Does Facebook use reduce worker productivity?

Does Facebook use reduce worker productivity?

Does training reduce worker productivity. Wouldn't it be better if we put new employees straight to work?

Why bother learning how to drive a car. You should get back to work making buggy-whips.

The complainers about social media have their heads buried in a block of concrete. True, if your job is to mow the lawn and you are twittering away your time on your iphone, you will be less productive. (Now that I've tossed the dog a bone.)

Facebook, twitter, blogs, the internet, virtual classrooms, virtual offices, virtual management, cloud computing, this is not the future. In fact, this is no longer the present. Tomorrow is yesterday. Get moving.

Regards,

Slim

Mail slimfairview@yahoo.com

copyright (c) 2011 Slim Fairview

Edison Invented the Light Bulb by Candlelight

Edison didn't invent a better candle. Still, Edison invented the light bulb by candlelight. All the new technology lacks one thing. It cannot convey a message to those who cannot see the new technology.

Egypt, A new world order--a world without borders.

We are moving rapidly from the land of Laptopistan written about in a Times article to Netopia.

What happens when movies on demand becomes TV on demand? What happens when television goes beyond the laptop through Google TV to a direct subscription system.

Time Warner may want to go beyond the old movies of TCM and began broadcasting, what? Leave it to Beaver? The Early episodes of The Simpsons? Gunsmoke? Two and a half men?

The Wolves at Tottenham that I cannot watch on ESPN will be available over the internet. Remember a few scant years ago when the music industry was in an uproar about Napster? Remember that free phone service of ten years ago and VOIP? That debate became moot with Skype.

The best idea broadcast television has come up with to attract viewers is to start airing programmes targeted at people who don't watch television. Thus, driving away viewers who do watch television. Then there is the newer technology.

Sit down to dinner, push a button, and your dining room wall becomes a massive flat-screen television screen allowing you to have dinner with your sister and her family in Bismarck, North Dakota. (Home to the Raccoon National Cemetery.)

The social interaction will move people quickly into Netopia. Your son studying in Sweden, your daughter the doctor on a humanitarian aid mission to Japan for the recent floods, a BritCom years before it hits Channel 13. (American idiom for The Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which used to be National Education Television before the marketing people realised that people don't watch television to get an education only to appear to have gotten an education. (There is a sentence in there somewhere: some assembly required.)

What a shame those in the broadcast industry can’t see what is going to happen. Then, too, they don’t seem to be able to see what is actually happening. If only we could figure out whether it’s because they’re watching too much television or not enough.

Regards,

Slim

Mail: Slimfairview@yahoo.com

http://www.linkedin.com/in/slimfairview

Copyright (c) 2011 Slim Fairview

Education Problem? Solution!

Education. Problem? Solution!

“There is no expedient to which a man will not resort to avoid the real labour of thinking.” Sir Joshua Reynolds. One of Thomas Alva Edison’s favourite quotations.

This is played out in the Great American Schools Debate. (Great debate, not great schools.) What happened? Why? What can be done to fix it?

First, I have come across nothing that substantiates the claim that using phonics to teach reading caused the decline in the ability of American students to read.

[Hold this thought. The decline was in test scores. We will return to that topic.]

There are numerous reasons that can be cited; and probably were. Failure to identify students needing glasses. Failure to identify students with ADHD. Failure to identify students who came from troubled homes, and so on.

Still, reading ability declined and we embraced a panicked approach to solving the problem—or not.

What really happened is the opportunity to make a buck. Exploiting children. Shaking America down for loot.

Some nincomperson writes a book and becomes an expert by appearing on talk show television. Was he an expert? Did reading ability

A. Go up

B. Go down

C. Stay the Same

D. All of the above

E. None of the above.

Mostly, they went down. Still, studies can and will show that all of the above is most likely correct. It depends on who did the test, on how the test was conducted, on why the test was conducted. None-the-less, children are less able to read today. How do I know this? Because everyone is in a panic to solve the problem of youngsters not learning to read.

Not too long ago, the demand was for better-educated teachers; more experienced teachers; better-looking teachers, and so on.

In a marketing strategy, and to appease parents, school officials fabricated a higher standard. Teachers with Masters Degrees, teachers with PhD’s, and teachers with more experience. This created an artificial demand and pushed up the price of education. This did not work. How do I know this? There is a continued demand to improve education in America.

Now, we have a new mantra: get rid of collective bargaining, fire experienced teachers, lower the cost of education, and everything will be hunky-dory. Will this strategy work? Have the experts been right before? No. How do I know this? If they were, there wouldn’t be a need to do something about declining education.

