A motivated student would learn material more quickly with some guidance.
True enough, and *private tutoring (as it's been called for hundreds of years) is only something the rich have ever been able to afford.
*Not 16 year old Jenny tutoring little 14 year old Johnny, but live-in year[s]-long tutors have ALWAYS been the most successful.
None of which will do public school children any good.
School is a glorified daycare.
Not all of it, but a lot of it. As the population began to move from small farms into big cities, the cities needed somewhere to put children no longer needed in the fields. Thus daycare/school was born. I think most grade levels between that of 4th or 5th grade up to High School, could be eliminated since (in my memory) they mostly just rehash the stuff taught the year before. It's not until some-time in High School until you are expected to start learning again.
I've yet to be convinced that Zooms or IPads etc are significantly better [than books] from a learning perspective. Actually, I would argue that they are often inferior in actual practice.
I have to agree, I learn better from the printed page than I do from a computer monitor. Though in my case, hands-on learning is the best. Where I can test theories and assumptions.
Though I WAS pleasantly surprised when I got my first eReader, technology is getting better at informing the user. (Does anybody remember any of the so-called 'teaching-software' from the IBM-PC's heyday? Just fricken flash 'cards' on a computer screen. AND it gave me headaches!)
It's a very pleasant and reassuring vision that you have.
But, what happens to the students that don't learn well (like I was) from the computer screen?
2) Reduce the number of Course hours by 2 and extend Art, Music, Sports, Ect time by two hours.
We live in a results oriented world where people say "What's the use of a general education? Teach kids to fill jobs, not their minds." Where is the motivation for this sudden(ly renewed) interest in creating a well-rounded person going to come from? Sounds like you are seeing the future of the rich, not public schools.
3) Students who progress test poorly via computer are forced to have extended after school tutoring with 4 kids per teacher for two hours extra of school per day of your grades slip below a B or you TEST anything below a C.
You're still going to have to compete with non-school related priorities. Students working jobs to support / help support poor families. Sex, drugs and abuse. I fail to see how poor children will be motivated any more than they are now. Plus you'll have students/parents claiming/pointing out that the family NEEDS the students after-school income, and the family can't afford to have them loose work / jobs to stay after school. They already make those same arguments about after-school detention.
4) The hours that students report to tutoring is in blocks. Teacher has 8 blocks allowing for 32 dumb students.
Now how is that helpful? A learning disability / trouble at home / absent or abusive parents / bullies / crime does not make a person stupid. Though it might be a fit description of those who use the word.
5) Kids that get an F require 2 Hours of EXTRA tutoring 1 student per teacher.
Or they drop out and become a drain on society (certainly NOT becoming an asset). Maybe resorting to theft or pushing to feed themselves / their families.
Properly speaking, your argument should then be, "inner city schools should be held to lower standards of achievement".
What an absolutely horrible idea.
And not just a very good way to not only get student's believing that they're not worth the effort, but also probably the most effective method to get both the students and their parents believing that there is a conspiracy among the right (Oops, freudian slip! I meant to say the rich, but both are probably just as correct) to keep them poor.
But even performance in tests in general are not necessarily an indication of real learning or performance in real-world situations, but tests have been accepted (for hundreds of years) as a legitimate proxy for real learning. Mostly because if there's a better system out there, people are being awfully tight-lipped about it.
Testing is used both despite the fact that large percentages of people are affected by performance anxiety, and partly because performance anxiety is not limited to tests nor excluded from real-world situations.
Is there a better solution? One that can stay inside current funding limitations imposed by voters? One that can be employed on a large scale, so that you are comparing apples-to-apples when you compare inner-city New York grades to those in rural Kansas?
It's nearly an impossible job, but we use the tools that we can.
Standardized tests are a great way to tell if a student is good at taking standardized tests. They are a very poor measure of teaching effectiveness.
That may be true, but if you define the job of a teacher to be that of teaching of students, then what else can be used to measure their effectiveness?
The culture in which we live demands measurable standards to define performance. If the teacher cannot be held responsible for their students performance (as a group, not individually), who is? If a teacher's students (as a group) perform exceptionally, the teacher should be proud, both of the students and of him/her-self, and often (occasionally?) receive recognition (being held responsible) as an exceptional teacher. I assume there is nothing wrong with that? So why shouldn't teachers who's students consistently perform poorly also be held responsible (receive recognition) as a poor teacher?
