight in terms of
where I was before and what I have accomplished.
The only real competition is ourselves. We can't win against ourselves
only understand,work around and exceed.
Ubiquitous and inexpensive broadband access will be a non issue in 10 years.
I doubt fixing the education system would ever happen that fast.
>Oh, but you're going to require already struggling parents to pay for those too. And pay for chemistry and physics labs as well.
They already pay for it. Taxes.
>Wow, I agree finally but your suggestions do not solve the problems.
Well, you certainly aren't offering any solutions other than to stay static.
Which is generally agreed to be a problem. Are you offering any solutions?
>All they do is pass on the cost to those unable to afford them.
Can the marginalized afford the education system we have now?
If it's not working and people are remaining marginalized one would tend to guess no.
A system where people can access learning at their own pace allows everyone the opportunity
to learn no matter what circumstances they are in. (ie; use the computers at the public library)
Your looping....(Recursion?)
I think the phrase you're looking for is, 'I know but what , so there N'ya!'
>So parents have to buy them? And pay for net access? Will dial-up be fine? Or will broadband be needed? Because not everyone can even get it.
Parents pay anyway. Taxes and school tuition account for the bulk of public school financing.
It certainly isn't free.
>But you said to get rid of books. Along with a bunch of other stuff.
No, I said get rid of the idea of *BUYING* textbooks, in favor of collaborative
curriculum that is shared by everyone.
>Exactly where did I say anything about "Soylent Green" in the post you replied to? Hint, I didn't.
No, not this thread same topic though.
QUOTE:
"Yea, who needs teachers and mentors? Who needs people watching them? Why should the disabled be taught?
It will reduce short term cost, but it will increase long term costs, unless those who don't make it are disposed of. Soylent green [wikipedia.org] anyone?
One size fits all rarely work for everyone. The same is true for education.
Falcon"
>I prefer my social solutions to your technical non-solutions.
I'm not sure you have shared any of your 'social solutions' in this thread.
Perhaps if you provided some examples it would be more clear what it is
that you have such strong feelings about regarding this whole issue.
So far you have provided no alternatives other than to say 'No! No! No!'.
>As if "If only enough technology is applied." Then again like most other posters, for
>you there is only one solution, though yours is more tech.
Not necessarily *MORE* tech. Just better use of the tools/resources to get the job done.
Perhaps a rethinking of why we teach the way we do.
>For others it's more standardized testing.
Standards work where measurements are required. That all depends
on what everyone is trying to measure. SATs are standardized tests.
College entrance exams for specific types of study are standardized tests.
I suppose the proof is in the result. When secondary students arrive at
college, can they pass an SAT?
>For still others losers and slackers should
>be left behind. Hell for all I know you may support those as well.
Not sure where you're going here...
Are you referring to people with socialization problems or learning challenges?
You are right, sometimes those two things work together to undermine a students
progress. You mention 'slackers' and 'losers'. What quantifies those people as
those things?
If it's a lifestyle choice then nothing can help unless the lifestyle changes.
If it's a bullying problem that is not their fault then removing the
negative social atmosphere may be a solution.
Just to be clear though, if there is the *ability* to learn a subject,
and a *willingness* to learn a subject by doing the necessary work,
any average person can be successful at learning provided the
*environment* is conducive. If there are endemic social challenges that
interfere with a students learning progress,
no matter how hard or intelligent that student is, then that same problem will
exist no matter what technique is applied in teaching.
No, I don't *want* anything.
I am suggesting that there are possibly more effective ways to teach
than the 500 year old hierarchal system we have now.
That, in itself, does not preclude teachers in some form.
The two are not mutually exclusive. It may, however, mean that teachers won't
work in exactly the same way as they do now.
Yes, can only be done in really small groups.
It has bee shown, quite consistently, that students in smaller groups
have better outcomes.
So, the crux of the problem is, how can we update techniques
to utilize current technology to make those groups smaller 'virtually'?
The answer is to stop using classrooms and start using the network.
How do you know that?
Substantiate that statement with some data.
You still need teachers and mentors. They are just utilized in a different context.
Most teachers would prefer to apply teaching skills to a tutorial focus rather
that standing and performing in front of a classroom full of people who would
rather be elsewhere.
The current schooling system was designed 500 years ago modeled
after feudal monastic education. It's moribund. There are better
ways to present information.
Teachers would be online within the home educational system as
tutors. They would also handle examinations and curriculum modeling
within the scope of their academic specialties.
Why in this day and age should we have to pay for big buildings
to present information that any kid can get online, and more consistently
so. What for?
What we have right now is the one size fits all system. We bathe
children in the mediocrity of 'big education'. Large systems can
only be mediocre, that's the very nature of big-anything.
Lab materials can be used in scheduled lab times,
or at home.
