Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

In the 1960s, some liberals praised the one-room school of yore as "the precursor to group learning" and "open classrooms"

Decades after consolidation had obliterated one-room schools, researchers discovered their advantages. The child in the small school is not just a statistic on a government chart. She receives "individual attention and recognition." She works at her own pace. She has, most important, a place. As Mr. Zimmerman remarks, recent alternatives to "the large, alienating modern school," from charter schools to homeschooling, have sought to foster "the snug, communal aspects of the one-room school." But the one-room-school model entails community control, which liberals and conservatives alike resist if the "community" sings from the wrong hymnal.

By World War II, the little red schoolhouse whose razing had been a New Deal project became a symbol of homefront democracy. In the 1960s, some liberals praised the one-room school of yore as "the precursor to group learning" and "open classrooms" -- daily Bible reading not included. At the same time some conservatives extolled its alleged (and exaggerated) hickory-stick discipline.

When allowed to do what we want to do, we are most likely to revert to whatever we previously found enjoyable and/or successful.

Independent international research undertaken by Clearswift in 2007 found that just 11% of global businesses were making use of Web 2.0 technologies such as Facebook and Salesforce.com

Three years on, the latest figures show over two-thirds of companies are allowing and encouraging the use of web collaboration or social media tools in the workplace.

Australian business users enjoy high use of Web 2.0 technologies, such as collaborative meeting, intranet, financial, CRM and social networking applications. However, they appear the least concerned about the security implications (at 53%) despite ranking second highest of respondents who have sent

A recent study conducted by Philip Sadler, the director of the Science Education Department at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, and his Harvard Graduate School of Education student Eddie Good examined the impact of peer-grading and self-grading. Sadler and Good wanted to determine whether the grades that students award themselves can actually replace their teacher's grades and whether any additional learning results when students grade tests.

The vast majority of the world's books, music, films, television and art, you will never see. It's just numbers. Consider books alone. Let's say you read two a week, and sometimes you take on a long one that takes you a whole week. That's quite a brisk pace for the average person. That lets you finish, let's say, 100 books a year. If we assume you start now, and you're 15, and you are willing to continue at this pace until you're 80. That's 6,500 books, which really sounds like a lot. Let's do you another favor: Let's further assume you limit yourself to books from the last, say, 250 years. Nothing before 1761. This cuts out giant, enormous swaths of literature, of course, but we'll assume you're willing to write off thousands of years of writing in an effort to be reasonably well-read. Of course, by the time you're 80, there will be 65 more years of new books, so by then, you're dealing with 315 years of books, which allows you to read about 20 books from each year. You'll have to break down your 20 books each year between fiction and nonfiction – you have to cover history, philosophy, essays, diaries, science, religion, science fiction, westerns, political theory ... I hope you weren't planning to go out very much. You can hit the highlights, and you can specialize enough to become knowledgeable in some things, but most of what's out there, you'll have to ignore. (Don't forget books not written in English! Don't forget to learn all the other languages!)