Now, I admit that my approach to examining the problem involves a bit of trickery. I am using common knowledge and common sense. However, please overlook that for the moment. Then again, don’t.

If performance is lower today than it was yesterday, then it must have been higher yesterday. If performance yesterday was lower than it was the day before, performance must have been higher the day before. Now, anyone with more intelligence than a five-pound bag of store brand cheese puffs will ask, “How did we teach children to read when children learned to read?” Answer, in the public arena, “Things were different back then.” To which I respond, “You’re darn tootin’ they were. Children learned to read.”

Now we get to teacher testing. The new demand is to test teachers. What an incredibly not smart idea.

1. The people who want teachers tested are the same people who inveighed against testing students. (Teaching to the test.)

2. The people who want teachers tested are the same people who’ve said, “Testing promotes memorization and memorization stifles creativity.” (All our children would be kings and captains of industry except that they had to memorize the times tables and that stifled their creativity.)

3. The people who are most concerned about testing teachers are the same people who relied on testing to banish phonics from the classroom. Do you remember what I asked you to set aside for later? [Hint: The decline was in test scores. We will return to that topic.]

Then there is the demand for charter schools. The people who laud charter schools, and cite low costs and high performance as compurgation for their position, apparently don’t listen to what they themselves are saying. They choose to ignore the part about how charter schools are unfettered by the opinions of the experts who are fettering public school education. How do I know that to be true? They are citing the poor performance in public schools. How do they know that? They cite test scores. How do they feel about testing? They don’t want children tested because teachers will teach to the test; however, they want teachers tested to see if the teachers know the subject matter. (There is a sentence in there somewhere, some assembly required.)

I once opined, online, that Parochial schools are doing a fine job at educating children. What no one waited to hear was this: “Parochial schools teach the way public schools used to teach when children learned to read.” What does that mean? Parochial schools are not fettered by the constraints imposed on public schools by the experts in education hired to solve the problems caused by experts in education.

Here is a novel idea. Let the teachers teach.

Regards,

Slim

Mail: slimfairview@yahoo.com

Copyright © 2011 Slim Fairview

Related topics.

Teachers aren’t allowed to teach anymore.

http://slimviews.blogspot.com/2010/06/teachers-arent-allowed-to-teach-anymore.html

How many parents want their children to get the appearance of an education?

http://slimviews.blogspot.com/2010/06/how-many-parents-want-their-children-to.html

No excuse to fail.

http://slimviews.blogspot.com/2010/06/no-excuse-to-fail.html

The virtual classroom class reunion highlights.

http://slimviews.blogspot.com/2011/03/thye-virtual-classroom-class-reunion.html

Now, what about experts?

http://slimviews.blogspot.com/2010/11/experts.html

The Virtual Classroom Class Reunion Highlights

The Virtual Classroom

E learning in the classroom has been around a while. They started a programme in Pennsylvania a few years ago. In Pennsylvania, it is called Cyber-school. Enrollment is up. Students have graduated, gone on to college, and have done well. This, of course, is anecdotal. For a deeper knowledge of the topic, you might want to do research [wait for it] on line.

There is a great need for social interaction; however, that need for the classroom experience may recede as more youngsters live in Netopia.

One of the vital areas that a virtual experience would be powerful is on a topic that would make it virtually impossible (no pun intended) for every classroom to have access to the expert on that topic.

Instead of youngsters passing notes to their friends in study hall, they can have a chat set up. This may sound satirical at best, however, it does enable students to work in group while in a virtual classroom with a virtual teacher helping the students with their group activities. The virtual connection also allows students to research as they progress through the lesson.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go clap erasers.

Sincerest regards,

Slim

Mail slimfairview@yahoo.com

Copyright (c) 2011 Slim Fairview

No Excuse to Fail

No Excuse to Fail


In one of my first, real, math teaching assignments, I had a student whose mother was not thrilled with the grade on her son’s first test. She came in on parent-teacher night to discuss this.

Mrs. Parent reassured me that she did not believe this was my fault. She was not blaming me. She was sure that I was intelligent and that some day I would make a fine teacher. However, as I was new, perhaps I had not yet acquired the skills necessary to teach her little Cherub.

Well, I explained to Mrs. Parent, the first test of the year is a review of what the students’ remember from last year. That way I can determine what I need to cover before we can move on. I reassured Mrs. Parent that the first two or three questions were easy questions, to help the students build confidence. To help the students overcome any math anxiety.

