<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_03_2110216</id>
	<title>Is Early Childhood Education Technology Moving Backwards?</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1262511420000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>theodp writes <i>"Four decades ago, the NSF-sponsored <a href="http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content\_storage\_01/0000019b/80/35/4a/13.pdf">PLATO Elementary Reading Curriculum Project</a> (pdf) provided Illinois schoolchildren with reading lessons and e-versions of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Are\_You\_My\_Mother\%3F">beloved children's books</a> that exploited networked, touch-sensitive 8.5"x8.5" bit-mapped plasma screens, color images, and audio. Last week, <a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977968756&amp;grpId=3659174697244816">the Today Show promoted the TeacherMate</a> &mdash; a $100 gadget that's teaching Illinois schoolchildren to read and do math using its <a href="http://www.innovationsforlearning.org/ecom/buy.php">2.5" screen and old-school U-D-L-R cursor keys</a> &mdash; as a revolution in education. Has early childhood education managed to defy Moore's Law?"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>theodp writes " Four decades ago , the NSF-sponsored PLATO Elementary Reading Curriculum Project ( pdf ) provided Illinois schoolchildren with reading lessons and e-versions of beloved children 's books that exploited networked , touch-sensitive 8.5 " x8.5 " bit-mapped plasma screens , color images , and audio .
Last week , the Today Show promoted the TeacherMate    a $ 100 gadget that 's teaching Illinois schoolchildren to read and do math using its 2.5 " screen and old-school U-D-L-R cursor keys    as a revolution in education .
Has early childhood education managed to defy Moore 's Law ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>theodp writes "Four decades ago, the NSF-sponsored PLATO Elementary Reading Curriculum Project (pdf) provided Illinois schoolchildren with reading lessons and e-versions of beloved children's books that exploited networked, touch-sensitive 8.5"x8.5" bit-mapped plasma screens, color images, and audio.
Last week, the Today Show promoted the TeacherMate — a $100 gadget that's teaching Illinois schoolchildren to read and do math using its 2.5" screen and old-school U-D-L-R cursor keys — as a revolution in education.
Has early childhood education managed to defy Moore's Law?
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30638624</id>
	<title>Re:As Clifford Stoll Said</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262598960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds like a good life lesson.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like a good life lesson .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like a good life lesson.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634872</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30638096</id>
	<title>Re:Gadgets may not help.</title>
	<author>celle</author>
	<datestamp>1262548380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"...If school courses are designed to strain the straight A students a bit the quality of school graduates is excellent. Try to redeem the mediocre middle and the schools fall apart."</p><p>And what if those students are "late-bloomers" or gifted in ways not measured by the limited perspective(tests) of school/educational administrators/educators. It takes all kinds to make society. We had a similar stupidity with blacks in the sixties, shall we create an educationally tiered society as well. In a country where anyone can be president, somehow I don't think dictating what people should be because they don't follow some standard we think they should would be a good thing. How long till the slaves are completely paying for the bullshit of the masters.("... Everyone will have drugs and no one will be in charge. Just like now" -- Carlin) Everyone brings a unique view to the table, even a soldier or a cook. This country was developed on individual initiative as much as group think. It should still be about individual choice and providing the resources for the individual to go whatever direction they wish to go.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:rant<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; How about getting rid of teachers who don't teach and instead of 10 administrators/people for every student have 10 qualified teachers for every student. And pay the teachers a decent wage while they're still young/passionate enough to still care. They take care of the parenting public's most important possession and are paid less than daycare for a four year degree plus extras and/or decades of experience. Nevermind teachers shouldn't be babysitters but since they are, make it worth their while and encourage them to be better teachers. And parents, keep your mouth shut unless you have something useful to say. You had your chance to live now let your kids have theirs and stop trying to live your life through them. I won't get into everyone paying for your breeding decisions.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/rant</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" ...If school courses are designed to strain the straight A students a bit the quality of school graduates is excellent .
Try to redeem the mediocre middle and the schools fall apart .
" And what if those students are " late-bloomers " or gifted in ways not measured by the limited perspective ( tests ) of school/educational administrators/educators .
It takes all kinds to make society .
We had a similar stupidity with blacks in the sixties , shall we create an educationally tiered society as well .
In a country where anyone can be president , somehow I do n't think dictating what people should be because they do n't follow some standard we think they should would be a good thing .
How long till the slaves are completely paying for the bullshit of the masters. ( " .. .
Everyone will have drugs and no one will be in charge .
Just like now " -- Carlin ) Everyone brings a unique view to the table , even a soldier or a cook .
This country was developed on individual initiative as much as group think .
It should still be about individual choice and providing the resources for the individual to go whatever direction they wish to go .
: rant     How about getting rid of teachers who do n't teach and instead of 10 administrators/people for every student have 10 qualified teachers for every student .
And pay the teachers a decent wage while they 're still young/passionate enough to still care .
They take care of the parenting public 's most important possession and are paid less than daycare for a four year degree plus extras and/or decades of experience .
Nevermind teachers should n't be babysitters but since they are , make it worth their while and encourage them to be better teachers .
And parents , keep your mouth shut unless you have something useful to say .
You had your chance to live now let your kids have theirs and stop trying to live your life through them .
I wo n't get into everyone paying for your breeding decisions .
/rant</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"...If school courses are designed to strain the straight A students a bit the quality of school graduates is excellent.
Try to redeem the mediocre middle and the schools fall apart.
"And what if those students are "late-bloomers" or gifted in ways not measured by the limited perspective(tests) of school/educational administrators/educators.
It takes all kinds to make society.
We had a similar stupidity with blacks in the sixties, shall we create an educationally tiered society as well.
In a country where anyone can be president, somehow I don't think dictating what people should be because they don't follow some standard we think they should would be a good thing.
How long till the slaves are completely paying for the bullshit of the masters.("...
Everyone will have drugs and no one will be in charge.
Just like now" -- Carlin) Everyone brings a unique view to the table, even a soldier or a cook.
This country was developed on individual initiative as much as group think.
It should still be about individual choice and providing the resources for the individual to go whatever direction they wish to go.
:rant
    How about getting rid of teachers who don't teach and instead of 10 administrators/people for every student have 10 qualified teachers for every student.
And pay the teachers a decent wage while they're still young/passionate enough to still care.
They take care of the parenting public's most important possession and are paid less than daycare for a four year degree plus extras and/or decades of experience.
Nevermind teachers shouldn't be babysitters but since they are, make it worth their while and encourage them to be better teachers.
And parents, keep your mouth shut unless you have something useful to say.
You had your chance to live now let your kids have theirs and stop trying to live your life through them.
I won't get into everyone paying for your breeding decisions.
/rant</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634490</id>
	<title>Yes.</title>
	<author>Shadow of Eternity</author>
	<datestamp>1262515560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now we plug them into X Interactivodular superintermodular digital box and have them staring at a generic "FUN!!1" learning program that teaches them to rotely memorize whatever miniscule number of factoids it can hold in it's tiny memory. Then we pick them up and shuttle them around all day on a million and one "Structured play-time" events before taking them home and expecting them to go to sleep on command after a hard day of sitting and doing what grownups tell them to.</p><p>We used to give them a stack of comic books, a box of legos, and enough kool-aid for them and whatever other kids in the neighborhood weren't grounded at the moment and tell them to figure it out for themselves.</p><p>Homework isn't (by default) fun, and "Structured play-time" is not good for kids. Learning is what you do so they're able to have options as an adult, and fun is anything they do voluntarily after they do the things they need to do but don't want to.</p><p>Let the little shiats skin their knees, scream their heads off, run around with their pants on their head, dig in the mud, and punch someone in their new best friend in the nose now and then. They'll thank you for it later.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now we plug them into X Interactivodular superintermodular digital box and have them staring at a generic " FUN !
! 1 " learning program that teaches them to rotely memorize whatever miniscule number of factoids it can hold in it 's tiny memory .
Then we pick them up and shuttle them around all day on a million and one " Structured play-time " events before taking them home and expecting them to go to sleep on command after a hard day of sitting and doing what grownups tell them to.We used to give them a stack of comic books , a box of legos , and enough kool-aid for them and whatever other kids in the neighborhood were n't grounded at the moment and tell them to figure it out for themselves.Homework is n't ( by default ) fun , and " Structured play-time " is not good for kids .
Learning is what you do so they 're able to have options as an adult , and fun is anything they do voluntarily after they do the things they need to do but do n't want to.Let the little shiats skin their knees , scream their heads off , run around with their pants on their head , dig in the mud , and punch someone in their new best friend in the nose now and then .
They 'll thank you for it later .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now we plug them into X Interactivodular superintermodular digital box and have them staring at a generic "FUN!
!1" learning program that teaches them to rotely memorize whatever miniscule number of factoids it can hold in it's tiny memory.
Then we pick them up and shuttle them around all day on a million and one "Structured play-time" events before taking them home and expecting them to go to sleep on command after a hard day of sitting and doing what grownups tell them to.We used to give them a stack of comic books, a box of legos, and enough kool-aid for them and whatever other kids in the neighborhood weren't grounded at the moment and tell them to figure it out for themselves.Homework isn't (by default) fun, and "Structured play-time" is not good for kids.
Learning is what you do so they're able to have options as an adult, and fun is anything they do voluntarily after they do the things they need to do but don't want to.Let the little shiats skin their knees, scream their heads off, run around with their pants on their head, dig in the mud, and punch someone in their new best friend in the nose now and then.
They'll thank you for it later.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30639646</id>
	<title>Re:This is a joke, right?</title>
	<author>tehcyder</author>
	<datestamp>1262613600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>My early child hood technology consisted mainly of books, Play-doh, LEGOs, magnifying glasses, hammers, nails and <strong>scrap blocks of wood from a paint brush handle factory down the street</strong>.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
You lucky bastard!  When I were a lad we didn't have anything as posh as factories.  Or streets.  We had to make our own entertainment out of stones and twigs.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>My early child hood technology consisted mainly of books , Play-doh , LEGOs , magnifying glasses , hammers , nails and scrap blocks of wood from a paint brush handle factory down the street .
You lucky bastard !
When I were a lad we did n't have anything as posh as factories .
Or streets .
We had to make our own entertainment out of stones and twigs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My early child hood technology consisted mainly of books, Play-doh, LEGOs, magnifying glasses, hammers, nails and scrap blocks of wood from a paint brush handle factory down the street.
You lucky bastard!
When I were a lad we didn't have anything as posh as factories.
Or streets.
We had to make our own entertainment out of stones and twigs.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635108</id>
	<title>Re:Yes.</title>
	<author>omb</author>
	<datestamp>1262519640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My kids were staunch fans of Ronald Dahl, none of it designed for children. There are very few Childrens' books, only the Hobbit comes to mind.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My kids were staunch fans of Ronald Dahl , none of it designed for children .
There are very few Childrens ' books , only the Hobbit comes to mind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My kids were staunch fans of Ronald Dahl, none of it designed for children.
There are very few Childrens' books, only the Hobbit comes to mind.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634684</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30638136</id>
	<title>Re:This is a joke, right?</title>
	<author>uninformedLuddite</author>
	<datestamp>1262635200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I went to school calculators had only been out for a couple of years. I think the big thing was a TI-59(I think it was a 59). Anyway, if any student had taken a calculator into a lesson it would have been a very serious matter. if it had been taken into a test it would have been immediate expulsion. I was recently flipping through some up to date math textbooks and though I do not have my old books to compare against I suspect that the math they are doing now is not as difficult as the math we used to do. I also met someone a few months ago who had managed a good pass in their HSC(year 12 leaving certificate in NSW, Australia) and had very little grasp on how to do math without a calculator(their multiplication and long division where totally abysmal). When I queried them on this they told me that being able to do long division on paper wasn't really very important as that's why they have calculators.</p><p>You really have to wonder what would happen to most people with a modern education if they suddenly had to rely on their own abilities rather than the gadget-enhanced abilities that they take for granted. </p><p>Then again I also think that computers have a time and a place and that place isn't the classroom. In an IT class is OK but IMHO that is about the only time is should be necessary(note to smarties don;t talk about disabilities as i am purposefully excluding them for the sake of brevity)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I went to school calculators had only been out for a couple of years .
I think the big thing was a TI-59 ( I think it was a 59 ) .
Anyway , if any student had taken a calculator into a lesson it would have been a very serious matter .
if it had been taken into a test it would have been immediate expulsion .
I was recently flipping through some up to date math textbooks and though I do not have my old books to compare against I suspect that the math they are doing now is not as difficult as the math we used to do .
I also met someone a few months ago who had managed a good pass in their HSC ( year 12 leaving certificate in NSW , Australia ) and had very little grasp on how to do math without a calculator ( their multiplication and long division where totally abysmal ) .
When I queried them on this they told me that being able to do long division on paper was n't really very important as that 's why they have calculators.You really have to wonder what would happen to most people with a modern education if they suddenly had to rely on their own abilities rather than the gadget-enhanced abilities that they take for granted .
Then again I also think that computers have a time and a place and that place is n't the classroom .
In an IT class is OK but IMHO that is about the only time is should be necessary ( note to smarties don ; t talk about disabilities as i am purposefully excluding them for the sake of brevity )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I went to school calculators had only been out for a couple of years.
I think the big thing was a TI-59(I think it was a 59).
Anyway, if any student had taken a calculator into a lesson it would have been a very serious matter.
if it had been taken into a test it would have been immediate expulsion.
I was recently flipping through some up to date math textbooks and though I do not have my old books to compare against I suspect that the math they are doing now is not as difficult as the math we used to do.
I also met someone a few months ago who had managed a good pass in their HSC(year 12 leaving certificate in NSW, Australia) and had very little grasp on how to do math without a calculator(their multiplication and long division where totally abysmal).
When I queried them on this they told me that being able to do long division on paper wasn't really very important as that's why they have calculators.You really have to wonder what would happen to most people with a modern education if they suddenly had to rely on their own abilities rather than the gadget-enhanced abilities that they take for granted.
Then again I also think that computers have a time and a place and that place isn't the classroom.
In an IT class is OK but IMHO that is about the only time is should be necessary(note to smarties don;t talk about disabilities as i am purposefully excluding them for the sake of brevity)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635470</id>
	<title>Re:Apples and Oranges</title>
	<author>michael\_cain</author>
	<datestamp>1262521800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Indeed. Not to mention that each terminal took up a few square feet of dedicated desk space, and consumed prodigious amounts of electricity (by contemporary standards).
</p><p>
The missing piece of the cheap child-oriented computer is an inexpensive durable display. OLED may get there -- it is inherently capable of being more robust than LCD, but the materials are still too expensive. If the resolution and monochrome display of the PLATO IV is acceptable, OLED displays are feasible today. I suspect that it is entirely possible to put something as capable as a PLATO into a 10x10x1 inch block of plastic that's completely sealed (recharge the battery by induction) and durable enough for a third grader for $100.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Indeed .
Not to mention that each terminal took up a few square feet of dedicated desk space , and consumed prodigious amounts of electricity ( by contemporary standards ) .
The missing piece of the cheap child-oriented computer is an inexpensive durable display .
OLED may get there -- it is inherently capable of being more robust than LCD , but the materials are still too expensive .
If the resolution and monochrome display of the PLATO IV is acceptable , OLED displays are feasible today .
I suspect that it is entirely possible to put something as capable as a PLATO into a 10x10x1 inch block of plastic that 's completely sealed ( recharge the battery by induction ) and durable enough for a third grader for $ 100 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Indeed.
Not to mention that each terminal took up a few square feet of dedicated desk space, and consumed prodigious amounts of electricity (by contemporary standards).
The missing piece of the cheap child-oriented computer is an inexpensive durable display.
OLED may get there -- it is inherently capable of being more robust than LCD, but the materials are still too expensive.
If the resolution and monochrome display of the PLATO IV is acceptable, OLED displays are feasible today.
I suspect that it is entirely possible to put something as capable as a PLATO into a 10x10x1 inch block of plastic that's completely sealed (recharge the battery by induction) and durable enough for a third grader for $100.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634628</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634838</id>
	<title>Inflation adjusted</title>
	<author>Baldrson</author>
	<datestamp>1262517780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IIRC, the plasma display PLATO terminals (with slide projector and audio disk player for "color images, and audio") were upwards of $10,000 in 1974.  That is close to $50,000 in 2009 dollars. If we compare $100 to $50,000 I think we can safely say Moore's Law is in operation even considering the smaller screen.</p><p>The real problem isn't regression in Moore's Law -- its regression in areas like software resulting from a loosening of the discipline allowed by exponentiating hardware capability.  This is one reason the Russians are so damn hot as programmers:  They had to make their software work correctly on ridiculous hardware developed by the commies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IIRC , the plasma display PLATO terminals ( with slide projector and audio disk player for " color images , and audio " ) were upwards of $ 10,000 in 1974 .
That is close to $ 50,000 in 2009 dollars .
If we compare $ 100 to $ 50,000 I think we can safely say Moore 's Law is in operation even considering the smaller screen.The real problem is n't regression in Moore 's Law -- its regression in areas like software resulting from a loosening of the discipline allowed by exponentiating hardware capability .
This is one reason the Russians are so damn hot as programmers : They had to make their software work correctly on ridiculous hardware developed by the commies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IIRC, the plasma display PLATO terminals (with slide projector and audio disk player for "color images, and audio") were upwards of $10,000 in 1974.
That is close to $50,000 in 2009 dollars.
If we compare $100 to $50,000 I think we can safely say Moore's Law is in operation even considering the smaller screen.The real problem isn't regression in Moore's Law -- its regression in areas like software resulting from a loosening of the discipline allowed by exponentiating hardware capability.
This is one reason the Russians are so damn hot as programmers:  They had to make their software work correctly on ridiculous hardware developed by the commies.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30646904</id>
	<title>Re:This is a joke, right?</title>
	<author>mhajicek</author>
	<datestamp>1262602560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I had (okay, my dad had) an IBM PC and an Atari 2600.  My son plays WoW and Wii.  He also has all of my old Legos (I know, but I'll call them Legos anyway!) plus about the same amount again new.  I had Robotix, he has Lego Mindstorms.  I had Erector...  Hmm, I guess I'll have to get him something like that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I had ( okay , my dad had ) an IBM PC and an Atari 2600 .
My son plays WoW and Wii .
He also has all of my old Legos ( I know , but I 'll call them Legos anyway !
) plus about the same amount again new .
I had Robotix , he has Lego Mindstorms .
I had Erector... Hmm , I guess I 'll have to get him something like that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had (okay, my dad had) an IBM PC and an Atari 2600.
My son plays WoW and Wii.
He also has all of my old Legos (I know, but I'll call them Legos anyway!
) plus about the same amount again new.
I had Robotix, he has Lego Mindstorms.
I had Erector...  Hmm, I guess I'll have to get him something like that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636398</id>
	<title>Re:This is a joke, right?</title>
	<author>Foobar of Borg</author>
	<datestamp>1262528820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>And you are familiar with our looming demographic catastrophe [mcclatchydc.com], right?</p></div></blockquote><p>Nothing funnier than a dumb, inbred redneck saying people of other races are inherently inferior.  Incidentally, where are multi-racial people in that racist piece of trash article you cited?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And you are familiar with our looming demographic catastrophe [ mcclatchydc.com ] , right ? Nothing funnier than a dumb , inbred redneck saying people of other races are inherently inferior .
Incidentally , where are multi-racial people in that racist piece of trash article you cited ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And you are familiar with our looming demographic catastrophe [mcclatchydc.com], right?Nothing funnier than a dumb, inbred redneck saying people of other races are inherently inferior.
Incidentally, where are multi-racial people in that racist piece of trash article you cited?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30638440</id>
	<title>Re:Simple Rugged Durable = Better</title>
	<author>mcrbids</author>
	<datestamp>1262596140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>It means "a home, food on the table, education and health care".</i></p><p>I wonder about this. Average new home size has roughly doubled since the mid-20th century - not far from the 1962 statistic you mention. Also, the percentage of population with college degrees is higher, and health care today is a far cry from the health care available in 1962!</p><p>Today, one of my oldest sons deals daily with a horrible disease that costs some $1,000 per month - just to keep him alive. He gets the best care I can afford! But in 1962, treatment options for Diabetes were limited, and the official advice was: "Diabetics rarely live more than 20 years from the date that they are diagnosed". Today, diabetics typically live near-normal lifespans!</p><p>So I work 30\% longer, but live in a spacious, comfortable, 2,000 SqFt home, fly a private airplane, and my son lives today? Sounds like a good deal!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It means " a home , food on the table , education and health care " .I wonder about this .
Average new home size has roughly doubled since the mid-20th century - not far from the 1962 statistic you mention .
Also , the percentage of population with college degrees is higher , and health care today is a far cry from the health care available in 1962 ! Today , one of my oldest sons deals daily with a horrible disease that costs some $ 1,000 per month - just to keep him alive .
He gets the best care I can afford !
But in 1962 , treatment options for Diabetes were limited , and the official advice was : " Diabetics rarely live more than 20 years from the date that they are diagnosed " .
Today , diabetics typically live near-normal lifespans ! So I work 30 \ % longer , but live in a spacious , comfortable , 2,000 SqFt home , fly a private airplane , and my son lives today ?
Sounds like a good deal !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It means "a home, food on the table, education and health care".I wonder about this.
Average new home size has roughly doubled since the mid-20th century - not far from the 1962 statistic you mention.
Also, the percentage of population with college degrees is higher, and health care today is a far cry from the health care available in 1962!Today, one of my oldest sons deals daily with a horrible disease that costs some $1,000 per month - just to keep him alive.
He gets the best care I can afford!
But in 1962, treatment options for Diabetes were limited, and the official advice was: "Diabetics rarely live more than 20 years from the date that they are diagnosed".
Today, diabetics typically live near-normal lifespans!So I work 30\% longer, but live in a spacious, comfortable, 2,000 SqFt home, fly a private airplane, and my son lives today?
Sounds like a good deal!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634754</id>
	<title>Article is a troll</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262517240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The article submitter must be trolling.  Decades ago there existed a one-off prototype, which was never widely deployed, that was hugely expensive.  Now there exists an inexpensive learning gadget that might actually be in the hands of actual kids, and this is "moving backwards"?</p><p>Next up: is the phone industry moving backwards?  At a world's fair, AT&amp;T demonstrated a working two-way color video phone, yet I don't have a video phone in my house yet.  Of course, millions of people have full-color Internet on their phones, and can do things like view a photo of their home taken <em>from orbit</em>.  And millions of people have practical teleconferencing via WebEx et al.  But never mind that.  The phone company doesn't have video phones in every house; we're moving backwards!</p><p>steveha</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The article submitter must be trolling .
