I work in a school where most lessons are planned with sensory motor function in mind, where art, language, math, etc are shown to be intertwined, and where students often preform higher on standardized tests, despite me never giving them a single, formally graded test the rest of the year.
For more than half of the children that transfer into my school after spending 3 or 4 years in a public school (factory structured, lecture based model), I have to spend the initial months detoxifying the child, showing them that it's okay to be creative, unsuppressed, and use their interests to learn.
The developing brains of young children are extremely sensitive to visual, tactile experiences that the various arts provide. Their psychology is very different from an adult's, yet many adults often project their own learning styles onto them. This leads to continuously keeping subjects separate (such as art & math). While key concepts should initially be presented in isolation to avoid confusion, the follow up activities should combine multiple areas. In other words, expose the children to everything possible, show them how it all interconnects, and use what the child's mind is sensitive to, practicing multiple areas in conjunction and forming deep understanding.
I find it highly likely that the statistically significant increase in critical thinking, social tolerance, and historical empathy that this study found not only comes from the initial exposure, but also from teachers integrating the experience into follow-up lessons / activities.
Are the standards reasonable, appropriate and developmentally sound—especially for our youngest learners? In order to answer that question, it is important to understand how the early primary standards were determined. If you read Commissioner John King’s Powerpoint slide 18, which can be found here, you see that the Common Core standards were “backmapped” from a description of 12th grade college-ready skills. There is no evidence that early childhood experts were consulted to ensure that the standards were appropriate for young learners. Every parent knows that their kids do not develop according to a “back map”—young children develop through a complex interaction of biology and experience that is unique to the child and which cannot be rushed.
It goes on to compare the US Core with the standards from other countries such as Finland and Singapore.
It then shows the very real and large problem that it was "Pearson Education" that made this poorly written test.
This Pearson first-grade unit test is the realization of the New York Common Core math standards. Pearson knows how the questions will be asked on the New York State tests, because they, of course, create them.
Children and schools are evaluated based on State tests. Do you want your job being evaluated by something like this?
Countdown timers on GREEN traffic lights increase accidents, as people seem to speed up when they see the light will soon change.
Rory Sutherland talks about this (starting around 8:37) on his TED talk: "Perspective is Everything".
600 cars going 50 MPH on a one-mile stretch of 4-lane freeway is extremely dangerous. 60 cars going 80 MPH on that same mile of freeway is must less dangerous.
These Microsoft Corp. Comm. people are more disconnected from reality than I expected.
No, I think they know what's going on, even though the things they say are carefully crafted attempts at making us think the opposite. When I was a kid, we called that "lying".
An adverb should not be placed between the verb it is modifying, and the direct object.
The sentence could be corrected by moving "necessary" after the direct object:
"...a game console that will make their own Linux-based software platform necessary,"
(This assumes the term "correct grammar" is defined as a description of how most native speakers speak, rather than a prescription of rules to make oneself understood.)
But a "Post-PC" era isn't coming anytime soon (unless you count today as a "Post-TV" era).
What other people CAN'T do:
- BY: they can't plagiarize (they must attribute the work)
- NC: they can't sell it (non-commercial purposes only)
- ND: they can't paraphrase and take things out of context (if someone copies it, they copy the full paper, in its original form)
The article worries about the inability to do text mining and translations. Good points, and they mention an organization working on a license just like the CC-BY-NC-ND that would allow text mining and translations. Good for them.
The rest of it is FUD claiming researchers don't understand the license. I disagree. CC-BY-NC-ND is being used the most because its the best license for openly sharing while still protecting their work.
--Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Charles Jarvis, 1820
Most do not view holy books as literal truth like religious fundamentalists, but rather guidelines and proverbs on the meaning behind life and how to live it well. Nor do they believe in creationism and other pseudoscience. But there are a large number of chemists, biologists, virologists, toxicologists, medical doctors, etc. that go to church, temple, mosque, etc.