I'm not aware of another industry (with the exception of Chief Executive Whatever's and politicians) where they believe they should only be held responsible for the good things that happen under their control / responsibility, but be exempt from responsibility for the bad.
The average teacher salary isn't going up 4.6% per year, the pay of individual teachers are going up by 4.6% per year. Do you really not understand the difference or are you just trolling?
I don't know if he does, but I don't. Maybe you could explain it to me. Thanks.
The average, correct me if I'm wrong, is made up of individuals, and would exclude those in the extremes. Unless, of course, one of those extremes contains most teachers (either being paid very well, or very little).
The teachers WILL take heavy casualties as the information age blossoms... but it will take a long time because of said teachers union.
The fact that some people NEED or learn better from an actual person will have no effect? (There are a lot of high functioning people who have learning disabilities. Don't think because you don't see it, that it's not there. I hosted a Japanese exchange student who swore up and down there were no mentally retarded people in Japan. When he went back he did some research and found that there are plenty, but Japanese society keeps / kept them out-of-sight)
It's also worth noting that the term "intellectual property" has been used to describe things like copyright and such for a century and a half. Under that model/viewpoint, unlawful copying is indeed theft.
Actually the corporations that will sue you for IP law infringement aren't suing you for copying or `stealing` the copyrighted material. They are suing you for `stealing` their lost potential profits that they assume that they would have received because they assume that you would have purchased their product. Plus the lost potential profits that they assume that they would have made from selling their product to everyone they assume that you passed a copy along to.
That is why they don't sue you for $45 for copying a $45 book, video, or program.
All corporations who sue individuals for IP infringement do not even consider a 1 to 1 loss (that 1 copy = 1 lost sale, and even THAT is patently illogical because everyone that gets a copy would NOT have purchased a copy otherwise), but assume that 1 illegal copy will result in multiple lost sales.
I'm saying NVIDIA could release an open source driver, not that they should.
I thought that you could write a program that uses GPL code as long as you did not modify it and distributed the code along with the GP Licence, or provided links to them.
Anyway, as far as the GPL is concerned, if it's version 2, then they probably wouldn't have to worry:
The Linux kernel is licensed under GPLv2 and that is unlikely to change.
I believe you are both agreeing on the version of GPL used.
The view of the kernel maintainers seems to be that loading a module makes that code part of the kernel, not a separate program and it is therefore bound to licensing rules set by the kernel.
That's great, but his list is a list of proxy servers. The purpose of those proxy servers is 'proxy avoidance'. My content filtering automatically filters pages in the category of 'proxy avoidance'... [and] he's constantly adding new domains to to get around my attempts to keep my employees from avoiding my filter)
Sounds like your company needs to put teeth in their "forbidden sites" policy.
A few firings, or massive fines, would fix this cat and mouse game you're playing with proxy servers.
As long as your bosses are willing to put up with this abuse of their network (theft of service) it's going to continue.
They own it, and all the rights to it, so unless they have refused to give themselves permission to distribute their magazine, a concept that makes no sence, they have the right to distribute it any way they want.
Internet 101: anything you post will eventually become public
Which is why, even though I have a Facebook page, there is almost nothing in it.
I haven't even put my birthday in it. Only a few interests and where I went to school. It's not even hooked to my main email account. (Which helps me spot spam!)
And when Google suggested that I use my real name on YouTube instead of the username I chose, I turned that down too. If I wanted to use my real name, I would have, and in fact I do sometimes.
I'm not a patent attorney, but I've spoken to one and was told to be as specific as possible, without being specific about exactly how I was going to do it. Because that would limit my patent to only my current idea, and eliminate patent protection from any improvements or updates.
Slashdot Mirror
"Siri. Replace all teachers."
A motivated student would learn material more quickly with some guidance.
True enough, and *private tutoring (as it's been called for hundreds of years) is only something the rich have ever been able to afford.
*Not 16 year old Jenny tutoring little 14 year old Johnny, but live-in year[s]-long tutors have ALWAYS been the most successful.
None of which will do public school children any good.
School is a glorified daycare.
Not all of it, but a lot of it. As the population began to move from small farms into big cities, the cities needed somewhere to put children no longer needed in the fields. Thus daycare/school was born. I think most grade levels between that of 4th or 5th grade up to High School, could be eliminated since (in my memory) they mostly just rehash the stuff taught the year before. It's not until some-time in High School until you are expected to start learning again.