Decades ago there existed a one-off prototype , which was never widely deployed , that was hugely expensive .
Now there exists an inexpensive learning gadget that might actually be in the hands of actual kids , and this is " moving backwards " ? Next up : is the phone industry moving backwards ?
At a world 's fair , AT&amp;T demonstrated a working two-way color video phone , yet I do n't have a video phone in my house yet .
Of course , millions of people have full-color Internet on their phones , and can do things like view a photo of their home taken from orbit .
And millions of people have practical teleconferencing via WebEx et al .
But never mind that .
The phone company does n't have video phones in every house ; we 're moving backwards ! steveha</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The article submitter must be trolling.
Decades ago there existed a one-off prototype, which was never widely deployed, that was hugely expensive.
Now there exists an inexpensive learning gadget that might actually be in the hands of actual kids, and this is "moving backwards"?Next up: is the phone industry moving backwards?
At a world's fair, AT&amp;T demonstrated a working two-way color video phone, yet I don't have a video phone in my house yet.
Of course, millions of people have full-color Internet on their phones, and can do things like view a photo of their home taken from orbit.
And millions of people have practical teleconferencing via WebEx et al.
But never mind that.
The phone company doesn't have video phones in every house; we're moving backwards!steveha</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634790</id>
	<title>Re:Simple Rugged Durable = Better</title>
	<author>PopeRatzo</author>
	<datestamp>1262517480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The latest and greatest techno-glitter is often not what's needed</p></div></blockquote><p>You're right of course, and although it might be a minority opinion among fans of high-tech, the best "early-childhood education technology" is <i>still interaction with parents, in a secure environment</i>.</p><p>But with mommy and daddy having to work thirty percent more just to provide the same standard of living and real income as a single-breadwinner family in 1962, interaction with parents is increasingly in short supply.</p><p>Gotta feed Moloch, you know.</p><p>[Note: "Standard of living does NOT mean "the number of big screen TVs you have charged to your credit cards".  It means "a home, food on the table, education and health care".]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The latest and greatest techno-glitter is often not what 's neededYou 're right of course , and although it might be a minority opinion among fans of high-tech , the best " early-childhood education technology " is still interaction with parents , in a secure environment.But with mommy and daddy having to work thirty percent more just to provide the same standard of living and real income as a single-breadwinner family in 1962 , interaction with parents is increasingly in short supply.Got ta feed Moloch , you know .
[ Note : " Standard of living does NOT mean " the number of big screen TVs you have charged to your credit cards " .
It means " a home , food on the table , education and health care " .
]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The latest and greatest techno-glitter is often not what's neededYou're right of course, and although it might be a minority opinion among fans of high-tech, the best "early-childhood education technology" is still interaction with parents, in a secure environment.But with mommy and daddy having to work thirty percent more just to provide the same standard of living and real income as a single-breadwinner family in 1962, interaction with parents is increasingly in short supply.Gotta feed Moloch, you know.
[Note: "Standard of living does NOT mean "the number of big screen TVs you have charged to your credit cards".
It means "a home, food on the table, education and health care".
]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637424</id>
	<title>Etch a sketch</title>
	<author>flyingfsck</author>
	<datestamp>1262539020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That good old little sand box thingy will likely be better and provide more educational value than any battery powered gadget.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That good old little sand box thingy will likely be better and provide more educational value than any battery powered gadget .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That good old little sand box thingy will likely be better and provide more educational value than any battery powered gadget.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636710</id>
	<title>Stupid</title>
	<author>rickb928</author>
	<datestamp>1262532000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My PLATO terminal cost me $200:</p><p>Used Lenovo X41 Tablet off Criagslist: $120<br>Restore CDs from Lenovo (pure vanity): $66<br>Open Source Pterm: $0</p><p>Total Cost: $186.</p><p>And it does other stuff also.</p><p>Any of the current crop of netbooks would run Pterm.  You could mash up a decent distro to run the Linux version and make it reasonably simple for kids, and even give an out button to the older one so they could run a browser and all that.</p><p>Of course, building a real PLATo terminal would be pointless, but I suspect it could be done for not a lot of money.  A bit more if you wished to use the color enhancements.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My PLATO terminal cost me $ 200 : Used Lenovo X41 Tablet off Criagslist : $ 120Restore CDs from Lenovo ( pure vanity ) : $ 66Open Source Pterm : $ 0Total Cost : $ 186.And it does other stuff also.Any of the current crop of netbooks would run Pterm .
You could mash up a decent distro to run the Linux version and make it reasonably simple for kids , and even give an out button to the older one so they could run a browser and all that.Of course , building a real PLATo terminal would be pointless , but I suspect it could be done for not a lot of money .
A bit more if you wished to use the color enhancements .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My PLATO terminal cost me $200:Used Lenovo X41 Tablet off Criagslist: $120Restore CDs from Lenovo (pure vanity): $66Open Source Pterm: $0Total Cost: $186.And it does other stuff also.Any of the current crop of netbooks would run Pterm.
You could mash up a decent distro to run the Linux version and make it reasonably simple for kids, and even give an out button to the older one so they could run a browser and all that.Of course, building a real PLATo terminal would be pointless, but I suspect it could be done for not a lot of money.
A bit more if you wished to use the color enhancements.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634628</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636688</id>
	<title>parents are the doom of the nation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262531700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Parents will be the downfall of the U.S. in terms of tech education and performance. Most parents have simply given up on learning and in doing so doom their children to educational mediocrity. They think if they didn't have to learn number systems and formal logic, then their children don't need that either, then wonder why all the technology jobs are shipping overseas or why we're taking jobs away from their kids and giving them to foreigners with H1-B visas. Furthermore, the public school system routinely resorts to teaching the use of simple gadgetry and office apps as "technical" education, watering down the education kids do receive and inflating grades in the process to make parents happy -- because without grade inflation all the parents do is email the teachers complaining that "their kids are A students!".</p><p>Actually I would go as far as to say that parents willfully hold their kids back in most cases because if their kids did manage to beat them in terms of logic and general common-sense, that would be a real burden on their egos, right? Anyway, in a country where academic performance is continuously watered down and sports make you more popular than learning real skills, it's no wonder we can't provide a good technical education. I had to re-learn all the math I ever learned in my life when I got to college, and I hope at some point kids don't have to suffer that any longer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Parents will be the downfall of the U.S. in terms of tech education and performance .
Most parents have simply given up on learning and in doing so doom their children to educational mediocrity .
They think if they did n't have to learn number systems and formal logic , then their children do n't need that either , then wonder why all the technology jobs are shipping overseas or why we 're taking jobs away from their kids and giving them to foreigners with H1-B visas .
Furthermore , the public school system routinely resorts to teaching the use of simple gadgetry and office apps as " technical " education , watering down the education kids do receive and inflating grades in the process to make parents happy -- because without grade inflation all the parents do is email the teachers complaining that " their kids are A students !
" .Actually I would go as far as to say that parents willfully hold their kids back in most cases because if their kids did manage to beat them in terms of logic and general common-sense , that would be a real burden on their egos , right ?
Anyway , in a country where academic performance is continuously watered down and sports make you more popular than learning real skills , it 's no wonder we ca n't provide a good technical education .
I had to re-learn all the math I ever learned in my life when I got to college , and I hope at some point kids do n't have to suffer that any longer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Parents will be the downfall of the U.S. in terms of tech education and performance.
Most parents have simply given up on learning and in doing so doom their children to educational mediocrity.
They think if they didn't have to learn number systems and formal logic, then their children don't need that either, then wonder why all the technology jobs are shipping overseas or why we're taking jobs away from their kids and giving them to foreigners with H1-B visas.
Furthermore, the public school system routinely resorts to teaching the use of simple gadgetry and office apps as "technical" education, watering down the education kids do receive and inflating grades in the process to make parents happy -- because without grade inflation all the parents do is email the teachers complaining that "their kids are A students!
".Actually I would go as far as to say that parents willfully hold their kids back in most cases because if their kids did manage to beat them in terms of logic and general common-sense, that would be a real burden on their egos, right?
Anyway, in a country where academic performance is continuously watered down and sports make you more popular than learning real skills, it's no wonder we can't provide a good technical education.
I had to re-learn all the math I ever learned in my life when I got to college, and I hope at some point kids don't have to suffer that any longer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634588</id>
	<title>Here is the Teachermate Web Site</title>
	<author>loose electron</author>
	<datestamp>1262516220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.innovationsforlearning.org/about\_teachermate.php" title="innovation...arning.org">http://www.innovationsforlearning.org/about\_teachermate.php</a> [innovation...arning.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.innovationsforlearning.org/about \ _teachermate.php [ innovation...arning.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.innovationsforlearning.org/about\_teachermate.php [innovation...arning.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635052</id>
	<title>Technology HAS NOTHING to do with READING</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262519280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is a further example of the obsession with gadgets, which is so prevalent today. What you need are BOOKS for the age of the child, 3-4 lots of pictures, 7-8 less so, 10+ none, the better the books and teacher is the quicker it goes so long as they keep trendy teaching methods.<br><br>Grammar and spelling are important, especially at the beginning before the start recognizing longer words as Gestalt.<br><br>Once they can read feed them all the interesting, to them, books you can. Done right it can be amazingly fast, my 10 year old daughter taught her 2.75 year sister to read English in about 6 months to a reading age of ~ 7. Then she started teaching basic French but by the time she was 5 she could read, and talk simply in French.<br><br>Keep away from computers, the fonts and resolution are poor, and most width is too wide to read quickley, and if you make the lines narrower they are too short.<br><br>Finally they are not intelligently reactive to the student's needs and progress.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a further example of the obsession with gadgets , which is so prevalent today .
What you need are BOOKS for the age of the child , 3-4 lots of pictures , 7-8 less so , 10 + none , the better the books and teacher is the quicker it goes so long as they keep trendy teaching methods.Grammar and spelling are important , especially at the beginning before the start recognizing longer words as Gestalt.Once they can read feed them all the interesting , to them , books you can .
Done right it can be amazingly fast , my 10 year old daughter taught her 2.75 year sister to read English in about 6 months to a reading age of ~ 7 .
Then she started teaching basic French but by the time she was 5 she could read , and talk simply in French.Keep away from computers , the fonts and resolution are poor , and most width is too wide to read quickley , and if you make the lines narrower they are too short.Finally they are not intelligently reactive to the student 's needs and progress .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a further example of the obsession with gadgets, which is so prevalent today.
What you need are BOOKS for the age of the child, 3-4 lots of pictures, 7-8 less so, 10+ none, the better the books and teacher is the quicker it goes so long as they keep trendy teaching methods.Grammar and spelling are important, especially at the beginning before the start recognizing longer words as Gestalt.Once they can read feed them all the interesting, to them, books you can.
Done right it can be amazingly fast, my 10 year old daughter taught her 2.75 year sister to read English in about 6 months to a reading age of ~ 7.
Then she started teaching basic French but by the time she was 5 she could read, and talk simply in French.Keep away from computers, the fonts and resolution are poor, and most width is too wide to read quickley, and if you make the lines narrower they are too short.Finally they are not intelligently reactive to the student's needs and progress.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637022</id>
	<title>Industrialization applied to raising children?</title>
	<author>bussdriver</author>
	<datestamp>1262534940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People often falsely apply ideas and concepts from other areas to education. Human education and development is UNLIKE EVERYTHING; therefore, one should avoid inter-discipline thinking. Psychology and education should be the fields upon which to base changes. Even then, we are talking about a topic which will never be fully understood (by humans.) This uncertainty somehow seems to give people license to spout off opinions like they know something merely because they were school children themselves. I'm no dentist simply because I've been to the dentist for much of my life; furthermore, my understanding is from a totally different perspective.</p><p>I'm often against technology which surprises people given that I'm an expert. After the shock has worn off, people go back to irrationally believing technology makes everything better in  and I'm dismissed like some faith healer preaching against antibiotics.</p><p>Metrics: Any measurement system of intangible things is going to have a lot of errors, especially in the ream of hacking the system to fake better results. There are plenty of political motives that distract from the goals already; the metrics only add to this problem.  Most metrics should be gone; I'm not saying there should be nothing, there should be something that works around  inherent problems; something quite different from what exists today.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People often falsely apply ideas and concepts from other areas to education .
Human education and development is UNLIKE EVERYTHING ; therefore , one should avoid inter-discipline thinking .
Psychology and education should be the fields upon which to base changes .
Even then , we are talking about a topic which will never be fully understood ( by humans .
) This uncertainty somehow seems to give people license to spout off opinions like they know something merely because they were school children themselves .
I 'm no dentist simply because I 've been to the dentist for much of my life ; furthermore , my understanding is from a totally different perspective.I 'm often against technology which surprises people given that I 'm an expert .
After the shock has worn off , people go back to irrationally believing technology makes everything better in and I 'm dismissed like some faith healer preaching against antibiotics.Metrics : Any measurement system of intangible things is going to have a lot of errors , especially in the ream of hacking the system to fake better results .
There are plenty of political motives that distract from the goals already ; the metrics only add to this problem .
Most metrics should be gone ; I 'm not saying there should be nothing , there should be something that works around inherent problems ; something quite different from what exists today .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People often falsely apply ideas and concepts from other areas to education.
Human education and development is UNLIKE EVERYTHING; therefore, one should avoid inter-discipline thinking.
Psychology and education should be the fields upon which to base changes.
Even then, we are talking about a topic which will never be fully understood (by humans.
) This uncertainty somehow seems to give people license to spout off opinions like they know something merely because they were school children themselves.
I'm no dentist simply because I've been to the dentist for much of my life; furthermore, my understanding is from a totally different perspective.I'm often against technology which surprises people given that I'm an expert.
After the shock has worn off, people go back to irrationally believing technology makes everything better in  and I'm dismissed like some faith healer preaching against antibiotics.Metrics: Any measurement system of intangible things is going to have a lot of errors, especially in the ream of hacking the system to fake better results.
There are plenty of political motives that distract from the goals already; the metrics only add to this problem.
Most metrics should be gone; I'm not saying there should be nothing, there should be something that works around  inherent problems; something quite different from what exists today.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636004</id>
	<title>And a Xerox Alto Workstation Was $75,000 in 1972</title>
	<author>theodp</author>
	<datestamp>1262525940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To put things in perspective, a circa-1972 <a href="http://hci.stanford.edu/publications/bds/2p-star.html" title="stanford.edu">Xerox Alto workstation</a> [stanford.edu] would be about $388,000 in 2009 dollars, but I can't imagine anyone preferring one to today's $399 laptops (about $77 in 1972 dollars)!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To put things in perspective , a circa-1972 Xerox Alto workstation [ stanford.edu ] would be about $ 388,000 in 2009 dollars , but I ca n't imagine anyone preferring one to today 's $ 399 laptops ( about $ 77 in 1972 dollars ) !
: - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To put things in perspective, a circa-1972 Xerox Alto workstation [stanford.edu] would be about $388,000 in 2009 dollars, but I can't imagine anyone preferring one to today's $399 laptops (about $77 in 1972 dollars)!
:-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634628</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634980</id>
	<title>Tech is just a tool</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262518800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was the IT guy in a K-12 school district for 7 years.  I've seen the good and bad of technology in a classroom.  The biggest thing is to remember that technology is just a tool.  Nothing more, nothing less.  That classroom PC (and other electronics) should be used to *enhance* the education and reinforce the lessons, not replace the teacher.  And that tool is only as useful as the user makes it.  I can buy a $100 hammer, but it won't put that nail in the wall by itself.  If I want a hole in the wall, I can't go to WalMart and buy a hole.  I buy a drill to make my hole.  Same with a PC.  It can't teach the kids by itself, it has to be used properly.</p><p>However, too often I saw teachers dump kids in front of a PC as little more than a babysitter.  The kids would play an outdated math game and knew exactly how to "cheat" the game.  (ex. - Doing basic math the kids had to input the answer to 8 + 7, they'd start at 12 and just keep increasing the answer by 1 until getting it right.)</p><p>So, is the technology moving backwards?  No, I don't think so.  The tech has advanced so much since I was in school!  (Grad high school in 1992.)  But if it's not used right, it may as well not be there at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was the IT guy in a K-12 school district for 7 years .
I 've seen the good and bad of technology in a classroom .
The biggest thing is to remember that technology is just a tool .
Nothing more , nothing less .
That classroom PC ( and other electronics ) should be used to * enhance * the education and reinforce the lessons , not replace the teacher .
And that tool is only as useful as the user makes it .
I can buy a $ 100 hammer , but it wo n't put that nail in the wall by itself .
If I want a hole in the wall , I ca n't go to WalMart and buy a hole .
I buy a drill to make my hole .
Same with a PC .
It ca n't teach the kids by itself , it has to be used properly.However , too often I saw teachers dump kids in front of a PC as little more than a babysitter .
The kids would play an outdated math game and knew exactly how to " cheat " the game .
( ex. - Doing basic math the kids had to input the answer to 8 + 7 , they 'd start at 12 and just keep increasing the answer by 1 until getting it right .
) So , is the technology moving backwards ?
No , I do n't think so .
The tech has advanced so much since I was in school !
( Grad high school in 1992 .
) But if it 's not used right , it may as well not be there at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was the IT guy in a K-12 school district for 7 years.
I've seen the good and bad of technology in a classroom.
The biggest thing is to remember that technology is just a tool.
Nothing more, nothing less.
That classroom PC (and other electronics) should be used to *enhance* the education and reinforce the lessons, not replace the teacher.
And that tool is only as useful as the user makes it.
I can buy a $100 hammer, but it won't put that nail in the wall by itself.
If I want a hole in the wall, I can't go to WalMart and buy a hole.
I buy a drill to make my hole.
Same with a PC.
It can't teach the kids by itself, it has to be used properly.However, too often I saw teachers dump kids in front of a PC as little more than a babysitter.
The kids would play an outdated math game and knew exactly how to "cheat" the game.
(ex. - Doing basic math the kids had to input the answer to 8 + 7, they'd start at 12 and just keep increasing the answer by 1 until getting it right.
)So, is the technology moving backwards?
No, I don't think so.
The tech has advanced so much since I was in school!
(Grad high school in 1992.
)  But if it's not used right, it may as well not be there at all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636618</id>
	<title>Stadard of living is better by every quant measure</title>
	<author>EMB Numbers</author>
	<datestamp>1262530980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Picking arbitrary dates around 1962:</p><p>1962 Life expectancy at birth: 66.9 years<br>2005 Life expectancy at birth: 74.89<br>source <a href="http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea\_lif\_exp\_at\_bir\_mal\_yea-life-expectancy-birth-male-years&amp;date=1962" title="nationmaster.com">http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea\_lif\_exp\_at\_bir\_mal\_yea-life-expectancy-birth-male-years&amp;date=1962</a> [nationmaster.com]</p><p>1970 cost of food as percentage of income: 14\%<br>2005 cost of food as percentage of income: 9.3\%<br>source <a href="http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=429074" title="google.com">http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=429074</a> [google.com]</p><p>1960 home ownership rate: 61.9\%<br>2000 home ownership rate: 66.2\%<br>source <a href="http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing/census/historic/owner.html" title="census.gov">http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing/census/historic/owner.html</a> [census.gov]</p><p>1960 Percent of the Population 25 Years and Over with a High School Diploma or More: 41.1\%<br>2000 Percent of the Population 25 Years and Over with a High School Diploma or More: 80.4\%<br>source <a href="http://www.census.gov/population/socdemo/education/phct41/US.pdf" title="census.gov">http://www.census.gov/population/socdemo/education/phct41/US.pdf</a> [census.gov]</p><p>1960 percent of the Population 25 Years and Over with a Bachelor&rsquo;s Degree or More: 7.7\%<br>2000 percent of the Population 25 Years and Over with a Bachelor&rsquo;s Degree or More: 24.4\%</p><p>source  <a href="http://www.census.gov/population/socdemo/education/phct41/US.pdf" title="census.gov">http://www.census.gov/population/socdemo/education/phct41/US.pdf</a> [census.gov]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Picking arbitrary dates around 1962 : 1962 Life expectancy at birth : 66.9 years2005 Life expectancy at birth : 74.89source http : //www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea \ _lif \ _exp \ _at \ _bir \ _mal \ _yea-life-expectancy-birth-male-years&amp;date = 1962 [ nationmaster.com ] 1970 cost of food as percentage of income : 14 \ % 2005 cost of food as percentage of income : 9.3 \ % source http : //answers.google.com/answers/threadview ? id = 429074 [ google.com ] 1960 home ownership rate : 61.9 \ % 2000 home ownership rate : 66.2 \ % source http : //www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing/census/historic/owner.html [ census.gov ] 1960 Percent of the Population 25 Years and Over with a High School Diploma or More : 41.1 \ % 2000 Percent of the Population 25 Years and Over with a High School Diploma or More : 80.4 \ % source http : //www.census.gov/population/socdemo/education/phct41/US.pdf [ census.gov ] 1960 percent of the Population 25 Years and Over with a Bachelor    s Degree or More : 7.7 \ % 2000 percent of the Population 25 Years and Over with a Bachelor    s Degree or More : 24.4 \ % source http : //www.census.gov/population/socdemo/education/phct41/US.pdf [ census.gov ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Picking arbitrary dates around 1962:1962 Life expectancy at birth: 66.9 years2005 Life expectancy at birth: 74.89source http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea\_lif\_exp\_at\_bir\_mal\_yea-life-expectancy-birth-male-years&amp;date=1962 [nationmaster.com]1970 cost of food as percentage of income: 14\%2005 cost of food as percentage of income: 9.3\%source http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=429074 [google.com]1960 home ownership rate: 61.9\%2000 home ownership rate: 66.2\%source http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing/census/historic/owner.html [census.gov]1960 Percent of the Population 25 Years and Over with a High School Diploma or More: 41.1\%2000 Percent of the Population 25 Years and Over with a High School Diploma or More: 80.4\%source http://www.census.gov/population/socdemo/education/phct41/US.pdf [census.gov]1960 percent of the Population 25 Years and Over with a Bachelor’s Degree or More: 7.7\%2000 percent of the Population 25 Years and Over with a Bachelor’s Degree or More: 24.4\%source  http://www.census.gov/population/socdemo/education/phct41/US.pdf [census.gov]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30639582</id>
	<title>Re:Gadgets may not help.</title>
	<author>tehcyder</author>
	<datestamp>1262613000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>  Really we need to aim our teaching at the brightest students and get the lesser students into work training programs and out of the way of the better students</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Yes, we should give the little fuckers an IQ test at the age of 10, anyone less than 120 gets booted out of school and straight onto the dole.  Oh hold on...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Really we need to aim our teaching at the brightest students and get the lesser students into work training programs and out of the way of the better students Yes , we should give the little fuckers an IQ test at the age of 10 , anyone less than 120 gets booted out of school and straight onto the dole .
Oh hold on.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>  Really we need to aim our teaching at the brightest students and get the lesser students into work training programs and out of the way of the better students