In the current system, if we removed the I.T. budget, the sports budget,
and used those for basic academic education and basic physical education,
schools would be farther ahead. Ever seen the budget for replacing football helmets?
If we got rid of schools all together and just designed and maintained
home learning programs the system would only need to pay for tutors,
occasionally for those who need them.
Schools shouldn't need to buy computers. It's an appliance.
If you're working from the network at home, or even
using a library without requiring a computer, there should be no need
for the government to supply computers.
I agree though, the way it was written is a bit contradictory.
Oh well, 5 minutes and slashdot...
Even with HTML books, you don't need a computer for each child.
For a guy to exaggerates about 'Soylent Green' you sure make a big deal out of
a comment regarding the social fixation with schools past and present. Do you
own stock in public schools or something?
spoken like a true believer...
It's a bit of a stretch to go from changing the way we apply education
to everyone making soylent green. Besides, self directed learning is
the goal for postsecondary education anyway. You're teaching people
to teach themselves.
Is the current system working so well?
No.
Instead of publicly funding institutionalized warehousing of children/students
why not get rid of the centralized public school buildings system all together.
There is no necessity for these big human warehouses. If people want
daycare, they should pay for their own daycare.
Education can be done at home with an internet connection and
standard, secure, self paced, curriculum. Testing and socialization should
be done in shared, controlled facilities. Bookwork at home.
This would reduce costs and improve long term outcomes.
There should be a constitutional 500K to 1M maximum limit to any litigation in law.
That would clear out all the ambulance chasers, copyright lawyers, etc., and make
it O.K. to do a chemistry experiment in school again.
This same problem was what kept US companies, like Cessna and Piper, from making
airplanes for decades. When Clinton put a cap on liability, suddenly the US had
small aircraft companies manufacturing again.
If there were a way to get rid of the "litigation industry" in the US, everyone would be better off.
we put a disproportionate amount of funding into these technologies
but the results are telling us that the technology, except in
narrow circumstances, provides very little educational return.
Either it is the wrong technology, or it is being used incorrectly.
They get those skills at home between ages 0 and 5 years.
1.) Use the technical resources that are available
a.) Stop BUYING textbooks and use HTML
b.) Stop using Schools (buildings) and just have major tests and socialization in regular locations
2.) Stop *overestimating* the value of one per child computer technology in education
a.) It's a distraction
b.) If it were of real educational value it would be working by now
c.) The money is better spent on ubiquitous lab materials for hands on experience
3.)Teach critical thinking skills starting from K
a.)you can't have analytical people unless you teach them to think and rethink
4.)Get rid of generalists in primary and secondary education
a.) Math teachers who can't do math ruin it for kids
b.) Science...same thing
When kids are able to leave junior high without understanding fractions there's a problem
5.) Stop using schools to warehouse kids while parents are working.
a.) The education system needs to stop trying to be all things to everyone because this makes it nothing to anyone
b.) focus on the basic skills and dump the extracurricular nonsense.
c.) Sell the real estate and send the kids home to learn with specific goals
d.) Schedule socialization for students at shared local facilities
e.) Schedule field trips for students like tours.
f.) There's a global computer network. Textbooks and schools/warehouses are obsolete.
g.) Reduces bullying and focuses on positive socialization.
We're not in a wagon train anymore. People/society need to get out of the one room schoolhouse and *with* the program.
Be realistic. The last two elections were both questionable.
Why do you think they try so hard to kill off journalists?
Muslims also believe in the bible. Abraham is also one of Islam's great prophets as is jesus.
So, to preclude stoning by Muslims on the basis of it being in the bible and not in the quran is
foolish and indicates a complete lack of understanding of the culture and it's relationship with
other abrahamic religions .
Judaism, Christian Judaism, Islam, Bahai, all reference the bible in some fashion.
Sorry, nobody sues Ford or G.M. if some fool tampers with the engine or brakes on your car.
Home owners are currently *not* covered by fire insurance if they leave 'appliances'
on while away from home. This demonstrates that the onus is on the home owner to
make sure their 'vacuum cleaner' and computer are stowed properly.
This is just another example of how people think regular laws, that already
apply to the use of machines in the commission of crime, somehow don't apply
because the new 'excavator', with a video
camera bolted on, now has four hydraulic booms instead of one.
Throw out your 'Terminator' DVDs, it's just a lawn mower with an expert system running.
10 points for imagination though.
Just out of curiosity, was this guy a muslim?
I'm just curious if the profiling at the airports these days is looking at the right people....
In Canada there are special tax breaks for churches as non-profit organizations.
This is an indirect tax on the general population since these large, religion based, corporate organizations
do not operate on the same level tax structure as other business.
Everyone ends up subsidizing them. In the case of the Catholic church than money just ends up
ascending the org-chart to the global organization. Our tax dollars hard at work.