<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="todaycom/2.3.1" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for educationtidbits</title>
	<link>http://educationtidbits.today.com</link>
	<description>Just another Today.com weblog</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 07 Nov 2009 23:59:18 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://www.today.com/version-2.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on New Beginnings in Education by educatorabc</title>
		<link>http://educationtidbits.today.com/2008/11/29/new-beginnings-in-education/#comment-3</link>
		<dc:creator>educatorabc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Dec 2008 01:27:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://educationtidbits.today.com/2008/11/29/new-beginnings-in-education/#comment-3</guid>
		<description>It is interesting that you would reply as such.  I once got into a discussion with an Economist, which is basically a lose-lose scenario because we come from two different perspectives.  However, in this case, you have mistaken me with the stereotypical (in the eyes of politicians and administrators) whining teacher who doesn't want to teach the unmotivated.  Actually, we are not coming from that different of philosophies in the sense that we are both saying that the system needs to be more adaptable.  I totally agree with having a free public education that is adaptable to various needs.

We have to be careful in saying that computer-based training is the answer to all of our educational woes.  I say this because not all students have what it takes inherently (without learning some pretty harsh lessons in time management and perseverance) succeed in computer-based training.  It truly does come down to throwing out the notion that one size truly does fit all.  The system then needs to include a balance of hands on and direct instruction.  However, I will discuss this issue more in my next blog.

The long and short of it is that we need to stop the pattern of criticizing each other and learn how to work together in creating a system that is adaptable to all students' needs, not just the needs of a few.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is interesting that you would reply as such.  I once got into a discussion with an Economist, which is basically a lose-lose scenario because we come from two different perspectives.  However, in this case, you have mistaken me with the stereotypical (in the eyes of politicians and administrators) whining teacher who doesn&#8217;t want to teach the unmotivated.  Actually, we are not coming from that different of philosophies in the sense that we are both saying that the system needs to be more adaptable.  I totally agree with having a free public education that is adaptable to various needs.</p>
<p>We have to be careful in saying that computer-based training is the answer to all of our educational woes.  I say this because not all students have what it takes inherently (without learning some pretty harsh lessons in time management and perseverance) succeed in computer-based training.  It truly does come down to throwing out the notion that one size truly does fit all.  The system then needs to include a balance of hands on and direct instruction.  However, I will discuss this issue more in my next blog.</p>
<p>The long and short of it is that we need to stop the pattern of criticizing each other and learn how to work together in creating a system that is adaptable to all students&#8217; needs, not just the needs of a few.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on New Beginnings in Education by joe stafura</title>
		<link>http://educationtidbits.today.com/2008/11/29/new-beginnings-in-education/#comment-2</link>
		<dc:creator>joe stafura</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Nov 2008 19:28:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://educationtidbits.today.com/2008/11/29/new-beginnings-in-education/#comment-2</guid>
		<description>I've heard this argument many times from educators, the idea behind the argument is that if the students don't succeed in the system we have then they should leave it and go somewhere else.

Fortunately s more scientific approach is emerging that adapts the system to the student. This results in the student being taught to capacity instead of forcing them to fit the one size fits all model. 

Computer based training is now providing the adaptable curriculum that flips the paradigm, teachers will provide more of a triage service to students while they learn in a fashion that helps them reach potential instead of suffering through hours of talking heads that might as well be talking Urdu.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve heard this argument many times from educators, the idea behind the argument is that if the students don&#8217;t succeed in the system we have then they should leave it and go somewhere else.</p>
<p>Fortunately s more scientific approach is emerging that adapts the system to the student. This results in the student being taught to capacity instead of forcing them to fit the one size fits all model. </p>
<p>Computer based training is now providing the adaptable curriculum that flips the paradigm, teachers will provide more of a triage service to students while they learn in a fashion that helps them reach potential instead of suffering through hours of talking heads that might as well be talking Urdu.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>