Yes, we should give the little fuckers an IQ test at the age of 10, anyone less than 120 gets booted out of school and straight onto the dole.
Oh hold on...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637260</id>
	<title>Re:Culture, not money</title>
	<author>randyleepublic</author>
	<datestamp>1262537460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The anti-education attitude is a direct product of the drug war.  Another fine dividend from that bit of genius.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The anti-education attitude is a direct product of the drug war .
Another fine dividend from that bit of genius .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The anti-education attitude is a direct product of the drug war.
Another fine dividend from that bit of genius.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634842</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637396</id>
	<title>Re:As Clifford Stoll Said</title>
	<author>SurlyJest</author>
	<datestamp>1262538720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Absolutely correct.  There is no useful "tech" fix for education - it's all in the <i>wetware</i> connection between the one giving the instruction and those receiving it; hardware just does not apply.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Absolutely correct .
There is no useful " tech " fix for education - it 's all in the wetware connection between the one giving the instruction and those receiving it ; hardware just does not apply .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Absolutely correct.
There is no useful "tech" fix for education - it's all in the wetware connection between the one giving the instruction and those receiving it; hardware just does not apply.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634704</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30639046</id>
	<title>Re:This is a joke, right?</title>
	<author>Hognoxious</author>
	<datestamp>1262605680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Calculators are useless for maths.  Pretty good for arithmetic, though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Calculators are useless for maths .
Pretty good for arithmetic , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Calculators are useless for maths.
Pretty good for arithmetic, though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30638136</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635294</id>
	<title>Same problem on Mac</title>
	<author>pubwvj</author>
	<datestamp>1262520720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This same problem happened on the Macintosh. Back under MacOS 9 and before there was a great deal of wonderful children's educational software. The companies consolidated and died off. Much of the software does not work in Classic under MacOS X. Now with Classic being abandoned by Apple even that which did work in Classic is no longer available. It's still great software, just no hardware and operating system to run it. I maintain an older computer for this. I used to have four. I'm down to one. Eventually there will be none. Very sad to lose this resource. Apple should have supported the older software on the newer hardware. Minor cost, minor emulation, major benefit to millions of children.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This same problem happened on the Macintosh .
Back under MacOS 9 and before there was a great deal of wonderful children 's educational software .
The companies consolidated and died off .
Much of the software does not work in Classic under MacOS X. Now with Classic being abandoned by Apple even that which did work in Classic is no longer available .
It 's still great software , just no hardware and operating system to run it .
I maintain an older computer for this .
I used to have four .
I 'm down to one .
Eventually there will be none .
Very sad to lose this resource .
Apple should have supported the older software on the newer hardware .
Minor cost , minor emulation , major benefit to millions of children .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This same problem happened on the Macintosh.
Back under MacOS 9 and before there was a great deal of wonderful children's educational software.
The companies consolidated and died off.
Much of the software does not work in Classic under MacOS X. Now with Classic being abandoned by Apple even that which did work in Classic is no longer available.
It's still great software, just no hardware and operating system to run it.
I maintain an older computer for this.
I used to have four.
I'm down to one.
Eventually there will be none.
Very sad to lose this resource.
Apple should have supported the older software on the newer hardware.
Minor cost, minor emulation, major benefit to millions of children.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634924</id>
	<title>Re:Article is a troll</title>
	<author>The MAZZTer</author>
	<datestamp>1262518380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not really the same thing... I think the idea was that Product X is touted as revolutionary, then later Product Y, which for being four decades later is curiously less advanced.  Though once you look at the relative prices, it makes sense.</p><p>Your example would work if AT&amp;T had demonstrated a hologram phone 40 years ago.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not really the same thing... I think the idea was that Product X is touted as revolutionary , then later Product Y , which for being four decades later is curiously less advanced .
Though once you look at the relative prices , it makes sense.Your example would work if AT&amp;T had demonstrated a hologram phone 40 years ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not really the same thing... I think the idea was that Product X is touted as revolutionary, then later Product Y, which for being four decades later is curiously less advanced.
Though once you look at the relative prices, it makes sense.Your example would work if AT&amp;T had demonstrated a hologram phone 40 years ago.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634754</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635270</id>
	<title>Fun and Education</title>
	<author>KalvinB</author>
	<datestamp>1262520660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Fun" is not the means to an education it is the primary function of it.</p><p>I use my education to do a lot of fun things.  I do not use fun to get an education.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Fun " is not the means to an education it is the primary function of it.I use my education to do a lot of fun things .
I do not use fun to get an education .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Fun" is not the means to an education it is the primary function of it.I use my education to do a lot of fun things.
I do not use fun to get an education.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634704</id>
	<title>As Clifford Stoll Said</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262516940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Computers don't emit "smartness radiation."</p><p>Computers in the class room have been around at least 25 years.  There was an Apple ][ in every classroom when I was a kid.  We used it to die of dysentery on the Oregon Trail.  Did we learn anything about history?  No.  We learned to that all that settlers needed was a 99 rounds of ammunition.</p><p>Computers in the classroom are just the latest incarnation of the whiz-bang technology that would magically make improve education and test scores, without requiring any more work on the child's, parent's, or teacher's part.  Just like television, movies, and filmstrips were hailed as an educator's silver bullet generations before.  (Stoll <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Silicon-Snake-Oil-Thoughts-Information/dp/0385419945" title="amazon.com" rel="nofollow">wrote about this</a> [amazon.com] 14 years ago, and it stills holds true.)</p><p>Anyone that has attended class in any "e-learning" classroom, can attest that of the regular occurrences of projectors that don't work.  Video and audio links that fail.  Overly sensitive microphones and the like.   The amount of time wasted trying to just set things up before instruction can begin is non-trivial, and easily can accumulate to entire missed days of instruction.   No thank you.</p><p>Watching passively, and just clicking "next" is not education.  The reason why it's used for occupational training, is that because no one wants to acutally teach, nor learn.  It's indemnification.</p><p>If you really want to improve education, how about removing the distractions, and actually teaching out of the book?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Computers do n't emit " smartness radiation .
" Computers in the class room have been around at least 25 years .
There was an Apple ] [ in every classroom when I was a kid .
We used it to die of dysentery on the Oregon Trail .
Did we learn anything about history ?
No. We learned to that all that settlers needed was a 99 rounds of ammunition.Computers in the classroom are just the latest incarnation of the whiz-bang technology that would magically make improve education and test scores , without requiring any more work on the child 's , parent 's , or teacher 's part .
Just like television , movies , and filmstrips were hailed as an educator 's silver bullet generations before .
( Stoll wrote about this [ amazon.com ] 14 years ago , and it stills holds true .
) Anyone that has attended class in any " e-learning " classroom , can attest that of the regular occurrences of projectors that do n't work .
Video and audio links that fail .
Overly sensitive microphones and the like .
The amount of time wasted trying to just set things up before instruction can begin is non-trivial , and easily can accumulate to entire missed days of instruction .
No thank you.Watching passively , and just clicking " next " is not education .
The reason why it 's used for occupational training , is that because no one wants to acutally teach , nor learn .
It 's indemnification.If you really want to improve education , how about removing the distractions , and actually teaching out of the book ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Computers don't emit "smartness radiation.
"Computers in the class room have been around at least 25 years.
There was an Apple ][ in every classroom when I was a kid.
We used it to die of dysentery on the Oregon Trail.
Did we learn anything about history?
No.  We learned to that all that settlers needed was a 99 rounds of ammunition.Computers in the classroom are just the latest incarnation of the whiz-bang technology that would magically make improve education and test scores, without requiring any more work on the child's, parent's, or teacher's part.
Just like television, movies, and filmstrips were hailed as an educator's silver bullet generations before.
(Stoll wrote about this [amazon.com] 14 years ago, and it stills holds true.
)Anyone that has attended class in any "e-learning" classroom, can attest that of the regular occurrences of projectors that don't work.
Video and audio links that fail.
Overly sensitive microphones and the like.
The amount of time wasted trying to just set things up before instruction can begin is non-trivial, and easily can accumulate to entire missed days of instruction.
No thank you.Watching passively, and just clicking "next" is not education.
The reason why it's used for occupational training, is that because no one wants to acutally teach, nor learn.
It's indemnification.If you really want to improve education, how about removing the distractions, and actually teaching out of the book?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634882</id>
	<title>last useful ed tech was...</title>
	<author>another\_larson</author>
	<datestamp>1262518080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What is the most recent genuinely useful educational technology? Word processing, maybe? That's a good generation old, now.
<br>
<br>
It seems like technologists are very keen to apply the latest and greatest to education, when plain-old pencil and paper mostly work fine.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What is the most recent genuinely useful educational technology ?
Word processing , maybe ?
That 's a good generation old , now .
It seems like technologists are very keen to apply the latest and greatest to education , when plain-old pencil and paper mostly work fine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is the most recent genuinely useful educational technology?
Word processing, maybe?
That's a good generation old, now.
It seems like technologists are very keen to apply the latest and greatest to education, when plain-old pencil and paper mostly work fine.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634606</id>
	<title>Re:This is a joke, right?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262516340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, at least blacks will only increase by 1\%.  I guess the Jews are pretty well on-track in their pursuit of the Eternal Revenge against Whites.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , at least blacks will only increase by 1 \ % .
I guess the Jews are pretty well on-track in their pursuit of the Eternal Revenge against Whites .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, at least blacks will only increase by 1\%.
I guess the Jews are pretty well on-track in their pursuit of the Eternal Revenge against Whites.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637584</id>
	<title>That rules out books too</title>
	<author>syousef</author>
	<datestamp>1262540760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Would you give an iPhone to a kid who is constantly throwing things around and having temper tantrums?</i></p><p><i>No, but I wouldn't give them a book either. I speak from experience. My one year old son has torn several "plastic coated" books, and likes to make puddles with his sippy cup at the moment. Last one, on the weekend was on our Guitar Hero Drum Kit, which thankfully survived.</i></p><p><i>The bottom line is you have to teach the child that destructive behaviour is undesirable and won't be tolerated. Of course they have to be old enough that you're sure they'll understand. You also have to recognise that infants aren't going to have much in the way of common sense or dependability. By the time they're in primary school though, if they're still throwing tantrums and destroying things often, the parent's done something wrong.</i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Would you give an iPhone to a kid who is constantly throwing things around and having temper tantrums ? No , but I would n't give them a book either .
I speak from experience .
My one year old son has torn several " plastic coated " books , and likes to make puddles with his sippy cup at the moment .
Last one , on the weekend was on our Guitar Hero Drum Kit , which thankfully survived.The bottom line is you have to teach the child that destructive behaviour is undesirable and wo n't be tolerated .
Of course they have to be old enough that you 're sure they 'll understand .
You also have to recognise that infants are n't going to have much in the way of common sense or dependability .
By the time they 're in primary school though , if they 're still throwing tantrums and destroying things often , the parent 's done something wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Would you give an iPhone to a kid who is constantly throwing things around and having temper tantrums?No, but I wouldn't give them a book either.
I speak from experience.
My one year old son has torn several "plastic coated" books, and likes to make puddles with his sippy cup at the moment.
Last one, on the weekend was on our Guitar Hero Drum Kit, which thankfully survived.The bottom line is you have to teach the child that destructive behaviour is undesirable and won't be tolerated.
Of course they have to be old enough that you're sure they'll understand.
You also have to recognise that infants aren't going to have much in the way of common sense or dependability.
By the time they're in primary school though, if they're still throwing tantrums and destroying things often, the parent's done something wrong.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30676594</id>
	<title>Re:Yes.</title>
	<author>frogzilla</author>
	<datestamp>1262780520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thank you for expressing this so well.  I completely agree.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thank you for expressing this so well .
I completely agree .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thank you for expressing this so well.
I completely agree.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635490</id>
	<title>Gadgets may not help.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262522040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>            The US education system is troubled in such a way that devices may not help at all. Teachers are under serious pressure to aim their teaching at the middle and lower achievers which causes better students to be neglected. It is the only way to meet compulsory testing goals. After all the brighter students will do well on such tests despite being neglected whereas the mediocre middle and down right lousy students will score poorly. These days those scores can cost a teacher their job.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Really we need to aim our teaching at the brightest students and get the lesser students into work training programs and out of the way of the better students. Parents are the real problem in this regard. They bombard every official when their kid does poorly. And elected types tend to think in terms of the number of votes a position on an issue will get them.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; England actually had a form of the draft that sent many young men into the coal mines. Others were directed into the armed forces. These were people not deemed able to succeed at higher callings due to poor school performance. It kept coal cheap and the armed forces populated. Other European nations weeded out lesser students after sixth grade and subjected them to real training as cooks or industrial workers.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; If school courses are designed to strain the straight A students a bit the quality of school graduates is excellent. Try to redeem the mediocre middle and the schools fall apart.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The US education system is troubled in such a way that devices may not help at all .
Teachers are under serious pressure to aim their teaching at the middle and lower achievers which causes better students to be neglected .
It is the only way to meet compulsory testing goals .
After all the brighter students will do well on such tests despite being neglected whereas the mediocre middle and down right lousy students will score poorly .
These days those scores can cost a teacher their job .
                          Really we need to aim our teaching at the brightest students and get the lesser students into work training programs and out of the way of the better students .
Parents are the real problem in this regard .
They bombard every official when their kid does poorly .
And elected types tend to think in terms of the number of votes a position on an issue will get them .
                          England actually had a form of the draft that sent many young men into the coal mines .
Others were directed into the armed forces .
These were people not deemed able to succeed at higher callings due to poor school performance .
It kept coal cheap and the armed forces populated .
Other European nations weeded out lesser students after sixth grade and subjected them to real training as cooks or industrial workers .
                          If school courses are designed to strain the straight A students a bit the quality of school graduates is excellent .
Try to redeem the mediocre middle and the schools fall apart .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>            The US education system is troubled in such a way that devices may not help at all.
Teachers are under serious pressure to aim their teaching at the middle and lower achievers which causes better students to be neglected.
It is the only way to meet compulsory testing goals.
After all the brighter students will do well on such tests despite being neglected whereas the mediocre middle and down right lousy students will score poorly.
These days those scores can cost a teacher their job.
                          Really we need to aim our teaching at the brightest students and get the lesser students into work training programs and out of the way of the better students.
Parents are the real problem in this regard.
They bombard every official when their kid does poorly.
And elected types tend to think in terms of the number of votes a position on an issue will get them.
                          England actually had a form of the draft that sent many young men into the coal mines.
Others were directed into the armed forces.
These were people not deemed able to succeed at higher callings due to poor school performance.
It kept coal cheap and the armed forces populated.
Other European nations weeded out lesser students after sixth grade and subjected them to real training as cooks or industrial workers.
                          If school courses are designed to strain the straight A students a bit the quality of school graduates is excellent.
Try to redeem the mediocre middle and the schools fall apart.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30641954</id>
	<title>The special ed perspective</title>
	<author>zerofoo</author>
	<datestamp>1262625660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm surprised that lots of comments here focus on the uselessness of technology in the classroom, instead of how technology does actually improve classroom instruction - on Slashdot no less.</p><p>Technology is not the "magic-bullet" for educating our youth.  There is no "magic-bullet".  The realization that is being generally accepted is that all students learn differently.  Some more so than others.  Our school teaches kids with dyslexia and mild Asperger's syndrome, and these kids, without a doubt, learn much differently than you or I.  Technology helps tailor the instruction to the individual student's needs.</p><p>Many people here are extolling the virtues of pencil and paper - that's great if you can read and write, but there are tons of kids out there who have encoding/decoding language difficulties.  Should these different students not learn science, math, or history due to their language problems?</p><p>Computers are an outstanding tool for these kids.  They can write papers, even though they can not "hand-write" papers.  They can learn mathematics without the frustration of attempting to read a math text.</p><p>The other argument for technology in the classroom:  Many instructional materials, and "new knowledge" never make it to print.  There are tons of videos made by REALLY GOOD teachers that can help less skilled teachers in a classroom.  Sure, it would be nice to have teaching perfection in every classroom, but I can tell you first hand, there aren't enough of these perfect teachers to go around.  Online video distribution does maximize the impact of these stellar teachers, and exposes kids to varying teaching styles.</p><p>Ultimately, the student, the parent, and the teacher are responsible for getting that student an education.  Technology can only assist, it can't do the work.</p><p>-ted</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm surprised that lots of comments here focus on the uselessness of technology in the classroom , instead of how technology does actually improve classroom instruction - on Slashdot no less.Technology is not the " magic-bullet " for educating our youth .
There is no " magic-bullet " .
The realization that is being generally accepted is that all students learn differently .
Some more so than others .
Our school teaches kids with dyslexia and mild Asperger 's syndrome , and these kids , without a doubt , learn much differently than you or I. Technology helps tailor the instruction to the individual student 's needs.Many people here are extolling the virtues of pencil and paper - that 's great if you can read and write , but there are tons of kids out there who have encoding/decoding language difficulties .
Should these different students not learn science , math , or history due to their language problems ? Computers are an outstanding tool for these kids .
They can write papers , even though they can not " hand-write " papers .
They can learn mathematics without the frustration of attempting to read a math text.The other argument for technology in the classroom : Many instructional materials , and " new knowledge " never make it to print .
There are tons of videos made by REALLY GOOD teachers that can help less skilled teachers in a classroom .
Sure , it would be nice to have teaching perfection in every classroom , but I can tell you first hand , there are n't enough of these perfect teachers to go around .
Online video distribution does maximize the impact of these stellar teachers , and exposes kids to varying teaching styles.Ultimately , the student , the parent , and the teacher are responsible for getting that student an education .
Technology can only assist , it ca n't do the work.-ted</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm surprised that lots of comments here focus on the uselessness of technology in the classroom, instead of how technology does actually improve classroom instruction - on Slashdot no less.Technology is not the "magic-bullet" for educating our youth.
There is no "magic-bullet".
The realization that is being generally accepted is that all students learn differently.
Some more so than others.
Our school teaches kids with dyslexia and mild Asperger's syndrome, and these kids, without a doubt, learn much differently than you or I.  Technology helps tailor the instruction to the individual student's needs.Many people here are extolling the virtues of pencil and paper - that's great if you can read and write, but there are tons of kids out there who have encoding/decoding language difficulties.
Should these different students not learn science, math, or history due to their language problems?Computers are an outstanding tool for these kids.
They can write papers, even though they can not "hand-write" papers.
They can learn mathematics without the frustration of attempting to read a math text.The other argument for technology in the classroom:  Many instructional materials, and "new knowledge" never make it to print.
There are tons of videos made by REALLY GOOD teachers that can help less skilled teachers in a classroom.
Sure, it would be nice to have teaching perfection in every classroom, but I can tell you first hand, there aren't enough of these perfect teachers to go around.
Online video distribution does maximize the impact of these stellar teachers, and exposes kids to varying teaching styles.Ultimately, the student, the parent, and the teacher are responsible for getting that student an education.
Technology can only assist, it can't do the work.-ted</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635220</id>
	<title>Re:This is a joke, right?</title>
	<author>Runaway1956</author>
	<datestamp>1262520360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Gotta HAVE kids, before you can educate kids.  White Americans are to preoccupied with gay marriage, peter puffing, and fudge packing to have kids.  But, hey, when they aren't being queer, the redneck element runs around proclaiming their superiority.  Truth in advertising, right?  It must be true.  And, all the superior asswipes will die out soon.</p><p>No, I'm not Black, Asian, Latino - I'm a mongrel mixed breed.  I can badmouth ALL the ignorant bastids, 'cause I'm related to them.</p><p>Stupid cocksuckers deserve to lose whatever strength in numbers that they've enjoyed for the last couple centuries.  When the Latin Americans finally become a majority, you can bet all those queer bastards will lose whatever silly "rights" they have voted for themselves.  Then, once again, life will become more normal, and a queer will be called a queer.</p><p>Of course, you see the same thing in Europe - declining fertility rates, increasing foreign populattions, etc.</p><p>The end of the "White Man's Dynasty" is approaching.  And, they'll be remembered as a bunch of peter puffing assholes, much as we remember ancient Greece.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Got ta HAVE kids , before you can educate kids .
White Americans are to preoccupied with gay marriage , peter puffing , and fudge packing to have kids .
But , hey , when they are n't being queer , the redneck element runs around proclaiming their superiority .
Truth in advertising , right ?
It must be true .
And , all the superior asswipes will die out soon.No , I 'm not Black , Asian , Latino - I 'm a mongrel mixed breed .
I can badmouth ALL the ignorant bastids , 'cause I 'm related to them.Stupid cocksuckers deserve to lose whatever strength in numbers that they 've enjoyed for the last couple centuries .
When the Latin Americans finally become a majority , you can bet all those queer bastards will lose whatever silly " rights " they have voted for themselves .
Then , once again , life will become more normal , and a queer will be called a queer.Of course , you see the same thing in Europe - declining fertility rates , increasing foreign populattions , etc.The end of the " White Man 's Dynasty " is approaching .
And , they 'll be remembered as a bunch of peter puffing assholes , much as we remember ancient Greece .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gotta HAVE kids, before you can educate kids.
White Americans are to preoccupied with gay marriage, peter puffing, and fudge packing to have kids.
But, hey, when they aren't being queer, the redneck element runs around proclaiming their superiority.
Truth in advertising, right?
It must be true.
And, all the superior asswipes will die out soon.No, I'm not Black, Asian, Latino - I'm a mongrel mixed breed.
I can badmouth ALL the ignorant bastids, 'cause I'm related to them.Stupid cocksuckers deserve to lose whatever strength in numbers that they've enjoyed for the last couple centuries.
When the Latin Americans finally become a majority, you can bet all those queer bastards will lose whatever silly "rights" they have voted for themselves.
Then, once again, life will become more normal, and a queer will be called a queer.Of course, you see the same thing in Europe - declining fertility rates, increasing foreign populattions, etc.The end of the "White Man's Dynasty" is approaching.
And, they'll be remembered as a bunch of peter puffing assholes, much as we remember ancient Greece.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634850</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30638804</id>
	<title>Re:Simple Rugged Durable = Better</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262601900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah? In that case why aren't they still using books?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah ?
In that case why are n't they still using books ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah?
In that case why aren't they still using books?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30639258</id>
	<title>Re:This is a joke, right?</title>
	<author>xaxa</author>
	<datestamp>1262609160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What <i>is</i> the point of being quick (rather than merely capable) at long division? If you want useful skills for life, teaching about calculating compound interest, sales tax / VAT, proportions (do I buy the 1L or the 750ml when the prices are X and Y), measurement, etc is important. If you want to teach maths then long division isn't needed.</p><p>I much prefer Bob the Builder knowing how to use his calculator reliably to work out quantities then making mistakes with long division, or making a guess. And I'd like to see Becky the Bimbo use hers, before she signs up for a &pound;35/month 24-month contract for a phone. If they aren't taught how to use a calculator in school but instead have to spend loads of time working through sums they're going to get pissed off with "maths" and not learn anything useful.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What is the point of being quick ( rather than merely capable ) at long division ?
If you want useful skills for life , teaching about calculating compound interest , sales tax / VAT , proportions ( do I buy the 1L or the 750ml when the prices are X and Y ) , measurement , etc is important .
If you want to teach maths then long division is n't needed.I much prefer Bob the Builder knowing how to use his calculator reliably to work out quantities then making mistakes with long division , or making a guess .
And I 'd like to see Becky the Bimbo use hers , before she signs up for a   35/month 24-month contract for a phone .
If they are n't taught how to use a calculator in school but instead have to spend loads of time working through sums they 're going to get pissed off with " maths " and not learn anything useful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is the point of being quick (rather than merely capable) at long division?
If you want useful skills for life, teaching about calculating compound interest, sales tax / VAT, proportions (do I buy the 1L or the 750ml when the prices are X and Y), measurement, etc is important.
If you want to teach maths then long division isn't needed.I much prefer Bob the Builder knowing how to use his calculator reliably to work out quantities then making mistakes with long division, or making a guess.
And I'd like to see Becky the Bimbo use hers, before she signs up for a £35/month 24-month contract for a phone.
If they aren't taught how to use a calculator in school but instead have to spend loads of time working through sums they're going to get pissed off with "maths" and not learn anything useful.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30638136</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636778</id>
	<title>iPhone for my 3 year old</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262532600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I gave my old 1g iPhone to my 3 year old daughter. She's been using one for a year now to play games and take photos and listen to music. it no longer has a sim card and is set up with just apps and content for her now.</p><p>I sincerely hope the schools she attends can do better than what I'm hearing or she is gonig to have a tough time adjusting to the low fidelity expectations.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I gave my old 1g iPhone to my 3 year old daughter .
She 's been using one for a year now to play games and take photos and listen to music .
it no longer has a sim card and is set up with just apps and content for her now.I sincerely hope the schools she attends can do better than what I 'm hearing or she is gonig to have a tough time adjusting to the low fidelity expectations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I gave my old 1g iPhone to my 3 year old daughter.
She's been using one for a year now to play games and take photos and listen to music.
it no longer has a sim card and is set up with just apps and content for her now.I sincerely hope the schools she attends can do better than what I'm hearing or she is gonig to have a tough time adjusting to the low fidelity expectations.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634878</id>
	<title>Two answers, and a challenge (ask)</title>
	<author>davecrusoe</author>
	<datestamp>1262518080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Technologies are only part of the solution - not at all the entirety!

