Based on my own definition of the current model, I'd say less than 20 years. However, since what the model is isn't defined, I'm answering my own question.

I take the current model to be 25 - 30 or so students in a classroom with a single instructor (aides don't count.) Classes use minimal instructional aids and students move from class to class.

I think that direct teacher-student interaction will always have a place with children, because they just seem to learn better when someone is there to help them focus. I think class sizes could change as could the number of "instructors" per class. I also think the moving around from class to class could change and we certainly could introduce more high tech learning aids like iPad text books. Let's not relegate computers to the computer lab or library. Now I can see the library going away, actually. I can see all books and homework carried and done on an iPad, so school supplies will be greatly reduced and kids won't have to lug around 10 pounds of books all day. So more personalized teaching would be desired, along with software that tracks where a student is having difficulties. We have some of this today, but it's not really universal based on my co-workers experiences with their kids.

Wait! I take it back. There has been one big change in the last 50 years. The trend toward equal rights for intelligence such that everyone pretty much does the same. There are no winners, no losers and mediocrity is the norm.

The current model that I've seen hasn't really changed much in the last 50 years. With scores dropping and teachers getting both harder to find and less competent, I think we need a change. On the other hand, if I was put in a classroom with an iPad an internet access, I can assure you I'd never hear anything the teacher said. I'd be reading /. :)

If it takes a thief to catch a thief, does it take a moron to catch a moron? Clearly people who blow themselves. up are morons.

Corruption implies doing something illegal. What they are doing is actually very legal, as is insider trading for congress members. The write the laws to maximize their profits.

Yeah, that's a funny term created out of desperation. First it was netbooks, but demand for those is being eaten by tablets. Apparently, Apple was one of they few companies who could figure out that people wanted a laptop that was both lightweight, small and powerful. Now they created a term to hide their embarrassment. At least we already had the term "smartphone" before the iPhone, although many people couldn't list an example of one before the iPhone.

But, indeed, a useless term even for marketing.

It's partly a comment on society, not the article in question. It seems every 5th article on /. is how the government wants to get involved in yet another area of life. Most recently is SOPA which is more related to CES than other examples. This article is another example of people introducing a non-problem as a problem.

It's also general sarcastic comment as to the newsworthiness of this article, which I did read, BTW. Of all the CES happenings, we this this?

Quick! Call your congress-critter! This sort of behavior needs to be outlawed for the safety of the children! (Or environment, or pick something else.) Clearly people can't make good decisions without government involvement.

Seriously, who cares who goes? I'm sure it's crowded, but really, this is news?

It looks like an Internal Server Error? I would have thought it would be more interesting than that. The more things change, the more they remain the same.

Or in Antarctica in suits pressurized to 1.5 to 2 atmospheres like the dwelling should be. That's an even better test.

I think that's one of the points of the article: memorization as a learning strategy is doomed to fail.

Just because one professor at a prestigious learning institution cannot teach in a way that fosters theoretical understanding doesn't mean we should throw out lectures. I found lectures helpful because I learn well in them, when backed up by other classwork.) I felt I had to be there regularly to learn. I suspect that many people who focus on memorization miss a lot of lectures. Plus, I don't think I'd like small groups. Sounds too new touchy-feely.

News at 11, not everyone learns the same. :)