Now comes the part where God was with me. (I can say that because this was a Parochial school.) Mrs. Parent came with Mrs. Friend who had Miss Daughter with her. (They went to the daughter’s class first. Either that or Mrs. Parent brought Mrs. Friend with her to be a witness.

I turned to Miss Daughter. I asked, “What grade are you in?”

“Sixth,” she replied.

I put the first question of the test on the board, handed her the chalk, and asked her to solve the problem. She did.

I turned to Mrs. Parent and said, “Now, your friend’s daughter solved that problem and she is only in the sixth grade. In addition, this is the beginning of the year, so they did not get to that material yet; which means she learned it in the fifth grade; and, your friend’s daughter did not know there was going to be a test tonight, so she did not have a chance to study. There is no excuse for your son getting that problem wrong.”

Mrs. Parent thanked me, took the test, folded it up, and they all left. Mrs. Friend and Miss Daughter went out the door, Mrs. Parent, under the woodwork.

I did not humiliate Mrs. Parent. Miss Daughter did not humiliate Mrs. Parent; the little Cherub did not humiliate his mother. Mrs. Parent humiliated herself when she came into my classroom and began the meeting with an empowerment and dignity festival to reassure me she was not blaming me, and proceeded to explain her son’s performance by fabricating a lack of ability to teach on my part.

I have often said, “It is the teacher’s job to teach; but that is all the teacher can do. Learning is the student’s responsibility.”

The following morning Little Cherub wanted to know what I had said to his mother. I started to tell him. He was not listening.

“My parents had me up till three o’clock in the morning. My parents were all over my case. My parents didn’t cut me no slack. (“Any slack”—he wasn’t listening.) My parents didn’t cut me no slack.”

Epilogue:

This student turned out to be, let us say, one of my top three students. The embarrassment his mother was subjected to (REMEMBER WHAT I HAD SAID ABOUT PEER PRESSURE? IT APPLIES TO PARENTS AS WELL.) was all Mrs. Parent needed to hold her son responsible for his grades. Moreover, he not only met the challenge, he exceeded it.

Regards,

Slim

PS. I am not Paul Harvey.  Still, I am open to becoming a paid blogger, columnist, or commentator.

In the meantime, if anyone finds the monographs on my blog to be especially helpful, please do not hesitate to send me on of those tricked out laptops and few dollars tucked into the envelope with the thank you note.

Sincerely  

Slim

Mail slimfairview@yahoo.com

Copyright (c) 2011 Slim Fairview

(On a personal note: If you have any doubts about raising children, contact John Rosemond, the professional http://rosemond.com He knows what he’s talking about.) www.rosemond.com

How many parents want their children to get the appearance of an education?

How many parents want their children to get the appearance of an education?


To follow up on a previous article, I am now a teacher. I teach 7th and 8th grade math. Children have math anxiety; pressure from their parents; and pressure they place on themselves. This, I found, was easy enough to deal with.

On the way home one Friday, I stopped in a stationery store. I bought a box of gold stars. Not those chump size stars, the big ones.

As I reviewed my students’ work, graded papers, and entered grades in my book, I looked for the best paper each student had submitted. I put a big gold star on the top, I wrote a very positive comment next to it in red ink.

On Monday, I handed out the papers. Some of the students went through them. One student said, “Hey, I got a gold star on my paper.” Another said, “How come I got a gold star on my paper?” Another said, “I got one too!”

I said, “Relax, everyone. Let me explain what I did.”

I explained to my class that I took the best paper each student submitted, put a gold star on top, and wrote something nice in red ink. Then I told them what I wanted them to do.

“I want you to take your papers home and say, ‘Look, I got a gold star on my paper.’ Now, what your parents are going to do, is look at the paper, tell you how proud they are of you, and maybe not get on your case so much. That way, when you come to class you won’t be so filled with math anxiety. You’ll be more relaxed and I will have an easier time teaching, and you will have an easier time learning.”

There was dead silence for less than a heartbeat. Then the class broke out in laughter. They got the joke.

Epilogue:

Tuesday, I asked my class how it went. They all had positive comments to share. I said, “Good. Now your parents won’t be getting on Sister’s case, Sister won’t be getting on my case, your parents won’t be getting on your case, and we can all relax, have a good time, enjoy math, and you’ll learn a lot more.

Regards,

Slim

PS. I am not Paul Harvey.  Still, I am open to becoming a paid blogger, columnist, or commentator.