</p><p>However, to avoid digressing from the topic of your question, my answers are several:

</p><p>First, there is simply not the same incentive to create educational technologies as there is to create faster processors or larger hard drives. The benefit of a faster computer is clear and immediately actionable. The results of improved educational opportunities don't become clear for quite some time - 20 years or more.

</p><p>Second, and more importantly, the comparison of Moore's law to education is inherently incorrect. Would your supposition be that the human cognition must double its... processing capability?... every few years, guided by increasingly powerful educational technologies?

</p><p>If there is an opportunity, it's the opportunity that we're trying to capitalize upon: that armed with an understanding of how people learn, and coupled with the low costs of producing high-quality educational technologies, we can begin to make a difference.

</p><p>The most important thing, in making that difference, is that technologies are used in such a way that they add something valuable to the experience of learning - whether it be visualizations with an explanation beyond what a teacher can reasonably provide; or equity; etc. Otherwise, the time required to set computers up, train teachers to use, develop lessons, etc., simply detracts from the educational potential of schools.

</p><p>If anyone here - LAMP volunteers, especially - would like to become involved in making that happen, <a href="http://www.plml.org/contact" title="plml.org">please let us know</a> [plml.org]! But, in the meantime, please don't use Moore's law as a point of comparison.

</p><p>Cheers,
<br>--Dave</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Technologies are only part of the solution - not at all the entirety !
However , to avoid digressing from the topic of your question , my answers are several : First , there is simply not the same incentive to create educational technologies as there is to create faster processors or larger hard drives .
The benefit of a faster computer is clear and immediately actionable .
The results of improved educational opportunities do n't become clear for quite some time - 20 years or more .
Second , and more importantly , the comparison of Moore 's law to education is inherently incorrect .
Would your supposition be that the human cognition must double its... processing capability ? .. .
every few years , guided by increasingly powerful educational technologies ?
If there is an opportunity , it 's the opportunity that we 're trying to capitalize upon : that armed with an understanding of how people learn , and coupled with the low costs of producing high-quality educational technologies , we can begin to make a difference .
The most important thing , in making that difference , is that technologies are used in such a way that they add something valuable to the experience of learning - whether it be visualizations with an explanation beyond what a teacher can reasonably provide ; or equity ; etc .
Otherwise , the time required to set computers up , train teachers to use , develop lessons , etc. , simply detracts from the educational potential of schools .
If anyone here - LAMP volunteers , especially - would like to become involved in making that happen , please let us know [ plml.org ] !
But , in the meantime , please do n't use Moore 's law as a point of comparison .
Cheers , --Dave</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Technologies are only part of the solution - not at all the entirety!
However, to avoid digressing from the topic of your question, my answers are several:

First, there is simply not the same incentive to create educational technologies as there is to create faster processors or larger hard drives.
The benefit of a faster computer is clear and immediately actionable.
The results of improved educational opportunities don't become clear for quite some time - 20 years or more.
Second, and more importantly, the comparison of Moore's law to education is inherently incorrect.
Would your supposition be that the human cognition must double its... processing capability?...
every few years, guided by increasingly powerful educational technologies?
If there is an opportunity, it's the opportunity that we're trying to capitalize upon: that armed with an understanding of how people learn, and coupled with the low costs of producing high-quality educational technologies, we can begin to make a difference.
The most important thing, in making that difference, is that technologies are used in such a way that they add something valuable to the experience of learning - whether it be visualizations with an explanation beyond what a teacher can reasonably provide; or equity; etc.
Otherwise, the time required to set computers up, train teachers to use, develop lessons, etc., simply detracts from the educational potential of schools.
If anyone here - LAMP volunteers, especially - would like to become involved in making that happen, please let us know [plml.org]!
But, in the meantime, please don't use Moore's law as a point of comparison.
Cheers,
--Dave</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634684</id>
	<title>Re:Yes.</title>
	<author>Darkness404</author>
	<datestamp>1262516760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Exactly. Things like this show exactly whats wrong with education: there is no thinking involved. If we want to use education to help people become more than just physical laborers, they need to really learn. They need to learn reading using books they -want- to read. When I was in early elementary school, my parents tell me that I wouldn't ever read any fiction books because I thought they were stupid. Looking today at most early fiction books, I can see that my younger me was exactly right. Now thats not to say I didn't read, far from it, I think I checked out every single non-fiction book that interested me at least twice in my old elementary school library, but fiction until about 5th grade simply didn't interest me. Everything worked out in the end, the plots generally sucked and there was not anything... interesting in them. Thankfully, children s literature has improved some with the success of Harry Potter, but in the days before that, nothing but happy stories, half-baked "mystery" novels and the like thrived. <br> <br>

I fail to see how this will motivate kids to learn more than giving them -real- things to do and having them doing it. Give them an RPG, that will teach them how to read, let them play war games, they will learn geography and history, etc.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly .
Things like this show exactly whats wrong with education : there is no thinking involved .
If we want to use education to help people become more than just physical laborers , they need to really learn .
They need to learn reading using books they -want- to read .
When I was in early elementary school , my parents tell me that I would n't ever read any fiction books because I thought they were stupid .
Looking today at most early fiction books , I can see that my younger me was exactly right .
Now thats not to say I did n't read , far from it , I think I checked out every single non-fiction book that interested me at least twice in my old elementary school library , but fiction until about 5th grade simply did n't interest me .
Everything worked out in the end , the plots generally sucked and there was not anything... interesting in them .
Thankfully , children s literature has improved some with the success of Harry Potter , but in the days before that , nothing but happy stories , half-baked " mystery " novels and the like thrived .
I fail to see how this will motivate kids to learn more than giving them -real- things to do and having them doing it .
Give them an RPG , that will teach them how to read , let them play war games , they will learn geography and history , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly.
Things like this show exactly whats wrong with education: there is no thinking involved.
If we want to use education to help people become more than just physical laborers, they need to really learn.
They need to learn reading using books they -want- to read.
When I was in early elementary school, my parents tell me that I wouldn't ever read any fiction books because I thought they were stupid.
Looking today at most early fiction books, I can see that my younger me was exactly right.
Now thats not to say I didn't read, far from it, I think I checked out every single non-fiction book that interested me at least twice in my old elementary school library, but fiction until about 5th grade simply didn't interest me.
Everything worked out in the end, the plots generally sucked and there was not anything... interesting in them.
Thankfully, children s literature has improved some with the success of Harry Potter, but in the days before that, nothing but happy stories, half-baked "mystery" novels and the like thrived.
I fail to see how this will motivate kids to learn more than giving them -real- things to do and having them doing it.
Give them an RPG, that will teach them how to read, let them play war games, they will learn geography and history, etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637968</id>
	<title>Re:Teachers Colleges are not teaching technology</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262546820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Teacher salaries are abysmal, there's a ton of bureaucratic bullshit to deal with, and various school program funding (except football) is being cut all over the place. Man, I wonder why we don't get a lot of smart people applying to be teachers...<br> <br>
The exception are those that just love to teach. I would, if I didn't have at least twice as high of a salary curve outside of teaching. Maybe when I retire, or get enough money saved up to not need to worry about much income.<br> <br>
- Pitabred</htmltext>
<tokenext>Teacher salaries are abysmal , there 's a ton of bureaucratic bullshit to deal with , and various school program funding ( except football ) is being cut all over the place .
Man , I wonder why we do n't get a lot of smart people applying to be teachers.. . The exception are those that just love to teach .
I would , if I did n't have at least twice as high of a salary curve outside of teaching .
Maybe when I retire , or get enough money saved up to not need to worry about much income .
- Pitabred</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Teacher salaries are abysmal, there's a ton of bureaucratic bullshit to deal with, and various school program funding (except football) is being cut all over the place.
Man, I wonder why we don't get a lot of smart people applying to be teachers... 
The exception are those that just love to teach.
I would, if I didn't have at least twice as high of a salary curve outside of teaching.
Maybe when I retire, or get enough money saved up to not need to worry about much income.
- Pitabred</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634890</id>
	<title>Re:As Clifford Stoll Said</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262518140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Computers in the class room have been around at least 25 years. There was an Apple ][ in every classroom when I was a kid. We used it to die of dysentery on the Oregon Trail. Did we learn anything about history? No. We learned to that all that settlers needed was a 99 rounds of ammunition.</p> </div><p>

