I have an undergrad in Mathematics, and planetarium, museum, and other informal education opportunities are great. I've been teaching in planetariums for 7yrs, and I absolutely love the lack of bureaucracy compared to K-12. Community college teaching is also a viable option.
Link to Original Source
Apollo-Soyuz was the big joint mission between the two powers.
Along those same lines, I'm sure that global warming will end since piracy is on the rise
It takes a bit of digging, but if you look at those test scores, you'll see some major biases there. Take China and India for example: their scores on international tests are not for the country as a whole, but only the rich metropolitan areas.
Same goes for many other countries which track students into trade schools before ever getting to these tests.
If we only tested our best performing schools, we'd look like the cream of the crop, too!
College/University professors, at least in the US, have no training in how to teach. It's appalling that our higher education centers do not require the professors to take courses in HOW to teach, as many of them are piss poor teachers.
We require certification to teach up through high school, but once you hit college, we don't care about your teaching abilities as long as you are a subject area expert.
"Banning laptops is not the answer here. If one student is a problem, address that student directly and respectfully resolve the issue. Don't make capricious rules against everyone because of a few students who are an issue."
How about I quote my above statement for you:
"Banning laptops in the classroom is absurd. It's hitting a nail with an anvil. Establishing proper etiquette protocol and disciplinary procedures for students who disrupt a classroom is a much more sensible solution to outright bans. Computers are increasingly becoming an integral part of our lives, and students need to learn to be able to use them in a professional manner. Just as you don't see people staring at porn in the classroom or in a business meeting (typically), we shouldn't see people staring at their friend's FB page."
Classroom disruption procedures are already in place in almost every student handbook (every one I've looked at both on the student and the instructor side). This is simply accepting that laptops, cell phones, and other media/internet devices can and do disrupt the classroom. They need to be treated like Walkmans, drum sticks, and naked people.
If someone is quickly checking a fact online or is typing an a word processor, it's no more a distraction than a pen and paper being held upright. If someone is playing a flashy game or flipping screens regularly, its no different than excessively tapping a pencil on a desk or jumping up and down saying, "the power of Christ compels you!"
Use the procedures in place to address the issue, and if necessary, simply add the couple words in the handbook to ensure the idiots out there can't run around the rules claiming it isn't explicitly spelled out that their distraction of choice isn't covered.
You seem to think that a disciplinary process means no personal responsibility. As with all disciplinary issues, I subscribe to the reliable "chain of command" principle in which you always confront the offender first. Should that fail, there is an escalation process to resolve the issue through someone with more authority and capability to resolve the issue be it through punitive or persuasive means.
To achieve that end, one needs established rules governing what is considered a violation.
The issue is not finding a device free of working with DRM, but rather a store that sells DRM-free works.
If you want an ebook reader built on open source software, look at the Nook. Many have even rooted them to allow for custom installations. It allows for a variety of DRM and DRM-free formats to be used (should you find those DRM-free stores).
The market is in its infancy, and until one store gains a good monopoly (like iTunes with music), you're not going to see real competition (like DRM stripped books).
Personally, I say let them filter certain websites on the academic networks with the ability to request per-account authorizations when a student is doing a research project dealing with social networking. It's not going to stop anyone from SD, but it will at least stop the casual classroom infringer (for a while). Granted, soon everyone will just have CDMA or GSM laptops capable of getting online from anywhere, and school wifi networks will be bypassed completely. It's a tricky subject, and students will have to familiarize themselves with the network regulations to decide what campus to go to.
Banning laptops in the classroom is absurd. It's hitting a nail with an anvil. Establishing proper etiquette protocol and disciplinary procedures for students who disrupt a classroom is a much more sensible solution to outright bans. Computers are increasingly becoming an integral part of our lives, and students need to learn to be able to use them in a professional manner. Just as you don't see people staring at porn in the classroom or in a business meeting (typically), we shouldn't see people staring at their friend's FB page.
For example: I have five bucks.....am I a hunter? What about an American with a little cash in my pocket? Maybe, five of my children have attended OSU.
In the context of "zoom" when relating to photographic arts, Zoom Lens, the accepted meaning is, "a mechanical assembly of lens elements for which the focal length (and thus angle of view) can be varied, as opposed to a fixed focal length (FFL) lens (see prime lens). They are commonly used with still, video, motion picture cameras, projectors, some binoculars, microscopes, telescopes, telescopic sights, and other optical instruments."
"magnification: the ratio of the size of an image to the size of the object"
These are two very different uses. Magnification and zoom are very different in photography. They refer to entirely different concepts and are not equatable.
I'm sure you are an excellent optical designer, but your expertise is in the optical (and from what I read of you, microscopic) arts, not photographic arts. Please, like the previous posters before you, stick with your expertise area, advise on it, but do not speak as an expert in a subject in which you have minimal qualifications. It's dangerous for people like yourself to make policy.
So long, and I'm glad you liked the fish
Props on finding a mirror lens designed for a camera, not an eyepiece!
Now, if we could just use that to get 10mm on the wide end, we'd have that "easy" 500x zoom lens
Annnnd..... you missed the point entirely. You CAN build a 500x zoom for a p&s. period.
Oh so wrong. A 500mm lens is easy to build (well, 500mm in 35mm equivalence. A 500X lens would be an incredible feat. Lets say it's 10mm on the wide end (VERY close to fisheye). That would be a 10mm-5000mm lens. Hell, you find me a 5000mm lens on any system and I commend you. Technical knowledge, you know not.
Lenses are not special on dslrs in any technical sense of the word. I specifically said that dslrs are more capable of producing better pictures. My recommendations on limiting quality are also more effective than the uninformed "ban all dslr" policy that is in place.
Lenses on dSLRs are not special in any sense of the word. The issue is that your caps on pixel count is absurd on small format lenses. Diffraction, the scattering of light passing through an eyelit, as modified by smaller absolute apertures (although equivalent relative apertures), limits the camera's ability to resolve beyond 8-10MP. Even the significantly larger 4/3rd sensor on the Olympus and Panasonic system is diffraction limited to f/6ish. So, your arbitrary limitations would be useless and simply limit a company's ability to market their new 50bajillion megapixel camera to the public. It's as arbitrary as banning dSLR cameras.
Yes, i know that you really can only subjectively measure quality, and sensor size matters when calculating relative zoom, but that isnt practical as a policy. What would be practical would be banning higher powered lenses, and limiting quality of sensor.
"Higher powered lenses" are an arbitrary assignment. Are you saying banning telephoto lenses beyond a certain throw is a good idea? 'cause that MIGHT be more worthwhile. I can find you a 1x lens that can spy a rivet on a bridge across town easily. Again, the multiplier has no bearing.
Issue is, how does anyone enforce that? Smaller sensor cameras use smaller lenses. There are some amazing 300mm+ lenses on P&S cameras that fold up into the body. Do we have all police become considerably more technically sound than yourself?
It all reeks of political stupidity. Are they also banning EVIL cameras (no reflex mirror)? Interchangeable lens systems? Does that include adapters screwed onto the front of fixed lens systems?
Point is, what you propose is nothing more than what they propose. It's all stupidity by those with no technical knowledge on the subject area.
So you can act like a smug dick all day, but to imply that the slr aspect of a camera is what defines its capacities is wrong. Just. Wrong.
Awwwwww.....did you not comprehend my previous post? Exactly my point. You, and those like you, are sadly the ones making these arbitrary rules.