In the meantime, if anyone finds the monographs on my blog to be especially helpful, please do not hesitate to send me on of those tricked out laptops and few dollars tucked into the envelope with the thank you note.

Sincerely  

Slim

Mail slimfairview@yahoo.com

Copyright (c) 2011 Slim Fairview

Teachers Aren't Allowed to Teach Anymore

Teachers Aren't Allowed to Teach Anymore



Before majoring in education or working full-time as a teacher, I accepted a one day substitute assignment for the 5th grade. Soon, I was called back to take over the same class. When the teacher had the opportunity to travel to England with her husband for several weeks, she needed a leave of absence. The teacher and the principal agreed: I would take over the class. That is what I consider a proper endorsement.

As the students already knew me, we’d already broken the ice. Still, perhaps they were a little overly relaxed. That can lead to discipline problems. It almost did.

I had three 10 year old students, close friends, who liked to talk. Sometimes, it seemed they’d forgotten they were in school. Or that I was the teacher. That situation had to be dealt with immediately or the assignment would be a disaster.

I knew that I could not use discipline. That would create a confrontation and as I was only a temporary teacher, the students had nothing to lose by challenging my authority.

I knew that I could not “get them on my side”. They were the students, I was the teacher.

The solution: peer pressure.

I took a quick count of the number of students (25) and threw the class off guard. I asked if they wanted to change the seating. Instead of rows, we could do a great, big semi-circle. They could sit in two’s. They could choose their own partners. However, to add to my credibility, I told them the main rule: They had to promise to behave. If they fooled around with their neighbors then I would change the seating and I would choose the neighbors. They promised, enthusiastically, to be good.

The first step was to let the class know that there was an odd number and one student would have to sit with two others. I made that offer to the three cherubs I dubbed “Charley’s Angels”.

I volunteered the boys to move their desks and chair to the middle of the semi-circle, then I let the rest of the class move their desks. Soon it was time for a bathroom break.

Charlie’s Angels, why don’t you start us off? The rest of the class, you may line up. I needn’t tell you how well that went over with the rest of the class. After that, it was time for snacks.

Charlie’s Angels, why don’t you get your snacks from the cupboard? When they returned to their desks, I let “the rest of the class, go get your snacks”: planned pandemonium. After that, it was time for recess.

Charlie’s Angel’s, why don’t you get your coats and line up for recess? (Each time Charlie’s Angels went to the cupboard, I had one of the boys open the door.) All right class, go get your coats—planned pandemonium!

I followed that routine when we lined up for lunch and when we lined up to go home. Then, the following morning, I proceeded to follow the same routine. However, it didn’t work out for me. Before recess, Charlie’s Angels came up to my desk to tell me, “We don’t want to be Charlie’s Angels anymore. We want to be treated like everyone else.”

I, of course, was shocked, shocked (!) to hear that. “I thought you were friends.” I said. “I thought you wanted to be treated special,” I asked. Alas, I was wrong.

So, I stood up and announced to the class that Charlie’s Angels didn’t want to be Charlie’s Angels anymore; they wanted to be treated like everyone else. The class applauded and cheered. Problem solved.

Not anymore. Today, that sort of favoritism would be frowned upon if a teacher so much as dared to think about solving such a big problem with such a simple and effective solution. Complaints would be lodged; explanations would be demanded—and rejected. Rights (or the denial of same) would be invoked. Catastrophe!

Not then. Then, all went smoothly, too smoothly. I enrolled in an accelerated program to obtain my teaching certificate. However, I failed to think things through. I’d been teaching in Parochial school. Parochial schools barely pay a subsistence wage and I needed a real job with a real salary. What about public schools? Public schools were then, as they are now, at the forefront of capitulating to the “experts” who caused the problems that they are now trying to solve; who cause the problems they can’t solve; who could solve the problems by not causing them in the first place; but that is too simple. Perhaps we could dub them Charlie’s Angels and invoke the acrimony of all against them. No. That won’t work. Too many people are happy to see the children getting the appearance of an education. But that is another report.

Regards,

Slim

PS. I am not Paul Harvey.  Still, I am open to becoming a paid blogger, columnist, or commentator.

In the meantime, if anyone finds the monographs on my blog to be especially helpful, please do not hesitate to send me on of those tricked out laptops and few dollars tucked into the envelope with the thank you note.

Sincerely  

Slim

Mail slimfairview@yahoo.com

Copyright (c) 2011 Slim Fairview