But did you learn something about computers? Chances you did learn something if you are now on Slashdot. The role of computers should be to provide a shiny toy for students to want to figure out how it works. To learn reading to play an RPG, to learn history to learn the backstory behind war games, etc.</p><p><div class="quote"><p> Computers in the classroom are just the latest incarnation of the whiz-bang technology that would magically make improve education and test scores, without requiring any more work on the child's, parent's, or teacher's part. Just like television, movies, and filmstrips were hailed as an educator's silver bullet generations before. (Stoll wrote about this 14 years ago, and it stills holds true.)</p> </div><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...And how many kids who are have graduated still remember watching The Magic School Bus and Bill Nye the Science Guy? My guess is a lot of them.</p><p><div class="quote"><p> Anyone that has attended class in any "e-learning" classroom, can attest that of the regular occurrences of projectors that don't work. Video and audio links that fail. Overly sensitive microphones and the like. The amount of time wasted trying to just set things up before instruction can begin is non-trivial, and easily can accumulate to entire missed days of instruction. No thank you.</p> </div><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...Mostly because teachers and professors are absolutely clueless on technology having long lost the ability to learn after their last degree</p><p><div class="quote"><p> If you really want to improve education, how about removing the distractions, and actually teaching out of the book?</p> </div><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...Because that would be removing over half the class and relying on a book that is usually severely out of date?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Computers in the class room have been around at least 25 years .
There was an Apple ] [ in every classroom when I was a kid .
We used it to die of dysentery on the Oregon Trail .
Did we learn anything about history ?
No. We learned to that all that settlers needed was a 99 rounds of ammunition .
But did you learn something about computers ?
Chances you did learn something if you are now on Slashdot .
The role of computers should be to provide a shiny toy for students to want to figure out how it works .
To learn reading to play an RPG , to learn history to learn the backstory behind war games , etc .
Computers in the classroom are just the latest incarnation of the whiz-bang technology that would magically make improve education and test scores , without requiring any more work on the child 's , parent 's , or teacher 's part .
Just like television , movies , and filmstrips were hailed as an educator 's silver bullet generations before .
( Stoll wrote about this 14 years ago , and it stills holds true .
) ...And how many kids who are have graduated still remember watching The Magic School Bus and Bill Nye the Science Guy ?
My guess is a lot of them .
Anyone that has attended class in any " e-learning " classroom , can attest that of the regular occurrences of projectors that do n't work .
Video and audio links that fail .
Overly sensitive microphones and the like .
The amount of time wasted trying to just set things up before instruction can begin is non-trivial , and easily can accumulate to entire missed days of instruction .
No thank you .
...Mostly because teachers and professors are absolutely clueless on technology having long lost the ability to learn after their last degree If you really want to improve education , how about removing the distractions , and actually teaching out of the book ?
...Because that would be removing over half the class and relying on a book that is usually severely out of date ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Computers in the class room have been around at least 25 years.
There was an Apple ][ in every classroom when I was a kid.
We used it to die of dysentery on the Oregon Trail.
Did we learn anything about history?
No. We learned to that all that settlers needed was a 99 rounds of ammunition.
But did you learn something about computers?
Chances you did learn something if you are now on Slashdot.
The role of computers should be to provide a shiny toy for students to want to figure out how it works.
To learn reading to play an RPG, to learn history to learn the backstory behind war games, etc.
Computers in the classroom are just the latest incarnation of the whiz-bang technology that would magically make improve education and test scores, without requiring any more work on the child's, parent's, or teacher's part.
Just like television, movies, and filmstrips were hailed as an educator's silver bullet generations before.
(Stoll wrote about this 14 years ago, and it stills holds true.
)  ...And how many kids who are have graduated still remember watching The Magic School Bus and Bill Nye the Science Guy?
My guess is a lot of them.
Anyone that has attended class in any "e-learning" classroom, can attest that of the regular occurrences of projectors that don't work.
Video and audio links that fail.
Overly sensitive microphones and the like.
The amount of time wasted trying to just set things up before instruction can begin is non-trivial, and easily can accumulate to entire missed days of instruction.
No thank you.
...Mostly because teachers and professors are absolutely clueless on technology having long lost the ability to learn after their last degree If you really want to improve education, how about removing the distractions, and actually teaching out of the book?
...Because that would be removing over half the class and relying on a book that is usually severely out of date?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634704</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30642820</id>
	<title>Re:Simple Rugged Durable = Better</title>
	<author>chelberg</author>
	<datestamp>1262628840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The issue in my mind isn't about whether the tech gadget is getting better and/or cheaper, the issue is why education technology (including paper/pencil/books/crayons, etc. as well as computer based) hasn't progressed much in many many years.</p><p>I doubt a case could be made for Moor's law applying to this problem, but we should be seeing progress of some kind.</p><p>I was an original Plato author, and have developed for that platform many years ago.  I found it to be an amazing tool that could be used for many educational objectives.  The high cost of Plato terminals limited the distribution of educational software developed for it.  Newer lower-cost hardware can help that, but still doesn't answer why the software today seems to be worse and with fewer features than what was available 30 or 40 years ago.</p><p>I am currently researching how to use educational games to enhance learning, engagement and student interest in science and technology.  I think the key to improving our educational system is to use proven methodologies to evaluate whether any potential new technology actually IMPROVES LEARNING.  This is the key point, not whether kids like the cool new widget, but did the cool new widget actually get them to learn more than a control cool new widget.</p><p>Educational research is complicated by the fact that controlled studies are hard to do as the kids change, the teachers change, and doing large scale studies costs a lot of $$.  Getting statistically significant results is difficult, and then doing follow-up studies to show that the results can be replicated in other school districts, etc. is often not done.  But in the end I think our kids and our society need better education, so it is worth spending some $$ to improve outcomes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The issue in my mind is n't about whether the tech gadget is getting better and/or cheaper , the issue is why education technology ( including paper/pencil/books/crayons , etc .
as well as computer based ) has n't progressed much in many many years.I doubt a case could be made for Moor 's law applying to this problem , but we should be seeing progress of some kind.I was an original Plato author , and have developed for that platform many years ago .
I found it to be an amazing tool that could be used for many educational objectives .
The high cost of Plato terminals limited the distribution of educational software developed for it .
Newer lower-cost hardware can help that , but still does n't answer why the software today seems to be worse and with fewer features than what was available 30 or 40 years ago.I am currently researching how to use educational games to enhance learning , engagement and student interest in science and technology .
I think the key to improving our educational system is to use proven methodologies to evaluate whether any potential new technology actually IMPROVES LEARNING .
This is the key point , not whether kids like the cool new widget , but did the cool new widget actually get them to learn more than a control cool new widget.Educational research is complicated by the fact that controlled studies are hard to do as the kids change , the teachers change , and doing large scale studies costs a lot of $ $ .
Getting statistically significant results is difficult , and then doing follow-up studies to show that the results can be replicated in other school districts , etc .
is often not done .
But in the end I think our kids and our society need better education , so it is worth spending some $ $ to improve outcomes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The issue in my mind isn't about whether the tech gadget is getting better and/or cheaper, the issue is why education technology (including paper/pencil/books/crayons, etc.
as well as computer based) hasn't progressed much in many many years.I doubt a case could be made for Moor's law applying to this problem, but we should be seeing progress of some kind.I was an original Plato author, and have developed for that platform many years ago.
I found it to be an amazing tool that could be used for many educational objectives.
The high cost of Plato terminals limited the distribution of educational software developed for it.
Newer lower-cost hardware can help that, but still doesn't answer why the software today seems to be worse and with fewer features than what was available 30 or 40 years ago.I am currently researching how to use educational games to enhance learning, engagement and student interest in science and technology.
I think the key to improving our educational system is to use proven methodologies to evaluate whether any potential new technology actually IMPROVES LEARNING.
This is the key point, not whether kids like the cool new widget, but did the cool new widget actually get them to learn more than a control cool new widget.Educational research is complicated by the fact that controlled studies are hard to do as the kids change, the teachers change, and doing large scale studies costs a lot of $$.
Getting statistically significant results is difficult, and then doing follow-up studies to show that the results can be replicated in other school districts, etc.
is often not done.
But in the end I think our kids and our society need better education, so it is worth spending some $$ to improve outcomes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636254</id>
	<title>I would be homeless if I had no school computers</title>
	<author>bigtallmofo</author>
	<datestamp>1262527500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>There was an Apple ][ in every classroom when I was a kid. We used it to die of dysentery on the Oregon Trail. Did we learn anything about history? No.</i> <br>
<br>
I was class of 1990, so I'm thinking that we are probably the same age.  When I was in 5th grade, I was exposed for the first time to a Commodore Vic-20 in the classroom which caused my parents to buy me a Commodore 64 when I was 10.  I got my first modem (Mitey Mo 300 baud) when I was 13.  Started my own bulletin board when I was 14.  Started a computer company when I was 20.  Bought my first house when I was 21.  Sold my computer company when I was 25.  Got a job in corporate America.  Became the CTO at the 3000+ publicly traded company I've worked at for the last 12 years.<br>
<br>
Despite being extremely intelligent, I did not do well in school and never spent a minute in college.  Never had a career interest outside of computers.  If it weren't for that Vic-20 and the occasional Apple IIe I was exposed to in school, I very likely would be homeless right now.  Instead, I am very financially successful, married with 3 fantastic kids.<br>
<br>
Playing with crayons and chalk and playing outside are important, but so is exposure to the machines that run the world today.  As with anything, it's the balance that's important.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There was an Apple ] [ in every classroom when I was a kid .
We used it to die of dysentery on the Oregon Trail .
Did we learn anything about history ?
No . I was class of 1990 , so I 'm thinking that we are probably the same age .
When I was in 5th grade , I was exposed for the first time to a Commodore Vic-20 in the classroom which caused my parents to buy me a Commodore 64 when I was 10 .
I got my first modem ( Mitey Mo 300 baud ) when I was 13 .
Started my own bulletin board when I was 14 .
Started a computer company when I was 20 .
Bought my first house when I was 21 .
Sold my computer company when I was 25 .
Got a job in corporate America .
Became the CTO at the 3000 + publicly traded company I 've worked at for the last 12 years .
Despite being extremely intelligent , I did not do well in school and never spent a minute in college .
Never had a career interest outside of computers .
If it were n't for that Vic-20 and the occasional Apple IIe I was exposed to in school , I very likely would be homeless right now .
Instead , I am very financially successful , married with 3 fantastic kids .
Playing with crayons and chalk and playing outside are important , but so is exposure to the machines that run the world today .
As with anything , it 's the balance that 's important .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There was an Apple ][ in every classroom when I was a kid.
We used it to die of dysentery on the Oregon Trail.
Did we learn anything about history?
No. 

I was class of 1990, so I'm thinking that we are probably the same age.
When I was in 5th grade, I was exposed for the first time to a Commodore Vic-20 in the classroom which caused my parents to buy me a Commodore 64 when I was 10.
I got my first modem (Mitey Mo 300 baud) when I was 13.
Started my own bulletin board when I was 14.
Started a computer company when I was 20.
Bought my first house when I was 21.
Sold my computer company when I was 25.
Got a job in corporate America.
Became the CTO at the 3000+ publicly traded company I've worked at for the last 12 years.
Despite being extremely intelligent, I did not do well in school and never spent a minute in college.
Never had a career interest outside of computers.
If it weren't for that Vic-20 and the occasional Apple IIe I was exposed to in school, I very likely would be homeless right now.
Instead, I am very financially successful, married with 3 fantastic kids.
Playing with crayons and chalk and playing outside are important, but so is exposure to the machines that run the world today.
As with anything, it's the balance that's important.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634704</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634628</id>
	<title>Apples and Oranges</title>
	<author>Grond</author>
	<datestamp>1262516400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PLATO\_(computer\_system)#NSF\_involvement" title="wikipedia.org">In 1972 the PLATO IV terminals (the kind described in the summary) cost $12,000</a> [wikipedia.org].  Adjusting for inflation, that would be over $60,000 today.  Moore's Law has worked some miracles, but as the OLPC project showed, creating a child-oriented, large screen portable computer for $100 is still out of reach.</p><p>The better question is whether throwing technology at the problem is going to actually help children learn.  Of course, the experiment has to be done, but I wouldn't be surprised if, once again, teacher quality and home life quality are by far the dominant factors in student success.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In 1972 the PLATO IV terminals ( the kind described in the summary ) cost $ 12,000 [ wikipedia.org ] .
Adjusting for inflation , that would be over $ 60,000 today .
Moore 's Law has worked some miracles , but as the OLPC project showed , creating a child-oriented , large screen portable computer for $ 100 is still out of reach.The better question is whether throwing technology at the problem is going to actually help children learn .
Of course , the experiment has to be done , but I would n't be surprised if , once again , teacher quality and home life quality are by far the dominant factors in student success .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In 1972 the PLATO IV terminals (the kind described in the summary) cost $12,000 [wikipedia.org].
Adjusting for inflation, that would be over $60,000 today.
Moore's Law has worked some miracles, but as the OLPC project showed, creating a child-oriented, large screen portable computer for $100 is still out of reach.The better question is whether throwing technology at the problem is going to actually help children learn.
Of course, the experiment has to be done, but I wouldn't be surprised if, once again, teacher quality and home life quality are by far the dominant factors in student success.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637920</id>
	<title>Re:Simple Rugged Durable = Better</title>
	<author>brendank310</author>
	<datestamp>1262546100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><blockquote><div><p>The latest and greatest techno-glitter is often not what's needed</p></div></blockquote><p>the best "early-childhood education technology" is <i>still interaction with parents, in a secure environment</i>.</p></div><p>How does one SSH into their parents?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The latest and greatest techno-glitter is often not what 's neededthe best " early-childhood education technology " is still interaction with parents , in a secure environment.How does one SSH into their parents ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The latest and greatest techno-glitter is often not what's neededthe best "early-childhood education technology" is still interaction with parents, in a secure environment.How does one SSH into their parents?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634880</id>
	<title>Teachers Colleges are not teaching technology</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262518080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>During the summer I work around many education majors, and I can tell you that teachers are not being taught anything about technology in teaching programs.  Most times they have less technical skills than your average college students.  They can't work their ipods or simple digital cameras and they often have trouble using basic web sites to fill in web forms.  It's all anecdotal, but I see the same thing year after year and I've seen it even going back to my own teachers in the 1980s.</p><p>Anyway, I am apt to agree with other comments in this thread.  I am for tech in the classroom, but it's not going to do any good with the teachers we are putting out in the field.  The best and brightest don't go into elementary education, and right now the jobs aren't there.  We need tech education for our kids to succeed, but there will have to be some other fundamental fixes made before that curriculum is even possible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>During the summer I work around many education majors , and I can tell you that teachers are not being taught anything about technology in teaching programs .
Most times they have less technical skills than your average college students .
They ca n't work their ipods or simple digital cameras and they often have trouble using basic web sites to fill in web forms .
It 's all anecdotal , but I see the same thing year after year and I 've seen it even going back to my own teachers in the 1980s.Anyway , I am apt to agree with other comments in this thread .
I am for tech in the classroom , but it 's not going to do any good with the teachers we are putting out in the field .
The best and brightest do n't go into elementary education , and right now the jobs are n't there .
We need tech education for our kids to succeed , but there will have to be some other fundamental fixes made before that curriculum is even possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>During the summer I work around many education majors, and I can tell you that teachers are not being taught anything about technology in teaching programs.
Most times they have less technical skills than your average college students.
They can't work their ipods or simple digital cameras and they often have trouble using basic web sites to fill in web forms.
It's all anecdotal, but I see the same thing year after year and I've seen it even going back to my own teachers in the 1980s.Anyway, I am apt to agree with other comments in this thread.
I am for tech in the classroom, but it's not going to do any good with the teachers we are putting out in the field.
The best and brightest don't go into elementary education, and right now the jobs aren't there.
We need tech education for our kids to succeed, but there will have to be some other fundamental fixes made before that curriculum is even possible.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30679924</id>
	<title>Re:Simple Rugged Durable = Better</title>
	<author>zoewhite</author>
	<datestamp>1262896800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think parent can do much more jobs than the gorernment do on kids study.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think parent can do much more jobs than the gorernment do on kids study .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think parent can do much more jobs than the gorernment do on kids study.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30638836</id>
	<title>Re:Simple Rugged Durable = Better</title>
	<author>gmhowell</author>
	<datestamp>1262602440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is Moloch the new name for 'ex-wife'? Because feeding that is the only thing keeping me from having a decent standard of living.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is Moloch the new name for 'ex-wife ' ?
Because feeding that is the only thing keeping me from having a decent standard of living .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is Moloch the new name for 'ex-wife'?
Because feeding that is the only thing keeping me from having a decent standard of living.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486</id>
	<title>Simple Rugged Durable = Better</title>
	<author>loose electron</author>
	<datestamp>1262515560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The latest and greatest techno-glitter is often not what's needed. The simple rugged device shown can get the interactive teaching job done, and probably endure getting dropped, kicked, and getting dumped in Cheerios.</p><p>Would you give an iPhone to a kid who is constantly throwing things around and having temper tantrums?</p><p>Often, simpler is better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The latest and greatest techno-glitter is often not what 's needed .
The simple rugged device shown can get the interactive teaching job done , and probably endure getting dropped , kicked , and getting dumped in Cheerios.Would you give an iPhone to a kid who is constantly throwing things around and having temper tantrums ? Often , simpler is better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The latest and greatest techno-glitter is often not what's needed.
The simple rugged device shown can get the interactive teaching job done, and probably endure getting dropped, kicked, and getting dumped in Cheerios.Would you give an iPhone to a kid who is constantly throwing things around and having temper tantrums?Often, simpler is better.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635302</id>
	<title>Sample of one</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262520780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let's generalize from a anecdotal sample of one - shall we?</p><p>Why did this get posted anyway? I have submitted far more interesting things than this and they got ignored...</p><p>Sheez.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's generalize from a anecdotal sample of one - shall we ? Why did this get posted anyway ?
I have submitted far more interesting things than this and they got ignored...Sheez .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's generalize from a anecdotal sample of one - shall we?Why did this get posted anyway?
I have submitted far more interesting things than this and they got ignored...Sheez.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30676696</id>
	<title>Re:Culture, not money</title>
	<author>frogzilla</author>
	<datestamp>1262780940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In most schools getting good grades is utterly unacceptable to the peer social group.  So the child can be an outcast with no friends or not - easy to choose, isn't it? </p></div><p>This, sadly, is completely true.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In most schools getting good grades is utterly unacceptable to the peer social group .
So the child can be an outcast with no friends or not - easy to choose , is n't it ?
This , sadly , is completely true .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In most schools getting good grades is utterly unacceptable to the peer social group.
So the child can be an outcast with no friends or not - easy to choose, isn't it?
This, sadly, is completely true.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634842</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634842</id>
	<title>Culture, not money</title>
	<author>cdrguru</author>
	<datestamp>1262517780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you bring children up in an environment where adults do not value education, don't be surprised when the children don't value it either.  And when they do not value it, they aren't going to learn much.</p><p>I am not familiar with an effective rating scale, but I think one adult saying "Eeew, looks like Brain Work to me.  No thanks!" within earshot of a child is probably -100 units whereas reading one children's book to the child is +1 unit.  Similarly, suggesting that by learning the child is trying to "put on airs" is probably -500.</p><p>Today most of the people you meet on the street are suffering with a lifetime score of -50,000.  If you are especially lucky the people you work with have only -1000 and somehow, dispite major obstacles managed to learn something.</p><p>In most schools getting good grades is utterly unacceptable to the peer social group.  So the child can be an outcast with no friends or not - easy to choose, isn't it?  This is the culture in the US today.  A good part of it comes from the inner city "majorities" that have pretty much taken over there.  Because of "white flight" to the suburbs where their children aren't exposed to an anti-education culture.</p><p>I recently saw a television program concerning a black educator trying to stir up some interest in children being educated and going on to college.  Gasp, they might be successful!  Biggest problem seemed to be that they had to pick and choose the children because so many were already infected by a culture that told them being educated was socially unacceptable.</p><p>If this problem isn't solved, no matter what technology is put into the classroom the situation is just going to get worse and worse.  Cheap Chinese-made toys aren't going to fix anything.  Expensive PLATO terminals aren't going to fix anything.  Changing the culture is the only way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you bring children up in an environment where adults do not value education , do n't be surprised when the children do n't value it either .
And when they do not value it , they are n't going to learn much.I am not familiar with an effective rating scale , but I think one adult saying " Eeew , looks like Brain Work to me .
No thanks !
" within earshot of a child is probably -100 units whereas reading one children 's book to the child is + 1 unit .
Similarly , suggesting that by learning the child is trying to " put on airs " is probably -500.Today most of the people you meet on the street are suffering with a lifetime score of -50,000 .
If you are especially lucky the people you work with have only -1000 and somehow , dispite major obstacles managed to learn something.In most schools getting good grades is utterly unacceptable to the peer social group .
So the child can be an outcast with no friends or not - easy to choose , is n't it ?
This is the culture in the US today .
A good part of it comes from the inner city " majorities " that have pretty much taken over there .
Because of " white flight " to the suburbs where their children are n't exposed to an anti-education culture.I recently saw a television program concerning a black educator trying to stir up some interest in children being educated and going on to college .
Gasp , they might be successful !
Biggest problem seemed to be that they had to pick and choose the children because so many were already infected by a culture that told them being educated was socially unacceptable.If this problem is n't solved , no matter what technology is put into the classroom the situation is just going to get worse and worse .
Cheap Chinese-made toys are n't going to fix anything .
Expensive PLATO terminals are n't going to fix anything .
Changing the culture is the only way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you bring children up in an environment where adults do not value education, don't be surprised when the children don't value it either.
And when they do not value it, they aren't going to learn much.I am not familiar with an effective rating scale, but I think one adult saying "Eeew, looks like Brain Work to me.
No thanks!
" within earshot of a child is probably -100 units whereas reading one children's book to the child is +1 unit.
Similarly, suggesting that by learning the child is trying to "put on airs" is probably -500.Today most of the people you meet on the street are suffering with a lifetime score of -50,000.
If you are especially lucky the people you work with have only -1000 and somehow, dispite major obstacles managed to learn something.In most schools getting good grades is utterly unacceptable to the peer social group.
So the child can be an outcast with no friends or not - easy to choose, isn't it?
This is the culture in the US today.
A good part of it comes from the inner city "majorities" that have pretty much taken over there.
Because of "white flight" to the suburbs where their children aren't exposed to an anti-education culture.I recently saw a television program concerning a black educator trying to stir up some interest in children being educated and going on to college.
Gasp, they might be successful!
Biggest problem seemed to be that they had to pick and choose the children because so many were already infected by a culture that told them being educated was socially unacceptable.If this problem isn't solved, no matter what technology is put into the classroom the situation is just going to get worse and worse.
Cheap Chinese-made toys aren't going to fix anything.
Expensive PLATO terminals aren't going to fix anything.
Changing the culture is the only way.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637804</id>
	<title>Re:As Clifford Stoll Said</title>
	<author>anyGould</author>
	<datestamp>1262543940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you really want to improve education, how about removing the distractions, and actually teaching out of the book?</p></div><p>Other than that a lot of those textbooks suck? (Written by the lowest bidder, remember)</p><p>I'd trade most of my textbooks for a knowledgeable teacher every time.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you really want to improve education , how about removing the distractions , and actually teaching out of the book ? Other than that a lot of those textbooks suck ?
( Written by the lowest bidder , remember ) I 'd trade most of my textbooks for a knowledgeable teacher every time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you really want to improve education, how about removing the distractions, and actually teaching out of the book?Other than that a lot of those textbooks suck?
(Written by the lowest bidder, remember)I'd trade most of my textbooks for a knowledgeable teacher every time.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634704</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637686</id>
	<title>Re:Gadgets may not help.</title>
	<author>Bengie</author>
	<datestamp>1262542200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My brother is good at math and got moved up two grades for his math class. Now he's in a 12th grade math class even though he's in 10th. I don't see why students can't be moved up. This did take some pushing from my mom. At first the school didn't want to, but she can can get very pushy. He'll probably just go into an AP math class next year.</p><p>Why can't kids just get put into another class for certain subjects?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My brother is good at math and got moved up two grades for his math class .
Now he 's in a 12th grade math class even though he 's in 10th .
I do n't see why students ca n't be moved up .
This did take some pushing from my mom .
At first the school did n't want to , but she can can get very pushy .
He 'll probably just go into an AP math class next year.Why ca n't kids just get put into another class for certain subjects ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My brother is good at math and got moved up two grades for his math class.
Now he's in a 12th grade math class even though he's in 10th.
I don't see why students can't be moved up.
This did take some pushing from my mom.
At first the school didn't want to, but she can can get very pushy.
He'll probably just go into an AP math class next year.Why can't kids just get put into another class for certain subjects?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635742</id>
	<title>Education, not technology</title>
	<author>pclminion</author>
	<datestamp>1262524020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's about the Education, not the Technology. If technology furthers education, use it. If it doesn't, don't. Carry out studies to determine what is effective and what isn't. Implement what is found. Rinse, repeat. It won't ever be perfect, just keep trying to make it better. I don't care if they're using supercomputers or abacuses, are they learning how to <i>add numbers</i> or aren't they?</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's about the Education , not the Technology .
If technology furthers education , use it .
If it does n't , do n't .
Carry out studies to determine what is effective and what is n't .
Implement what is found .
Rinse , repeat .
It wo n't ever be perfect , just keep trying to make it better .
I do n't care if they 're using supercomputers or abacuses , are they learning how to add numbers or are n't they ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's about the Education, not the Technology.
If technology furthers education, use it.
If it doesn't, don't.
Carry out studies to determine what is effective and what isn't.
Implement what is found.
Rinse, repeat.
It won't ever be perfect, just keep trying to make it better.
I don't care if they're using supercomputers or abacuses, are they learning how to add numbers or aren't they?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636628</id>
	<title>Re:Simple Rugged Durable = Better</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262531100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>"a home, food on the table, education and health care".</i></p><p>If you're satisfied with a 1960s standard of living, you can get by on very lttle money.  But you will have to live in lower-quality housing, get your education at a community college and go to the ER for your healthcare.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" a home , food on the table , education and health care " .If you 're satisfied with a 1960s standard of living , you can get by on very lttle money .
But you will have to live in lower-quality housing , get your education at a community college and go to the ER for your healthcare .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"a home, food on the table, education and health care".If you're satisfied with a 1960s standard of living, you can get by on very lttle money.
But you will have to live in lower-quality housing, get your education at a community college and go to the ER for your healthcare.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635904</id>
	<title>My wife is a 4th grade teacher</title>
	<author>dirkdodgers</author>
	<datestamp>1262525220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just showed her this video and she is very interested.</p><p>Let me tell you why. What I hear from her is that the biggest problem is the kids who sit through the lessons and the material just goes in one ear and out the other. It's not necessarily that they're stupid or that they don't care, it's that they aren't engaged. What you need for those students is either massive support from the parent(s), or you need to interact with them on a one-to-one basis. My wife doesn't have the bandwidth as a teacher to provide that one-on-one interactivity while still teaching the material to the rest of the children who are on track and are learning in the traditional model.</p><p>This sort of technology can provide that one-on-one interactivity. What it needs, and what she's looking into, is whether it also provides some way that she as a teacher can monitor progress live while the children are using the devices.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just showed her this video and she is very interested.Let me tell you why .
What I hear from her is that the biggest problem is the kids who sit through the lessons and the material just goes in one ear and out the other .
It 's not necessarily that they 're stupid or that they do n't care , it 's that they are n't engaged .
What you need for those students is either massive support from the parent ( s ) , or you need to interact with them on a one-to-one basis .
My wife does n't have the bandwidth as a teacher to provide that one-on-one interactivity while still teaching the material to the rest of the children who are on track and are learning in the traditional model.This sort of technology can provide that one-on-one interactivity .
What it needs , and what she 's looking into , is whether it also provides some way that she as a teacher can monitor progress live while the children are using the devices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just showed her this video and she is very interested.Let me tell you why.
What I hear from her is that the biggest problem is the kids who sit through the lessons and the material just goes in one ear and out the other.
It's not necessarily that they're stupid or that they don't care, it's that they aren't engaged.
What you need for those students is either massive support from the parent(s), or you need to interact with them on a one-to-one basis.
My wife doesn't have the bandwidth as a teacher to provide that one-on-one interactivity while still teaching the material to the rest of the children who are on track and are learning in the traditional model.This sort of technology can provide that one-on-one interactivity.
What it needs, and what she's looking into, is whether it also provides some way that she as a teacher can monitor progress live while the children are using the devices.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30656732</id>
	<title>Re:Simple Rugged Durable = Better</title>
	<author>ArsonSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1262714460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe check on some of the stats outlined from this post as well:</p><p><a href="http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1496246&amp;threshold=1&amp;commentsort=3&amp;mode=nested&amp;cid=30636618" title="slashdot.org">http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1496246&amp;threshold=1&amp;commentsort=3&amp;mode=nested&amp;cid=30636618</a> [slashdot.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe check on some of the stats outlined from this post as well : http : //hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl ? sid = 1496246&amp;threshold = 1&amp;commentsort = 3&amp;mode = nested&amp;cid = 30636618 [ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe check on some of the stats outlined from this post as well:http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1496246&amp;threshold=1&amp;commentsort=3&amp;mode=nested&amp;cid=30636618 [slashdot.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636824</id>
	<title>Re:As Clifford Stoll Said</title>
	<author>white\_owl</author>
	<datestamp>1262532960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And how many kids that did not play Oregon Trail know that people ever got in wagons and had a hard time getting to the West. (Where is the West anyway?  Why didn't they just fly or take the bus?) I do not suggest that Oregon Trail was great for teaching history.  It was not.  But it did teach some history.
</p><p>Civilization is a better example. I have run programs that used Civilization with close to realistic maps and poor middle school kids. Did they become historians - No.  But did they have a better idea of the map of the world and how technology changed with different era's in world history. Well Yea. Did they find it hard to learn. Surprisingly yes.
</p><p>
I guess it depends on where you are, what looks like progress?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And how many kids that did not play Oregon Trail know that people ever got in wagons and had a hard time getting to the West .
( Where is the West anyway ?
Why did n't they just fly or take the bus ?
) I do not suggest that Oregon Trail was great for teaching history .
It was not .
But it did teach some history .
Civilization is a better example .
I have run programs that used Civilization with close to realistic maps and poor middle school kids .
Did they become historians - No .
But did they have a better idea of the map of the world and how technology changed with different era 's in world history .
Well Yea .
Did they find it hard to learn .
Surprisingly yes .
I guess it depends on where you are , what looks like progress ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And how many kids that did not play Oregon Trail know that people ever got in wagons and had a hard time getting to the West.
(Where is the West anyway?
Why didn't they just fly or take the bus?
) I do not suggest that Oregon Trail was great for teaching history.
It was not.
But it did teach some history.
Civilization is a better example.
I have run programs that used Civilization with close to realistic maps and poor middle school kids.
Did they become historians - No.
But did they have a better idea of the map of the world and how technology changed with different era's in world history.
Well Yea.
Did they find it hard to learn.
Surprisingly yes.
I guess it depends on where you are, what looks like progress?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634890</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634850</id>
	<title>Re:This is a joke, right?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262517840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I looked at that article, about how we need to start focusing on blacks and latinos before it's too late.</p><p>What bullshit.</p><p>How about we drop the race nonsense and start focusing on educating kids, hmm?  Kinda solves the problem right there, doesn't it?  Man I'm a genius, I should be running the NEA!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I looked at that article , about how we need to start focusing on blacks and latinos before it 's too late.What bullshit.How about we drop the race nonsense and start focusing on educating kids , hmm ?
Kinda solves the problem right there , does n't it ?
Man I 'm a genius , I should be running the NEA !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I looked at that article, about how we need to start focusing on blacks and latinos before it's too late.What bullshit.How about we drop the race nonsense and start focusing on educating kids, hmm?
Kinda solves the problem right there, doesn't it?
Man I'm a genius, I should be running the NEA!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637124</id>
	<title>Re:As Clifford Stoll Said</title>
	<author>Camshaft\_90</author>
	<datestamp>1262536020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Are you real? 2+2 is out of date. Reading &amp; writing is out of date.  I disagree.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...Mostly because teachers and professors are absolutely clueless on technology having long lost the ability to learn after their last degree