Talking Heads are headed for obsolesence
Hah! You're funny!
I've yet to be convinced that Zooms or IPads etc are significantly better [than books] from a learning perspective. Actually, I would argue that they are often inferior in actual practice.
I have to agree, I learn better from the printed page than I do from a computer monitor. Though in my case, hands-on learning is the best. Where I can test theories and assumptions.
Though I WAS pleasantly surprised when I got my first eReader, technology is getting better at informing the user. (Does anybody remember any of the so-called 'teaching-software' from the IBM-PC's heyday? Just fricken flash 'cards' on a computer screen. AND it gave me headaches!)
It's a very pleasant and reassuring vision that you have.
But, what happens to the students that don't learn well (like I was) from the computer screen?
2) Reduce the number of Course hours by 2 and extend Art, Music, Sports, Ect time by two hours.
We live in a results oriented world where people say "What's the use of a general education? Teach kids to fill jobs, not their minds." Where is the motivation for this sudden(ly renewed) interest in creating a well-rounded person going to come from? Sounds like you are seeing the future of the rich, not public schools.
3) Students who progress test poorly via computer are forced to have extended after school tutoring with 4 kids per teacher for two hours extra of school per day of your grades slip below a B or you TEST anything below a C.
You're still going to have to compete with non-school related priorities. Students working jobs to support / help support poor families. Sex, drugs and abuse. I fail to see how poor children will be motivated any more than they are now. Plus you'll have students/parents claiming/pointing out that the family NEEDS the students after-school income, and the family can't afford to have them loose work / jobs to stay after school. They already make those same arguments about after-school detention.
4) The hours that students report to tutoring is in blocks. Teacher has 8 blocks allowing for 32 dumb students.
Now how is that helpful? A learning disability / trouble at home / absent or abusive parents / bullies / crime does not make a person stupid. Though it might be a fit description of those who use the word.
5) Kids that get an F require 2 Hours of EXTRA tutoring 1 student per teacher.
Or they drop out and become a drain on society (certainly NOT becoming an asset). Maybe resorting to theft or pushing to feed themselves / their families.
Every contract that I've looked at has a different class size limit for gym and music.
Different than what? Other classes? Each other? Or different from other / last-year's contract?
Wooo! Burn!
Properly speaking, your argument should then be, "inner city schools should be held to lower standards of achievement".
What an absolutely horrible idea.
And not just a very good way to not only get student's believing that they're not worth the effort, but also probably the most effective method to get both the students and their parents believing that there is a conspiracy among the right (Oops, freudian slip! I meant to say the rich, but both are probably just as correct) to keep them poor.
Yes, that is true.
But even performance in tests in general are not necessarily an indication of real learning or performance in real-world situations, but tests have been accepted (for hundreds of years) as a legitimate proxy for real learning. Mostly because if there's a better system out there, people are being awfully tight-lipped about it.
Testing is used both despite the fact that large percentages of people are affected by performance anxiety, and partly because performance anxiety is not limited to tests nor excluded from real-world situations.
Is there a better solution? One that can stay inside current funding limitations imposed by voters? One that can be employed on a large scale, so that you are comparing apples-to-apples when you compare inner-city New York grades to those in rural Kansas?
It's nearly an impossible job, but we use the tools that we can.
Standardized tests are a great way to tell if a student is good at taking standardized tests. They are a very poor measure of teaching effectiveness.
That may be true, but if you define the job of a teacher to be that of teaching of students, then what else can be used to measure their effectiveness?
The culture in which we live demands measurable standards to define performance. If the teacher cannot be held responsible for their students performance (as a group, not individually), who is? If a teacher's students (as a group) perform exceptionally, the teacher should be proud, both of the students and of him/her-self, and often (occasionally?) receive recognition (being held responsible) as an exceptional teacher. I assume there is nothing wrong with that? So why shouldn't teachers who's students consistently perform poorly also be held responsible (receive recognition) as a poor teacher?
I'm not aware of another industry (with the exception of Chief Executive Whatever's and politicians) where they believe they should only be held responsible for the good things that happen under their control / responsibility, but be exempt from responsibility for the bad.
