Blurts

New data from PEW seems to indicate that long form content production (blogs) has declined. Lenhart proposes that increase use of Facebook and phones has led to this decline.

The Eduflack blog offers an analysis of education winners and losers in the Obama budget. Technology ends up listed as a loser. The logic again is that tech expenses are part of everything, but EduFlack suggests that it is always better to have the dollars.

Details of updates to NCLB are beginning to emerge (NY Times). My quick reading seems to indicate schools will be placed more directly in competition rather than being focused on the proportion of students who meet AYP. Again, it appears that the logic is to take resources away from under performing schools as a punishment.

It also seems that the competition would be within states:

“States would measure school performance and differentiate schools on the basis of progress in getting all subgroups of students on track to CCR, the growth of individual students toward CCR, progress toward closing subgroup achievement gaps, graduation rates (at the high school level) and other measures as appropriate,” the summary said. “Schools that are showing significant improvement,” it said, “would be eligible for recognition and rewards.”

It also appears that schools must allow teachers to be evaluated based on student performance to qualify for federal payments or at least the “race to the top” funds.

I do think it is important to create a system sensitive the performance of all students. The existing system creates a lot of game playing with a focus on students in the “sweet spot” while ignoring those likely to do well and those unlikely to make it under any condition. My wife likes to describe this as “move all children forward” rather than “no child left behind”.

CNews offers an article describing the dropping scores of Canadian youth on entry tests of written English. Experience with social media is being blamed for the down turn in performance. I continue to wonder how serious this issue is and whether the problem is lack of awareness or lack of motivation. The distinction between conversational speech and written communication has always been an issue. Maybe it is simply a matter of making the effort to differentiate formal and informal communication.

Just get out your red pen, draw a line through improper grammar, and assume students will make the effort to adapt.

Apple fan or not, I really like this post by Mark Pilgrim. Once I got past the shock of a platform that made me do it myself, I pretty much made a career out of building things from code and from words. I wish there was more i could do to create things by manipulating what is within my Touch (or eventually) the iPad, but I now think the device is simply a way to get to the environment within which you create. What I now ask of a device is that it allows me to manipulate the tools that are online. If the device is for consumption, I would regard it as too limiting. If the device allows me to generate stuff efficiently and cost-effectively then I am in for a full share.

It appears that the anticipated iPad is already having an influence on providers. Gizmodo reports that Macmillan no longer wants to go along with the $10 price encouraged by Amazon perhaps assuming that Apple books will go for $15. My primitive view of the business world tends to assume that competition is good for consumers. However, in this case, it appears important to remember that competition may be good for sellers as well. The self-interest thing works when there are options. Companies such as Google and Amazon are to content produces but function in the middle. if the middleman is successful enough, it appears this role can dictate price in either direction.