If you really want to improve education, how about removing the distractions, and actually teaching out of the book?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...Because that would be removing over half the class and relying on a book that is usually severely out of date?

You sound like a terrible parent. You have to LEARN to walk before you can run. Teach your kids the basic things and the computers will take care of themselves.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you real ?
2 + 2 is out of date .
Reading &amp; writing is out of date .
I disagree .
...Mostly because teachers and professors are absolutely clueless on technology having long lost the ability to learn after their last degree If you really want to improve education , how about removing the distractions , and actually teaching out of the book ?
...Because that would be removing over half the class and relying on a book that is usually severely out of date ?
You sound like a terrible parent .
You have to LEARN to walk before you can run .
Teach your kids the basic things and the computers will take care of themselves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you real?
2+2 is out of date.
Reading &amp; writing is out of date.
I disagree.
...Mostly because teachers and professors are absolutely clueless on technology having long lost the ability to learn after their last degree

If you really want to improve education, how about removing the distractions, and actually teaching out of the book?
...Because that would be removing over half the class and relying on a book that is usually severely out of date?
You sound like a terrible parent.
You have to LEARN to walk before you can run.
Teach your kids the basic things and the computers will take care of themselves.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634890</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30646570</id>
	<title>Re:Gadgets may not help.</title>
	<author>ResidentSourcerer</author>
	<datestamp>1262601060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>
Remember:  80 to 90 percent of parents believe that their kid is above average.  It is heresy to speak out loud the truth that 50\% are below average ability.<br>

(By definition of average)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Remember : 80 to 90 percent of parents believe that their kid is above average .
It is heresy to speak out loud the truth that 50 \ % are below average ability .
( By definition of average )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Remember:  80 to 90 percent of parents believe that their kid is above average.
It is heresy to speak out loud the truth that 50\% are below average ability.
(By definition of average)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634602</id>
	<title>Re:This is a joke, right?</title>
	<author>Darkness404</author>
	<datestamp>1262516280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ok, what in the world does the NEA (either National Endowment of the Arts or National Educators Association) have to do with this story, or the thing you just posted?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok , what in the world does the NEA ( either National Endowment of the Arts or National Educators Association ) have to do with this story , or the thing you just posted ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok, what in the world does the NEA (either National Endowment of the Arts or National Educators Association) have to do with this story, or the thing you just posted?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634484</id>
	<title>This is a joke, right?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262515500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><br>
You have heard of this thing called the NEA, right?
<br><br>
And you are familiar with our <a href="http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/48071.html" title="mcclatchydc.com" rel="nofollow">looming demographic catastrophe</a> [mcclatchydc.com], right?
<br><br>
I mean, come on, be serious.
<br><br>
.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You have heard of this thing called the NEA , right ?
And you are familiar with our looming demographic catastrophe [ mcclatchydc.com ] , right ?
I mean , come on , be serious .
.</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
You have heard of this thing called the NEA, right?
And you are familiar with our looming demographic catastrophe [mcclatchydc.com], right?
I mean, come on, be serious.
.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635404</id>
	<title>Baby boomers are the problem</title>
	<author>wiredlogic</author>
	<datestamp>1262521440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem is that school administrations are all run by baby boomers. They're still too technologically naive (/.ers excluded) to consider the problems of abandoning traditional teaching methods for shiny bling. I had the displeasure of going through some computer based education in the 80's (Chelsea Clinton was in the same program just to name drop) and I vastly preferred regular classroom instruction. With regards to reading, there's nothing wrong with a regular book. It's important to teach children how to use those too. There isn't much value in getting kids to cram their faces into a glorified VTech toy.</p><p>Those in the position to make decisions about these things love to feel that they're doing something to help the poor and disadvantaged by sneaking some technological contrivance into the curriculum wherever they can. Books are a pretty advanced technology all their own. They are far more reliable, dependable, and cheaper than any gizmo based solution to a problem that doesn't exist. Even more importantly, it is necessary to instill some degree of self-sufficiency in the kids growing up today. Teaching them that they just need to rely on the machine to do everything for them and rely on it unquestioningly isn't the best way to prepare children for a productive life in our society. The mass deployment of electronic calculators in elementary school classrooms has led to the creation of generations of innumerate people. Certainly children should be encouraged to learn about the use of computers and information technology but that should not be used as an excuse to set them up into accepting computers as magic.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is that school administrations are all run by baby boomers .
They 're still too technologically naive ( /.ers excluded ) to consider the problems of abandoning traditional teaching methods for shiny bling .
I had the displeasure of going through some computer based education in the 80 's ( Chelsea Clinton was in the same program just to name drop ) and I vastly preferred regular classroom instruction .
With regards to reading , there 's nothing wrong with a regular book .
It 's important to teach children how to use those too .
There is n't much value in getting kids to cram their faces into a glorified VTech toy.Those in the position to make decisions about these things love to feel that they 're doing something to help the poor and disadvantaged by sneaking some technological contrivance into the curriculum wherever they can .
Books are a pretty advanced technology all their own .
They are far more reliable , dependable , and cheaper than any gizmo based solution to a problem that does n't exist .
Even more importantly , it is necessary to instill some degree of self-sufficiency in the kids growing up today .
Teaching them that they just need to rely on the machine to do everything for them and rely on it unquestioningly is n't the best way to prepare children for a productive life in our society .
The mass deployment of electronic calculators in elementary school classrooms has led to the creation of generations of innumerate people .
Certainly children should be encouraged to learn about the use of computers and information technology but that should not be used as an excuse to set them up into accepting computers as magic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is that school administrations are all run by baby boomers.
They're still too technologically naive (/.ers excluded) to consider the problems of abandoning traditional teaching methods for shiny bling.
I had the displeasure of going through some computer based education in the 80's (Chelsea Clinton was in the same program just to name drop) and I vastly preferred regular classroom instruction.
With regards to reading, there's nothing wrong with a regular book.
It's important to teach children how to use those too.
There isn't much value in getting kids to cram their faces into a glorified VTech toy.Those in the position to make decisions about these things love to feel that they're doing something to help the poor and disadvantaged by sneaking some technological contrivance into the curriculum wherever they can.
Books are a pretty advanced technology all their own.
They are far more reliable, dependable, and cheaper than any gizmo based solution to a problem that doesn't exist.
Even more importantly, it is necessary to instill some degree of self-sufficiency in the kids growing up today.
Teaching them that they just need to rely on the machine to do everything for them and rely on it unquestioningly isn't the best way to prepare children for a productive life in our society.
The mass deployment of electronic calculators in elementary school classrooms has led to the creation of generations of innumerate people.
Certainly children should be encouraged to learn about the use of computers and information technology but that should not be used as an excuse to set them up into accepting computers as magic.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30640596</id>
	<title>Re:Simple Rugged Durable = Better</title>
	<author>Dammital</author>
	<datestamp>1262620320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>"... with mommy and daddy having to work thirty percent more just to provide the same standard of living and real income as a single-breadwinner family in 1962"</p></div></blockquote><p>
As Larry Summers said a few years ago, I'm going to provoke you.
</p><p>
Isn't it possible that two-income families weren't needed <i>until</i> a sizable percentage of families went to two incomes, devaluing the work pool?  Sexual politics aside, might we be better off today if each household had a designated breadwinner and a designated homemaker?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" ... with mommy and daddy having to work thirty percent more just to provide the same standard of living and real income as a single-breadwinner family in 1962 " As Larry Summers said a few years ago , I 'm going to provoke you .
Is n't it possible that two-income families were n't needed until a sizable percentage of families went to two incomes , devaluing the work pool ?
Sexual politics aside , might we be better off today if each household had a designated breadwinner and a designated homemaker ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"... with mommy and daddy having to work thirty percent more just to provide the same standard of living and real income as a single-breadwinner family in 1962"
As Larry Summers said a few years ago, I'm going to provoke you.
Isn't it possible that two-income families weren't needed until a sizable percentage of families went to two incomes, devaluing the work pool?
Sexual politics aside, might we be better off today if each household had a designated breadwinner and a designated homemaker?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637488</id>
	<title>Re:Simple Rugged Durable = Better</title>
	<author>ArsonSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1262539740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Would you give an iPhone to a kid who is constantly throwing things around and having temper tantrums?"</p><p>that sounds like a typical apple fanboi. Just read the replies to this post.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Would you give an iPhone to a kid who is constantly throwing things around and having temper tantrums ?
" that sounds like a typical apple fanboi .
Just read the replies to this post .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Would you give an iPhone to a kid who is constantly throwing things around and having temper tantrums?
"that sounds like a typical apple fanboi.
Just read the replies to this post.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635516</id>
	<title>Re:This is a joke, right?</title>
	<author>feepness</author>
	<datestamp>1262522160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Today I would like to be educated as to the meaning of "peter puffing".</htmltext>
<tokenext>Today I would like to be educated as to the meaning of " peter puffing " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Today I would like to be educated as to the meaning of "peter puffing".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637652</id>
	<title>Re:Simple Rugged Durable = Better</title>
	<author>RyuuzakiTetsuya</author>
	<datestamp>1262541720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Would you give an iPhone to a kid who is constantly throwing things around and having temper tantrums?</i></p><p>No, because he'd be the CEO in charge of the company that gave us the Zune and Windows Mobile.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Would you give an iPhone to a kid who is constantly throwing things around and having temper tantrums ? No , because he 'd be the CEO in charge of the company that gave us the Zune and Windows Mobile .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Would you give an iPhone to a kid who is constantly throwing things around and having temper tantrums?No, because he'd be the CEO in charge of the company that gave us the Zune and Windows Mobile.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635762</id>
	<title>No technology, it's the human touch that's vital</title>
	<author>snStarter</author>
	<datestamp>1262524140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not technology that's needed; quite the contrary: it's intimate human contact. READ to them, tell stories, interact. That's what children need because it's how children learn: listening, interacting, being HUMAN. The technology is a boondoggle in this. Love your kids, play with them, READ to them, be real people. For some slashdot folks that might be challenge enough.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not technology that 's needed ; quite the contrary : it 's intimate human contact .
READ to them , tell stories , interact .
That 's what children need because it 's how children learn : listening , interacting , being HUMAN .
The technology is a boondoggle in this .
Love your kids , play with them , READ to them , be real people .
For some slashdot folks that might be challenge enough .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not technology that's needed; quite the contrary: it's intimate human contact.
READ to them, tell stories, interact.
That's what children need because it's how children learn: listening, interacting, being HUMAN.
The technology is a boondoggle in this.
Love your kids, play with them, READ to them, be real people.
For some slashdot folks that might be challenge enough.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30646534</id>
	<title>Re:Children do not need electronics to learn.</title>
	<author>ResidentSourcerer</author>
	<datestamp>1262600880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>

Let me rephrase that subject:

Most current computer programs don't help students learn.