The average teacher salary isn't going up 4.6% per year, the pay of individual teachers are going up by 4.6% per year. Do you really not understand the difference or are you just trolling?
I don't know if he does, but I don't. Maybe you could explain it to me. Thanks.
The average, correct me if I'm wrong, is made up of individuals, and would exclude those in the extremes. Unless, of course, one of those extremes contains most teachers (either being paid very well, or very little).
... the marked fragment* of his sentence seems to be entirely withing** limits
Or did you have something else in mind, like stylistic clumsiness, for example?
*fragmentation
**within
Perhaps you're not the best one to be criticizing others for their views on English.
The teachers WILL take heavy casualties as the information age blossoms... but it will take a long time because of said teachers union.
The fact that some people NEED or learn better from an actual person will have no effect? (There are a lot of high functioning people who have learning disabilities. Don't think because you don't see it, that it's not there. I hosted a Japanese exchange student who swore up and down there were no mentally retarded people in Japan. When he went back he did some research and found that there are plenty, but Japanese society keeps / kept them out-of-sight)
NEWSFLASH! crazyjj discovers that when you threaten a person's job, they act all pissed off 'n stuff!
It's also worth noting that the term "intellectual property" has been used to describe things like copyright and such for a century and a half. Under that model/viewpoint, unlawful copying is indeed theft.
Actually the corporations that will sue you for IP law infringement aren't suing you for copying or `stealing` the copyrighted material. They are suing you for `stealing` their lost potential profits that they assume that they would have received because they assume that you would have purchased their product. Plus the lost potential profits that they assume that they would have made from selling their product to everyone they assume that you passed a copy along to.
That is why they don't sue you for $45 for copying a $45 book, video, or program.
All corporations who sue individuals for IP infringement do not even consider a 1 to 1 loss (that 1 copy = 1 lost sale, and even THAT is patently illogical because everyone that gets a copy would NOT have purchased a copy otherwise), but assume that 1 illegal copy will result in multiple lost sales.
They are a corporation, profits are never high enough...
Whereas a government, of course, would be satisfied with a certain level of taxation... right?
Guhwhaaaa?
Who brought up government?
AFAICT just you.
I'm saying NVIDIA could release an open source driver, not that they should.
I thought that you could write a program that uses GPL code as long as you did not modify it and distributed the code along with the GP Licence, or provided links to them.
Anyway, as far as the GPL is concerned, if it's version 2, then they probably wouldn't have to worry:
The Linux kernel is licensed under GPLv2 and that is unlikely to change.
I believe you are both agreeing on the version of GPL used.
The view of the kernel maintainers seems to be that loading a module makes that code part of the kernel, not a separate program and it is therefore bound to licensing rules set by the kernel.
Doesn't this go against the entire concept of "Free Software"?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Software#Selling_free_software
That's great, but his list is a list of proxy servers. The purpose of those proxy servers is 'proxy avoidance'. My content filtering automatically filters pages in the category of 'proxy avoidance'... [and] he's constantly adding new domains to to get around my attempts to keep my employees from avoiding my filter)
Sounds like your company needs to put teeth in their "forbidden sites" policy.
A few firings, or massive fines, would fix this cat and mouse game you're playing with proxy servers.
As long as your bosses are willing to put up with this abuse of their network (theft of service) it's going to continue.
yes, but we forgive you.
...you're supposed to give them to me!
They own it, and all the rights to it, so unless they have refused to give themselves permission to distribute their magazine, a concept that makes no sence, they have the right to distribute it any way they want.
Translation: They can't pirate their own stuff.
I'm aware that it has high fees and is unprofitable for small organizations, that is exactly why fly-by-night websites don't take it.
Although there are other things that will make me forgo the rule.
Lies!
I saw it!
Well, videotaped it anyway.
Internet 101: anything you post will eventually become public
Which is why, even though I have a Facebook page, there is almost nothing in it.
I haven't even put my birthday in it. Only a few interests and where I went to school. It's not even hooked to my main email account. (Which helps me spot spam!)
And when Google suggested that I use my real name on YouTube instead of the username I chose, I turned that down too. If I wanted to use my real name, I would have, and in fact I do sometimes.
You get no argument from me.
I'm not a patent attorney, but I've spoken to one and was told to be as specific as possible, without being specific about exactly how I was going to do it. Because that would limit my patent to only my current idea, and eliminate patent protection from any improvements or updates.