Monday, December 18, 2006

Seeking a New Skills Revolution

Original Article - Check the comments
Executive Summary for Tough Choices or Tough Times
- First empression: Accountability is all over the places. The proposed changes are enomarous and may not be practicle. What good it is if no one is going to adopt it. I don't know if it's realistic. It propose a mass production of high quality worker while detail less on how those works will be created. Is it realistic to assum that US will house all the high quality job while others will not? It does not consider if US are too late in the game. We have to realize that if we are too late in the game, the only choice we will have is to hope to achieve a sustainable society other than a elite society.

Summary goes here!

US should 'focus its economy on high end products and services'. Which is the right approach. The question is how. Everyone will say: through education. The problem is, this is no small job.

Without making students take up responsibilities, any system will fail. Public funding schools does not mean everyone entitle to go to school - just like not everyone got to be governnor. Yes, not all students are for college, but we still need provide them appropriate future.

Tuesday, December 12, 2006

State Spending Continues to Climb

Original Article

Summary goes here!

Let's see if any of these exceed the inflation rate? The state pending cap?

Tuition Tax Break Extended

Original Article

Summary goes here! - still working on...
This way of please voter have been carried out for quite a while.
I, however, wonder if this solve the real problem and if this is the right policy. Or if this should be part of a bigger picture.

A demoncartic system requires people take their own responsibilities and using public resources to help those un-fortunate. Governments can't afford to let people slip away from their responsibilities. One way to prompt people to take their responsibility is through compansation. In this view, this seem to be a reasonable approach. The Tax Break won't cover all cost, so people have to value the education enough to spend their own money.

Like some of the comments said, how about those can't afford to go to colleges? Do we consider them the un-fortunate? Or if it's fare for parent that making more money be 'required' to pay their kids' college cost? Should we simply send qualified kids at no cost?

Feeling the Winds From Washington

Original Article - Again, the comments there are of no construction.

Summary goes here!

As acknowleged by some academics, there are problems. A question should also asked is how we build a system that will reduce the chances for these problems to happen. As we all know, self monitoring is problematic in human history.

As one also point out that the Spellings give them more chances in examing their systems.

Thursday, December 07, 2006

Endless debates on fair admission

Original Article

Drafts to be re-written
Everone have equal chances
--Internet Chat
Test is not coachable
--Study more and hard should not be considered coachable.
--Test need be written so that it test the 'real knowledge'.
Admission is based purly on score

  1. Will diversity still a questions if the above goal is obtained?
  2. Message: The door is open to any race, as long as you can excel the test. This is open to all.
Suppose, no race info is given at admission, there will then be no question about race(name is another clue). Institution will then be race blind. The question is then on how to achieve the equal chances for all kids. K12 does not cost a dime that is a ground. Library is free, that is race blind. Teacher speak to all kids that is race blind. The GPA may be race biased. So use standard test - which is race blind. Parent help - teacher should do better so that parent help doesn't help.
Assuming all parent do is watching but not teaching or at least wouldn't help in grade.

Diversity operation is against fairness! They simply can't be co-exist in principle. Even in a pure race blind environment, there are other factors that will randered the un-diversity. The insist on diversity is simply another non-blind, biased factor.

Do we favor the diversity or the fairness?
Fairness brings in diversity in nature process while the diversity brings in fairness in artifacture.

The Need for Another Sputnik

Original Article - Problem in science education - lake motivation

Summary goes here!

‘To get a good job after graduation: 64 percent’ — Well. Do our college courses designed for this? — It doesn’t mean it’s a good thing, but we do need understand students’ need in order to communicate with them.

‘They think it is too difficult: 44 percent’ — Well. Indeed it is and which is not going to change. It seems this is a social problem. Our kids just don’t like hard work. How to solve this?

I used to hear a saying that “China’s leader are engineers while US’ leader are politicians” — No. I don’t think it’s always true. But this give us something to think about. Were scientists in US given more respects or spotlights than politicians or pop star?

I read a story about a high-achieving engineer who decided to go back to school and earn a MBA degree because his counterparts made more money than he did’.

Well. If science is going to be hard and low rewarding, I don’t think many people are motivated to learn it. We can make it mandatory but that will only achieve the facial value?

I wonder if in our society, there is a mind set that scientists are ONLY good at science and that they make no good management decisions. The thing is that if scientists were able to comprehend the hard stuff, why we think they will have trouble understand management? Sometimes, chances is all it take to give people motivated. On the ohter hand, without good tech. background, how a general manager can make good tech. decisions?

By the way, Intel used to be led by CEOs with tech. background.

Friday, December 01, 2006

Consensus (or Not) About Comparability

Original Article - On Spellings' accreditation meeting

Summary goes here!
This is a big task and I still feel that establishing a new accreditation type for for-profit institutions is a good start. For one, for-profit institutions is the one that is likely to run out of control and if there isn't any mechanism to objectively rectify these institutions there will be a lot of diploma mill. On the other hand, these new accreditation type can drive the cost down due to the competetion. Given time, these institution will grow and will push some traditional institutions to adjust their operation. Some of them may choose to run like for-profit and some of them may opt to offer qualities that can't be offered by low cost for-profit institutions - like research oriented trainings.