Exceptions:

Having a word processor makes it possible to help kids learn how to write better.  As a teacher you scribble your comments on the printout and write "Redo" at the top. (So far there is no computer program as fast as my red pencil.)

Or you sit down and chat with them about what's wrong  with the paper, and tell them to redo it.  Redo's are easy with a WP.

There are chem and physics simulation programs that provide a reasonable alternative to the lab.  While I still think that kids should get their hands dirty in the lab, having the ability to do some of the more expensive experiments in simulation is better than not doing them at all.

***

It should be possible to write a math teaching program that analyses kids mistakes, and doesn't let them game the system.  However to do this well, you need a keyboard math entry system that is as fast as a pencil.

In general a good computer program *should* be able to handle 80\% of the tutoring and practice sessions, keeping the kids from practicing the incorrect way, and getting the teacher to come over when it ran out of it's own limited repertoire.

Nobody writes that kind of software.

A computer should be able to handle everything that a book can.  Kid's books can stay at school, and they can work with a ebook at home.  AND the ebooks should be cheap like borscht.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let me rephrase that subject : Most current computer programs do n't help students learn .
Exceptions : Having a word processor makes it possible to help kids learn how to write better .
As a teacher you scribble your comments on the printout and write " Redo " at the top .
( So far there is no computer program as fast as my red pencil .
) Or you sit down and chat with them about what 's wrong with the paper , and tell them to redo it .
Redo 's are easy with a WP .
There are chem and physics simulation programs that provide a reasonable alternative to the lab .
While I still think that kids should get their hands dirty in the lab , having the ability to do some of the more expensive experiments in simulation is better than not doing them at all .
* * * It should be possible to write a math teaching program that analyses kids mistakes , and does n't let them game the system .
However to do this well , you need a keyboard math entry system that is as fast as a pencil .
In general a good computer program * should * be able to handle 80 \ % of the tutoring and practice sessions , keeping the kids from practicing the incorrect way , and getting the teacher to come over when it ran out of it 's own limited repertoire .
Nobody writes that kind of software .
A computer should be able to handle everything that a book can .
Kid 's books can stay at school , and they can work with a ebook at home .
AND the ebooks should be cheap like borscht .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>

Let me rephrase that subject:

Most current computer programs don't help students learn.
Exceptions:

Having a word processor makes it possible to help kids learn how to write better.
As a teacher you scribble your comments on the printout and write "Redo" at the top.
(So far there is no computer program as fast as my red pencil.
)

Or you sit down and chat with them about what's wrong  with the paper, and tell them to redo it.
Redo's are easy with a WP.
There are chem and physics simulation programs that provide a reasonable alternative to the lab.
While I still think that kids should get their hands dirty in the lab, having the ability to do some of the more expensive experiments in simulation is better than not doing them at all.
***

It should be possible to write a math teaching program that analyses kids mistakes, and doesn't let them game the system.
However to do this well, you need a keyboard math entry system that is as fast as a pencil.
In general a good computer program *should* be able to handle 80\% of the tutoring and practice sessions, keeping the kids from practicing the incorrect way, and getting the teacher to come over when it ran out of it's own limited repertoire.
Nobody writes that kind of software.
A computer should be able to handle everything that a book can.
Kid's books can stay at school, and they can work with a ebook at home.
AND the ebooks should be cheap like borscht.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635342</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635342</id>
	<title>Children do not need electronics to learn.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262520960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Children do not need electronics to learn.  Wasting money on gadgets will not make children learn faster or be smarter.  It's an utter waste of educational funds to start k-3 on computers.  Even with 4th &amp; 5th graders, the best thing to start them on is typing, which means a cheap, old hand-me-down-computer is sufficient.  That's assuming the 4th grader's hands are big enough to start touch typing.  We still have far too many adults that can't touch type.  Kids will learn all other aspects of computers fast enough on their own.</p><p>The main reason I see for having ocmputers at home, especially for the kids, is mainly for playing games.  Education is and has always been a minor part of that equation.  Kids have enough toys these days and need to get off their rear and go play outside.  We've got more than enough unhealthy fat adults and we're getting too many unhealthy fat children these days.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Children do not need electronics to learn .
Wasting money on gadgets will not make children learn faster or be smarter .
It 's an utter waste of educational funds to start k-3 on computers .
Even with 4th &amp; 5th graders , the best thing to start them on is typing , which means a cheap , old hand-me-down-computer is sufficient .
That 's assuming the 4th grader 's hands are big enough to start touch typing .
We still have far too many adults that ca n't touch type .
Kids will learn all other aspects of computers fast enough on their own.The main reason I see for having ocmputers at home , especially for the kids , is mainly for playing games .
Education is and has always been a minor part of that equation .
Kids have enough toys these days and need to get off their rear and go play outside .
We 've got more than enough unhealthy fat adults and we 're getting too many unhealthy fat children these days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Children do not need electronics to learn.
Wasting money on gadgets will not make children learn faster or be smarter.
It's an utter waste of educational funds to start k-3 on computers.
Even with 4th &amp; 5th graders, the best thing to start them on is typing, which means a cheap, old hand-me-down-computer is sufficient.
That's assuming the 4th grader's hands are big enough to start touch typing.
We still have far too many adults that can't touch type.
Kids will learn all other aspects of computers fast enough on their own.The main reason I see for having ocmputers at home, especially for the kids, is mainly for playing games.
Education is and has always been a minor part of that equation.
Kids have enough toys these days and need to get off their rear and go play outside.
We've got more than enough unhealthy fat adults and we're getting too many unhealthy fat children these days.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30638102</id>
	<title>Speaking of PLATO...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262548380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>2010 marks the 50th Anniversary of the PLATO system.</p><p>There is going to be a 2-day conference celebrating the history of PLATO at the Computer History Museum on June 2-3, 2010.</p><p>For details, see:</p><p>http://platohistory.org</p><p>or</p><p>http://events.linkedin.com/50th-Anniversary-PLATO-Conference/pub/163992</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>2010 marks the 50th Anniversary of the PLATO system.There is going to be a 2-day conference celebrating the history of PLATO at the Computer History Museum on June 2-3 , 2010.For details , see : http : //platohistory.orgorhttp : //events.linkedin.com/50th-Anniversary-PLATO-Conference/pub/163992</tokentext>
<sentencetext>2010 marks the 50th Anniversary of the PLATO system.There is going to be a 2-day conference celebrating the history of PLATO at the Computer History Museum on June 2-3, 2010.For details, see:http://platohistory.orgorhttp://events.linkedin.com/50th-Anniversary-PLATO-Conference/pub/163992</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30638194</id>
	<title>Re:Yes.</title>
	<author>uninformedLuddite</author>
	<datestamp>1262635740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have forgotten the name of the syndrome but their actually is a syndrome where people grow up with defective immune systems as it hasn't learnt how to do its job. Apparently an important part of playing in the dirt and the mud is having a good taste of it at that helps to train your immune system for the future. Probably OT a bit but interesting nevertheless.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have forgotten the name of the syndrome but their actually is a syndrome where people grow up with defective immune systems as it has n't learnt how to do its job .
Apparently an important part of playing in the dirt and the mud is having a good taste of it at that helps to train your immune system for the future .
Probably OT a bit but interesting nevertheless .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have forgotten the name of the syndrome but their actually is a syndrome where people grow up with defective immune systems as it hasn't learnt how to do its job.
Apparently an important part of playing in the dirt and the mud is having a good taste of it at that helps to train your immune system for the future.
Probably OT a bit but interesting nevertheless.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637508</id>
	<title>Re:Simple Rugged Durable = Better</title>
	<author>ArsonSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1262539920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"But with mommy and daddy having to work thirty percent more just to provide the <b>same</b> standard of living and real income as a single-breadwinner family in 1962, interaction with parents is increasingly in short supply."</p><p>I think you're idea of same is a bit different than most.  Sorry the standard has been raised several orders of magnitude.  That is the reason for the double incomes and working more.  People want more, and they're getting a lot more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" But with mommy and daddy having to work thirty percent more just to provide the same standard of living and real income as a single-breadwinner family in 1962 , interaction with parents is increasingly in short supply .
" I think you 're idea of same is a bit different than most .
Sorry the standard has been raised several orders of magnitude .
That is the reason for the double incomes and working more .
People want more , and they 're getting a lot more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"But with mommy and daddy having to work thirty percent more just to provide the same standard of living and real income as a single-breadwinner family in 1962, interaction with parents is increasingly in short supply.
"I think you're idea of same is a bit different than most.
Sorry the standard has been raised several orders of magnitude.
That is the reason for the double incomes and working more.
People want more, and they're getting a lot more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30638784</id>
	<title>Re:Culture, not money</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262601660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nah, money works.<br> <br>
When the American economy finally goes into the toilet and the American child becomes as poor as the rural Chinese kid, they'll learn to work harder.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nah , money works .
When the American economy finally goes into the toilet and the American child becomes as poor as the rural Chinese kid , they 'll learn to work harder .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nah, money works.
When the American economy finally goes into the toilet and the American child becomes as poor as the rural Chinese kid, they'll learn to work harder.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634842</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635482</id>
	<title>Re:This is a joke, right?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262521920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I certainly hope this post is a joke, as there is absolutely no reason while bigger, faster, shinier more energy intensive devices are going to be necessarily better than a simpler device.
<br> <br>
My early child hood technology consisted mainly of books, Play-doh, LEGOs, magnifying glasses, hammers, nails and scrap blocks of wood from a paint brush handle factory down the street. And I fail to see how that early education "tech" could have been improved by an e-version of anything.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I certainly hope this post is a joke , as there is absolutely no reason while bigger , faster , shinier more energy intensive devices are going to be necessarily better than a simpler device .
My early child hood technology consisted mainly of books , Play-doh , LEGOs , magnifying glasses , hammers , nails and scrap blocks of wood from a paint brush handle factory down the street .
And I fail to see how that early education " tech " could have been improved by an e-version of anything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I certainly hope this post is a joke, as there is absolutely no reason while bigger, faster, shinier more energy intensive devices are going to be necessarily better than a simpler device.
My early child hood technology consisted mainly of books, Play-doh, LEGOs, magnifying glasses, hammers, nails and scrap blocks of wood from a paint brush handle factory down the street.
And I fail to see how that early education "tech" could have been improved by an e-version of anything.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634484</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637552</id>
	<title>Hold your horses.</title>
	<author>XB-70</author>
	<datestamp>1262540400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've been up close and personal with the education 'system' as past chair of a parent's association, parent of an educator and ex-spouse of another. I've worked closely with two levels of government and I've presented before legislative bodies to ask just what the fuck is going on in the educational world.
<p>The long and the short of it is that technology has about as much impact on education as an electron does on a nucleus.
</p><p>Education is a bloody mess. It is a co-opted quagmire of politizised bullshit that's so deep that you'd need a chunnel mole to get to the bottom of it. It's all about rules and protecting everyone's ass, not about the kids. (This is not meant as a slag on teachers, it's the way the system is implemented that's the problem.)
</p><p>If you really want to change the speed and ability with which children learn, here's what you do: focus very intently on the various pedagogic methodologies. Make each school an autonomous unit with the principal in complete control of every aspect of school life. Implement pedagogic triage every three years to determine the most efective way that each student learns. Apply targeted learning materials  in a broad spectrum of subjects. Swirl in a minimum of one hour of excersize per day. Make sure that each student consumes no junk food whatsoever and is fed balanced, healthy meals.
</p><p>Oh, and get BOTH parents involved with their children on a daily basis.
</p><p>If you manage all that, then, and only then should you swirl in computers. The rest of the world had better step back because our super brained children will take over the world.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been up close and personal with the education 'system ' as past chair of a parent 's association , parent of an educator and ex-spouse of another .
I 've worked closely with two levels of government and I 've presented before legislative bodies to ask just what the fuck is going on in the educational world .
The long and the short of it is that technology has about as much impact on education as an electron does on a nucleus .
Education is a bloody mess .
It is a co-opted quagmire of politizised bullshit that 's so deep that you 'd need a chunnel mole to get to the bottom of it .
It 's all about rules and protecting everyone 's ass , not about the kids .
( This is not meant as a slag on teachers , it 's the way the system is implemented that 's the problem .
) If you really want to change the speed and ability with which children learn , here 's what you do : focus very intently on the various pedagogic methodologies .
Make each school an autonomous unit with the principal in complete control of every aspect of school life .
Implement pedagogic triage every three years to determine the most efective way that each student learns .
Apply targeted learning materials in a broad spectrum of subjects .
Swirl in a minimum of one hour of excersize per day .
Make sure that each student consumes no junk food whatsoever and is fed balanced , healthy meals .
Oh , and get BOTH parents involved with their children on a daily basis .
If you manage all that , then , and only then should you swirl in computers .
The rest of the world had better step back because our super brained children will take over the world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been up close and personal with the education 'system' as past chair of a parent's association, parent of an educator and ex-spouse of another.
I've worked closely with two levels of government and I've presented before legislative bodies to ask just what the fuck is going on in the educational world.
The long and the short of it is that technology has about as much impact on education as an electron does on a nucleus.
Education is a bloody mess.
It is a co-opted quagmire of politizised bullshit that's so deep that you'd need a chunnel mole to get to the bottom of it.
It's all about rules and protecting everyone's ass, not about the kids.
(This is not meant as a slag on teachers, it's the way the system is implemented that's the problem.
)
If you really want to change the speed and ability with which children learn, here's what you do: focus very intently on the various pedagogic methodologies.
Make each school an autonomous unit with the principal in complete control of every aspect of school life.
Implement pedagogic triage every three years to determine the most efective way that each student learns.
Apply targeted learning materials  in a broad spectrum of subjects.
Swirl in a minimum of one hour of excersize per day.
Make sure that each student consumes no junk food whatsoever and is fed balanced, healthy meals.
Oh, and get BOTH parents involved with their children on a daily basis.
If you manage all that, then, and only then should you swirl in computers.
The rest of the world had better step back because our super brained children will take over the world.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636162</id>
	<title>Re:Simple Rugged Durable = Better</title>
	<author>kdart</author>
	<datestamp>1262526840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are quite right. Taken further, the simplest tools are paper and pencil. Also blocks, builders of some sort (like Legos), and "manipulatives". But nothing beats basic human interaction, one on one. For young children this all that is needed.</p><p>I believe too much technology exposure at a young age is actually detrimental to learning. I'm not the only one. See:</p><p><a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13507\_3-9757396-18.html" title="cnet.com">http://news.cnet.com/8301-13507\_3-9757396-18.html</a> [cnet.com]</p><p>In my experience, the best teacher IS experience. Kids just need to get outside more and play.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are quite right .
Taken further , the simplest tools are paper and pencil .
Also blocks , builders of some sort ( like Legos ) , and " manipulatives " .
But nothing beats basic human interaction , one on one .
For young children this all that is needed.I believe too much technology exposure at a young age is actually detrimental to learning .
I 'm not the only one .
See : http : //news.cnet.com/8301-13507 \ _3-9757396-18.html [ cnet.com ] In my experience , the best teacher IS experience .
Kids just need to get outside more and play .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are quite right.
Taken further, the simplest tools are paper and pencil.
Also blocks, builders of some sort (like Legos), and "manipulatives".
But nothing beats basic human interaction, one on one.
For young children this all that is needed.I believe too much technology exposure at a young age is actually detrimental to learning.
I'm not the only one.
See:http://news.cnet.com/8301-13507\_3-9757396-18.html [cnet.com]In my experience, the best teacher IS experience.
Kids just need to get outside more and play.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637356</id>
	<title>Re:Teachers Colleges are not teaching technology</title>
	<author>SurlyJest</author>
	<datestamp>1262538360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
I really don't mean this as a troll, but, really, do Teacher's colleges (or Education departments) really teach anything significant at all?  I was an undergraduate 40 years ago and education majors were not exactly considered the brightest on campus then and, as far as I can tell, still aren't (from my kids in college).</p><p>
Personally, I believe that when women with intelligence could become anything they wanted, the teaching profession lost its most reliable source of decent practitioners.  I hasten to add that I don't think we should turn the clock back on that, but it would be nice if teaching attracted more of the highly competent women that now go into business or other professions.  How to do that is another issue and there are serious cultural as well as financial problems to overcome here.</p><p>


And yes, I will plead guilty to holding the probably sexist notion that intelligent women are better at handling younger children (say before middle school, at least) than equally intelligent men, on average.  That's just the way it is (in my not so humble opinion).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I really do n't mean this as a troll , but , really , do Teacher 's colleges ( or Education departments ) really teach anything significant at all ?
I was an undergraduate 40 years ago and education majors were not exactly considered the brightest on campus then and , as far as I can tell , still are n't ( from my kids in college ) .
Personally , I believe that when women with intelligence could become anything they wanted , the teaching profession lost its most reliable source of decent practitioners .
I hasten to add that I do n't think we should turn the clock back on that , but it would be nice if teaching attracted more of the highly competent women that now go into business or other professions .
How to do that is another issue and there are serious cultural as well as financial problems to overcome here .
And yes , I will plead guilty to holding the probably sexist notion that intelligent women are better at handling younger children ( say before middle school , at least ) than equally intelligent men , on average .
That 's just the way it is ( in my not so humble opinion ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
I really don't mean this as a troll, but, really, do Teacher's colleges (or Education departments) really teach anything significant at all?
I was an undergraduate 40 years ago and education majors were not exactly considered the brightest on campus then and, as far as I can tell, still aren't (from my kids in college).
Personally, I believe that when women with intelligence could become anything they wanted, the teaching profession lost its most reliable source of decent practitioners.
I hasten to add that I don't think we should turn the clock back on that, but it would be nice if teaching attracted more of the highly competent women that now go into business or other professions.
How to do that is another issue and there are serious cultural as well as financial problems to overcome here.
And yes, I will plead guilty to holding the probably sexist notion that intelligent women are better at handling younger children (say before middle school, at least) than equally intelligent men, on average.
That's just the way it is (in my not so humble opinion).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637288</id>
	<title>Re:Culture, not money</title>
	<author>zazenation</author>
	<datestamp>1262537760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You hit the proverbial nail -- Sad to say.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; I'd like to add how television aids in reinforcing this behavior pattern. It would probably be a safe bet to say that education desire/absorption is inversely proportion to the number of hours in front of the tube.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; (In my formative years, I could count on one hand the number of UHF and VHF channels. Therefore, less TV watching, not to mention that one had to actually get up off the sofa to change the channel. A TV in one's room was a non starter.)<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Try and convince the inner city single parent to limit the hours in front of the electronic babysitter. The imagery on the tube almost never reinforces education for advancement. Street smarts and gaming the system is all that is required to get ahead and/or be popular.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You hit the proverbial nail -- Sad to say .
      I 'd like to add how television aids in reinforcing this behavior pattern .
It would probably be a safe bet to say that education desire/absorption is inversely proportion to the number of hours in front of the tube .
      ( In my formative years , I could count on one hand the number of UHF and VHF channels .
Therefore , less TV watching , not to mention that one had to actually get up off the sofa to change the channel .
A TV in one 's room was a non starter .
)       Try and convince the inner city single parent to limit the hours in front of the electronic babysitter .
The imagery on the tube almost never reinforces education for advancement .
Street smarts and gaming the system is all that is required to get ahead and/or be popular .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You hit the proverbial nail -- Sad to say.
      I'd like to add how television aids in reinforcing this behavior pattern.
It would probably be a safe bet to say that education desire/absorption is inversely proportion to the number of hours in front of the tube.
      (In my formative years, I could count on one hand the number of UHF and VHF channels.
Therefore, less TV watching, not to mention that one had to actually get up off the sofa to change the channel.
A TV in one's room was a non starter.
)
      Try and convince the inner city single parent to limit the hours in front of the electronic babysitter.
The imagery on the tube almost never reinforces education for advancement.
Street smarts and gaming the system is all that is required to get ahead and/or be popular.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634842</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634984</id>
	<title>Re:Simple Rugged Durable = Better</title>
	<author>Alien Being</author>
	<datestamp>1262518800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's a great reason to support all local business as much as possible.  The more local it is, the better.</p><p>Just look at all the middlemen involved when you buy from national and international sources.  Most of those middlemen are people working far from their homes in order to take jobs from people who are trying to work close to home.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's a great reason to support all local business as much as possible .
The more local it is , the better.Just look at all the middlemen involved when you buy from national and international sources .
Most of those middlemen are people working far from their homes in order to take jobs from people who are trying to work close to home .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's a great reason to support all local business as much as possible.
The more local it is, the better.Just look at all the middlemen involved when you buy from national and international sources.
Most of those middlemen are people working far from their homes in order to take jobs from people who are trying to work close to home.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634862</id>
	<title>Plasma != Thin screen</title>
	<author>Ken\_g6</author>
	<datestamp>1262517960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've never seen a "PLATO", so "touch-sensitive 8.5"x8.5" bit-mapped plasma screens" gave me visions of a tablet PC/laptop, maybe even like the Apple tablet that's supposed to come out soon.</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Platovterm1981.jpg" title="wikipedia.org">Not even close!</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've never seen a " PLATO " , so " touch-sensitive 8.5 " x8.5 " bit-mapped plasma screens " gave me visions of a tablet PC/laptop , maybe even like the Apple tablet that 's supposed to come out soon.Not even close !
[ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've never seen a "PLATO", so "touch-sensitive 8.5"x8.5" bit-mapped plasma screens" gave me visions of a tablet PC/laptop, maybe even like the Apple tablet that's supposed to come out soon.Not even close!
[wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30639010</id>
	<title>Nah, relax</title>
	<author>wzzzzrd</author>
	<datestamp>1262605080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Be nice parents (just be, don't "try to be"), have a real interest in your children. Send them to school but never forget: it's also YOUR thing to educate your children. If you put them in front of a XB360 or a TV or a PC connected to the net because the education is taken care of in school, epic fail. Grow some confidence, try to teach your children what YOU know, what you think is interesting or worth knowing. See what I did there?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Be nice parents ( just be , do n't " try to be " ) , have a real interest in your children .
Send them to school but never forget : it 's also YOUR thing to educate your children .
If you put them in front of a XB360 or a TV or a PC connected to the net because the education is taken care of in school , epic fail .
Grow some confidence , try to teach your children what YOU know , what you think is interesting or worth knowing .
See what I did there ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Be nice parents (just be, don't "try to be"), have a real interest in your children.
Send them to school but never forget: it's also YOUR thing to educate your children.
If you put them in front of a XB360 or a TV or a PC connected to the net because the education is taken care of in school, epic fail.
Grow some confidence, try to teach your children what YOU know, what you think is interesting or worth knowing.
See what I did there?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30640674</id>
	<title>Re:No technology, it's the human touch that's vita</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262620680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's not technology that's needed; quite the contrary: it's intimate human contact. READ to them, tell stories, interact. That's what children need because it's how children learn: listening, interacting, being HUMAN. The technology is a boondoggle in this. Love your kids, play with them, READ to them, be real people. For some slashdot folks that might be challenge enough.</p></div><p>Children need contact with other children not just adults. That is the main problem with home schooling. Furthermore its far more important to have good math and English capability at the age of 25 than 5.<br>Maybe its no coincidence that we have a really poor lower level school system together with the best university system in the world. Perhaps this is a reasonable resource trade-off.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not technology that 's needed ; quite the contrary : it 's intimate human contact .
READ to them , tell stories , interact .
That 's what children need because it 's how children learn : listening , interacting , being HUMAN .
The technology is a boondoggle in this .
Love your kids , play with them , READ to them , be real people .
For some slashdot folks that might be challenge enough.Children need contact with other children not just adults .
That is the main problem with home schooling .
Furthermore its far more important to have good math and English capability at the age of 25 than 5.Maybe its no coincidence that we have a really poor lower level school system together with the best university system in the world .
Perhaps this is a reasonable resource trade-off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not technology that's needed; quite the contrary: it's intimate human contact.
READ to them, tell stories, interact.
That's what children need because it's how children learn: listening, interacting, being HUMAN.
The technology is a boondoggle in this.
Love your kids, play with them, READ to them, be real people.
For some slashdot folks that might be challenge enough.Children need contact with other children not just adults.
That is the main problem with home schooling.
Furthermore its far more important to have good math and English capability at the age of 25 than 5.Maybe its no coincidence that we have a really poor lower level school system together with the best university system in the world.
Perhaps this is a reasonable resource trade-off.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635762</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636088</id>
	<title>Re:Simple Rugged Durable = Better</title>
	<author>lionchild</author>
	<datestamp>1262526420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>More than just simple, rugged and durable is better, with public education, cost is always a strong consideration.  With it comes down to the cost between a workstation(s), and being able t afford a good, qualified teacher...having the extra teacher or the para will win every time.  As economic times get tougher, that's more and more true.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>More than just simple , rugged and durable is better , with public education , cost is always a strong consideration .
With it comes down to the cost between a workstation ( s ) , and being able t afford a good , qualified teacher...having the extra teacher or the para will win every time .
As economic times get tougher , that 's more and more true .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More than just simple, rugged and durable is better, with public education, cost is always a strong consideration.
With it comes down to the cost between a workstation(s), and being able t afford a good, qualified teacher...having the extra teacher or the para will win every time.
As economic times get tougher, that's more and more true.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634792</id>
	<title>Vaporware of the past</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262517480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was an Illinois school child four decades ago, and neither I nor anybody I knew had even heard of PLATO until we got to the university level. From the article, it looks like it was deployed on a trial basis in a couple of classrooms in near the UIUC. However, the terminals were extremely expensive and required dedicated links to the mainframe. I doubt that the money and/or technology to widely deploy this in grade schools across the state would have been be practical until the 1990s. So bottom line: early childhood education was not more advanced back then, since only a tiny fraction of 1\% of kids even had access to this experiment.</p><p>PLATO was amazing. It had many or most of the technologies used in the current web/email/chat/etc, but it somehow managed to support 400 people interactively sharing a single CPU that had about the same horsepower as an 80286. However, most of the people who had access to it were in university computer labs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was an Illinois school child four decades ago , and neither I nor anybody I knew had even heard of PLATO until we got to the university level .
From the article , it looks like it was deployed on a trial basis in a couple of classrooms in near the UIUC .
However , the terminals were extremely expensive and required dedicated links to the mainframe .
I doubt that the money and/or technology to widely deploy this in grade schools across the state would have been be practical until the 1990s .
So bottom line : early childhood education was not more advanced back then , since only a tiny fraction of 1 \ % of kids even had access to this experiment.PLATO was amazing .
It had many or most of the technologies used in the current web/email/chat/etc , but it somehow managed to support 400 people interactively sharing a single CPU that had about the same horsepower as an 80286 .
However , most of the people who had access to it were in university computer labs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was an Illinois school child four decades ago, and neither I nor anybody I knew had even heard of PLATO until we got to the university level.
From the article, it looks like it was deployed on a trial basis in a couple of classrooms in near the UIUC.
However, the terminals were extremely expensive and required dedicated links to the mainframe.
I doubt that the money and/or technology to widely deploy this in grade schools across the state would have been be practical until the 1990s.
So bottom line: early childhood education was not more advanced back then, since only a tiny fraction of 1\% of kids even had access to this experiment.PLATO was amazing.
It had many or most of the technologies used in the current web/email/chat/etc, but it somehow managed to support 400 people interactively sharing a single CPU that had about the same horsepower as an 80286.
However, most of the people who had access to it were in university computer labs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635550</id>
	<title>Re:This is a joke, right?</title>
	<author>bschorr</author>
	<datestamp>1262522400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have no idea how this nonsense got modded as "funny."  It's nothing but flamebait at best.<br><br>It is, at least, on-topic flamebait - seeing as how it nicely demonstrates an utter failure of our education system.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have no idea how this nonsense got modded as " funny .
" It 's nothing but flamebait at best.It is , at least , on-topic flamebait - seeing as how it nicely demonstrates an utter failure of our education system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have no idea how this nonsense got modded as "funny.
"  It's nothing but flamebait at best.It is, at least, on-topic flamebait - seeing as how it nicely demonstrates an utter failure of our education system.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30643700</id>
	<title>Used smartphones given to kids in three years</title>
	<author>Paul Fernhout</author>
	<datestamp>1262632620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Some ideas here:<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; <a href="http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch\_listcultures.org/2009-November/006250.html" title="listcultures.org">http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch\_listcultures.org/2009-November/006250.html</a> [listcultures.org]</p><p>In two to three years or so, the current generation of smart phones just coming out like the Google Droid will be discarded for something new, and those might make terrific cheap education platforms.</p><p>So, Droid is a more tempting platform to me for educational software than the OLPC and Sugar in that sense of a big market.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p><p>Imagine, Google and Verizon could even make a promise now to customers -- buy your Droid through Verizon, and in two years, if you continue your cell phone plan, we will give you the latest Droid version and if you return the old one to a Verizon store, we'll send it to materially poor kids loaded with educational software that teaches them how to read, write, and do math. And with bluetooth, and WiFi, the Droid could even have some software that works along the lines that Sugar aspired to do, with kids collaborating together. What a deal -- and it might greatly boost current sales.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-) Maybe someone should forward this note to someone they know at Google or Verizon?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-) Seriously, what US teacher would not buy a Droid over an iPhone knowing it was going to teach some poor kid to read in two years? (Of course, Apple might eventually have to follow suit.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-) And that gives me and the rest of the free software developer world two years to write all that free software for those kids.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-) Of course, it might be nice if Google or Verizon helped   some of those free software developers to write lots of cool stuff (millions of dollars in support for education software could just be considered part of their advertising budget). But it might happen even if they did not directly provide support, because a lot of developers might see the potential, as I did. And it might help Droid sales even now, for parents to hand their Droid to their kid who was learning to read or write or do arithmetic, and it would help the kid. Parents might even buy a Droid for all their kids, and think that in two years, those Droids would also go to materially poor nations. This project might even help boost the economic recovery in the USA. And of course, there are many Android devices beside the Droid, so all of those might benefit as well from educational software. And, the Android platform already runs well under almost any PC OS in emulation. So, any free software made for the Android will also run right now on any desktop or laptop, and likely that integration could be improved even more over time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some ideas here :     http : //listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch \ _listcultures.org/2009-November/006250.html [ listcultures.org ] In two to three years or so , the current generation of smart phones just coming out like the Google Droid will be discarded for something new , and those might make terrific cheap education platforms.So , Droid is a more tempting platform to me for educational software than the OLPC and Sugar in that sense of a big market .
: - ) Imagine , Google and Verizon could even make a promise now to customers -- buy your Droid through Verizon , and in two years , if you continue your cell phone plan , we will give you the latest Droid version and if you return the old one to a Verizon store , we 'll send it to materially poor kids loaded with educational software that teaches them how to read , write , and do math .
And with bluetooth , and WiFi , the Droid could even have some software that works along the lines that Sugar aspired to do , with kids collaborating together .
What a deal -- and it might greatly boost current sales .
: - ) Maybe someone should forward this note to someone they know at Google or Verizon ?
: - ) Seriously , what US teacher would not buy a Droid over an iPhone knowing it was going to teach some poor kid to read in two years ?
( Of course , Apple might eventually have to follow suit .
: - ) And that gives me and the rest of the free software developer world two years to write all that free software for those kids .
: - ) Of course , it might be nice if Google or Verizon helped some of those free software developers to write lots of cool stuff ( millions of dollars in support for education software could just be considered part of their advertising budget ) .
But it might happen even if they did not directly provide support , because a lot of developers might see the potential , as I did .
And it might help Droid sales even now , for parents to hand their Droid to their kid who was learning to read or write or do arithmetic , and it would help the kid .
Parents might even buy a Droid for all their kids , and think that in two years , those Droids would also go to materially poor nations .
This project might even help boost the economic recovery in the USA .
And of course , there are many Android devices beside the Droid , so all of those might benefit as well from educational software .
And , the Android platform already runs well under almost any PC OS in emulation .
So , any free software made for the Android will also run right now on any desktop or laptop , and likely that integration could be improved even more over time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some ideas here:
    http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch\_listcultures.org/2009-November/006250.html [listcultures.org]In two to three years or so, the current generation of smart phones just coming out like the Google Droid will be discarded for something new, and those might make terrific cheap education platforms.So, Droid is a more tempting platform to me for educational software than the OLPC and Sugar in that sense of a big market.
:-)Imagine, Google and Verizon could even make a promise now to customers -- buy your Droid through Verizon, and in two years, if you continue your cell phone plan, we will give you the latest Droid version and if you return the old one to a Verizon store, we'll send it to materially poor kids loaded with educational software that teaches them how to read, write, and do math.
And with bluetooth, and WiFi, the Droid could even have some software that works along the lines that Sugar aspired to do, with kids collaborating together.
What a deal -- and it might greatly boost current sales.
:-) Maybe someone should forward this note to someone they know at Google or Verizon?
:-) Seriously, what US teacher would not buy a Droid over an iPhone knowing it was going to teach some poor kid to read in two years?
(Of course, Apple might eventually have to follow suit.
:-) And that gives me and the rest of the free software developer world two years to write all that free software for those kids.
:-) Of course, it might be nice if Google or Verizon helped   some of those free software developers to write lots of cool stuff (millions of dollars in support for education software could just be considered part of their advertising budget).
But it might happen even if they did not directly provide support, because a lot of developers might see the potential, as I did.
And it might help Droid sales even now, for parents to hand their Droid to their kid who was learning to read or write or do arithmetic, and it would help the kid.
Parents might even buy a Droid for all their kids, and think that in two years, those Droids would also go to materially poor nations.
This project might even help boost the economic recovery in the USA.
And of course, there are many Android devices beside the Droid, so all of those might benefit as well from educational software.
And, the Android platform already runs well under almost any PC OS in emulation.
So, any free software made for the Android will also run right now on any desktop or laptop, and likely that integration could be improved even more over time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635784</id>
	<title>Re:Article is a troll</title>
	<author>jonbryce</author>
	<datestamp>1262524320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A lot of cell phones can do video calls.  The thing is that people generally don't want to do video calls.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A lot of cell phones can do video calls .
The thing is that people generally do n't want to do video calls .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A lot of cell phones can do video calls.
The thing is that people generally don't want to do video calls.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634754</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634666</id>
	<title>Only on slashdot</title>
	<author>phizi0n</author>
	<datestamp>1262516640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Only on slashdot will you find a comparison where a 1970's terminal is declared superior to a modern gameboy-like product.

<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PLATO\_(computer\_system)" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PLATO\_(computer\_system)</a> [wikipedia.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Only on slashdot will you find a comparison where a 1970 's terminal is declared superior to a modern gameboy-like product .
http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PLATO \ _ ( computer \ _system ) [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only on slashdot will you find a comparison where a 1970's terminal is declared superior to a modern gameboy-like product.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PLATO\_(computer\_system) [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635528</id>
	<title>Re:Simple Rugged Durable = Better</title>
	<author>dave sapien</author>
	<datestamp>1262522220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can only say from our experiences developing developmental/educational apps for young toddlers that they generally dont through the iphone with enough force to kill it.
With that said, very young kids only see the iphone as a object, whats going on onscreen is only part of the experience. So its hardly surprising that children are oblivious to moores law.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can only say from our experiences developing developmental/educational apps for young toddlers that they generally dont through the iphone with enough force to kill it .
With that said , very young kids only see the iphone as a object , whats going on onscreen is only part of the experience .
So its hardly surprising that children are oblivious to moores law .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can only say from our experiences developing developmental/educational apps for young toddlers that they generally dont through the iphone with enough force to kill it.
With that said, very young kids only see the iphone as a object, whats going on onscreen is only part of the experience.
So its hardly surprising that children are oblivious to moores law.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634940</id>
	<title>Meanwhile, in other news ...</title>
	<author>PPH</author>
	<datestamp>1262518500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>... kids spend the rest of their waking hours texting each other on tiny cellphone screens.</htmltext>
<tokenext>... kids spend the rest of their waking hours texting each other on tiny cellphone screens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... kids spend the rest of their waking hours texting each other on tiny cellphone screens.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634872</id>
	<title>Re:As Clifford Stoll Said</title>
	<author>Ethanol-fueled</author>
	<datestamp>1262518020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>No. We learned to that all that settlers needed was a 99 rounds of ammunition.</p></div></blockquote><p>

Or that a rich banker will always win the game no matter his/her skill level<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
We learned to that all that settlers needed was a 99 rounds of ammunition .
Or that a rich banker will always win the game no matter his/her skill level : (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
We learned to that all that settlers needed was a 99 rounds of ammunition.
Or that a rich banker will always win the game no matter his/her skill level :(
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634704</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635028</id>
	<title>Re:Simple Rugged Durable = Better</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262519100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The latest and greatest techno-glitter is often not what's needed.</p></div><p>You were headed in the right direction, but some how missed the destination.</p><p>What proof is there that any technological solution is productive or effective?  Why bemoan a shrinking screen size when shrinking goals explains shrinking results.</p><p>Pencil and Paper generally don't distract the student from the task at hand.  And the budget for those can be managed with pocket change.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The latest and greatest techno-glitter is often not what 's needed.You were headed in the right direction , but some how missed the destination.What proof is there that any technological solution is productive or effective ?
Why bemoan a shrinking screen size when shrinking goals explains shrinking results.Pencil and Paper generally do n't distract the student from the task at hand .
And the budget for those can be managed with pocket change .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The latest and greatest techno-glitter is often not what's needed.You were headed in the right direction, but some how missed the destination.What proof is there that any technological solution is productive or effective?
Why bemoan a shrinking screen size when shrinking goals explains shrinking results.Pencil and Paper generally don't distract the student from the task at hand.
And the budget for those can be managed with pocket change.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637124
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634890
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634704
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636628
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30676696
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634842
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634628
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30679924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636398
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634588
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637804
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634704
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637652
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634984
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636710
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634628
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30646904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30638784
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634842
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635784
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30638440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30640596
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634704
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30638804
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636618
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30676594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30639046
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30638136
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636162
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30646570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30638194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30639258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30638136
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30639646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30638624
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634872
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634704
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636824
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634890
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634704
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635550
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634850
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30639582
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30638096
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634704
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637920
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635528
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637968
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30638836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636088
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30642820
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30640674
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635470
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634628
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637686
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635108
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634684
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30646534
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635342
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635516
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634850
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30656732
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634842
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_03_2110216_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634842
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_03_2110216.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634882
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_03_2110216.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637552
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_03_2110216.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635052
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_03_2110216.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634880
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637356
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637968
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_03_2110216.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634490
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30638194
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634684
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635108
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637022
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30676594
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_03_2110216.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634666
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_03_2110216.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635762
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30640674
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_03_2110216.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636778
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_03_2110216.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634754
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634924
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635784
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_03_2110216.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635342
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30646534
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_03_2110216.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634842
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30676696
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637288
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637260
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30638784
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_03_2110216.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635404
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_03_2110216.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634704
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634890
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636824
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637124
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636254
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634872
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30638624
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637804
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637396
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_03_2110216.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634484
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634850
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635220
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635516
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635550
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634606
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635482
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30639646
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30638136
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30639046
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30639258
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30646904
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634602
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636398
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_03_2110216.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634878
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_03_2110216.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635490
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30638096
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30639582
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637686
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30646570
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_03_2110216.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634486
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635028
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30642820
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635528
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30638804
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636088
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634790
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30638440
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637508
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30656732
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634984
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636628
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637920
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636618
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30679924
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30638836
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30640596
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637488
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637584
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30637652
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636162
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634588
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_03_2110216.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634862
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_03_2110216.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30634628
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636004
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30636710
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_03_2110216.30635470
</commentlist>
</conversation>
