See, I just don't see the overly pushy father thing at all. I think you're making a prejudiced assumption. And I haven't seen any reason for the school staff to be worried at all except for that one headline. And the article under that headline didn't even mention anything about the staff at all, much less actually promote the idea of them losing their jobs. The staff was NEVER threatened, and I haven't seen any criticism of them at all, in anything I've read. The only thing I have seen is criticism of the council. I'd honestly say I think the council just made that crap up (or at least exaggerated it greatly) to try and justify their decision and make the kid look like the bad guy. What exactly were the 'consequences' of her actions Lews? The food improved? How horrible? People had to answer questions about if they were actually giving kids the food they were supposed to be getting? Is transparency supposed to be a bad thing? Parents actually caring about what their kids are eating? How dare they? Or worse, the kids are now at risk of actually caring about what they eat themselves! they might be inspired to do something creative! the system will clearly never survive.
As for the risk of bringing electronics to school, I have no idea what you're imagining will happen with this, but they didn't need this for an excuse. Kids are always trying to smuggle their phones around and stuff anyway.
See, I just don't see the overly pushy father thing at all. I think you're making a prejudiced assumption. And I haven't seen any reason for the school staff to be worried at all except for that one headline. And the article under that headline didn't even mention anything about the staff at all, much less actually promote the idea of them losing their jobs. The staff was NEVER threatened, and I haven't seen any criticism of them at all, in anything I've read. The only thing I have seen is criticism of the council. I'd honestly say I think the council just made that crap up (or at least exaggerated it greatly) to try and justify their decision and make the kid look like the bad guy. What exactly were the 'consequences' of her actions Lews? The food improved? How horrible? People had to answer questions about if they were actually giving kids the food they were supposed to be getting? Is transparency supposed to be a bad thing? Parents actually caring about what their kids are eating? How dare they? Or worse, the kids are now at risk of actually caring about what they eat themselves! they might be inspired to do something creative! the system will clearly never survive.
As for the risk of bringing electronics to school, I have no idea what you're imagining will happen with this, but they didn't need this for an excuse. Kids are always trying to smuggle their phones around and stuff anyway.
Im sorry, you even state kids are always trying to smuggle their phones around anyways....the very fact you stated 'smuggle' means its against school policy. This only enhances the chances of kids bringing electronic devices to school at such a young age.
And you think parents dont care about food for their kids? Because you're based in the US, you have jackall knowledge of the school schemes being proposed around the country to improve school lunches, the attention raised by Jamie Oliver a few years ago. Kids care about what they eat anyways, and you think kids will read another strange girl's blog? How ignorant. This news didn't even get picked up by the UK's children's news programmes, let alone many kids who actually watch it...kids dont watch the news, hint hint.
The staff was NEVER threatened? The staff got threatened on every forum, blog, comment page this 'news' was posted under, including the BBC. Clearly being outside the UK, you have no knowledge of what goes on here and the school systems in place.
I don't see any problem with kids having cameras at school. If the governments want to put videos on every corner and a microphone in every house let's start with their offices and their houses.
Dank clearly you can see the difference between kids/others having cameras at schools and governments/authorities doing so. I doubt you'd need me to explain to you the obvious flaws in your examination....hint, privacy and the uses of such content in the wrong hands.
You talk about electronic devices like they are inherently evil. What, are they all secret transformers that will attack the kids? Electronics aren't banned from the schools anyway, not in my area at least. Teachers just don't want the kids bringing their cells to class because it's a distraction and potential cheating tool. That's classified as minor annoyance, not risk.
"Because you're based in the US, you have jackall knowledge of the school schemes being proposed around the country to improve school lunches"
Right, all Americans are OBVIOUSLY ignorant fools. Except this is actually part of my job Lews. I mentioned being the purchaser for my school already right? Part of that job is making sure we're complying with the government food program. I have to know exactly what kids are supposed to get at every point of the meal, and every other requirement of the program.
On top of just having the quantity stuff memorized, I have to make sure we're following the changes when they make new rules about things like how much fresh fruit and vegetables you're required to serve vs how much canned stuff you serve, etc. We're also always trying to improve our own program, and searching for ways to do better without raising costs, so I pay attention to what other people are coming up with. So guess what? You know jack all about what I know about school food programs.
"Jamie Oliver/ Kids care about what they eat anyways" ^Did you watch the same program I watched? Because really, they don't. At the very start of the show he did that "how to make chicken nuggets" lesson, which shows how they grind up the bones of the chicken carcass and then add a bunch of fake flavoring to make the patties, and the kids were like, "yeah I want to eat it, I'm hungry!" And Jamie had the most disgusted look on his face, but the kids didn't care at all, even knowing those nuggets were made out of trash.
There are kids who read the blog, as evidenced by some of the pictures that got submitted to the girl from around the world. But no, in general, kids probably aren't big blog readers or news watchers. You're the one saying kids are going to notice this and be "at risk" from it though. So you tell me, how are they going to be at risk if they didn't even notice anything happening because it wasn't on the news they don't watch anyway? You're kind of contradicting yourself here.
I never saw any criticism of the staff in the blog, I never saw anything in any of the articles I read either. I did not, however, read through every comment that got made either. If there's things I missed, please, send me the link and enlighten me.
You talk about electronic devices like they are inherently evil. What, are they all secret transformers that will attack the kids? Electronics aren't banned from the schools anyway, not in my area at least. Teachers just don't want the kids bringing their cells to class because it's a distraction and potential cheating tool. That's classified as minor annoyance, not risk.
"Because you're based in the US, you have jackall knowledge of the school schemes being proposed around the country to improve school lunches"
Right, all Americans are OBVIOUSLY ignorant fools. Except this is actually part of my job Lews. I mentioned being the purchaser for my school already right? Part of that job is making sure we're complying with the government food program. I have to know exactly what kids are supposed to get at every point of the meal, and every other requirement of the program.
On top of just having the quantity stuff memorized, I have to make sure we're following the changes when they make new rules about things like how much fresh fruit and vegetables you're required to serve vs how much canned stuff you serve, etc. We're also always trying to improve our own program, and searching for ways to do better without raising costs, so I pay attention to what other people are coming up with. So guess what? You know jack all about what I know about school food programs.
"Jamie Oliver/ Kids care about what they eat anyways" ^Did you watch the same program I watched? Because really, they don't. At the very start of the show he did that "how to make chicken nuggets" lesson, which shows how they grind up the bones of the chicken carcass and then add a bunch of fake flavoring to make the patties, and the kids were like, "yeah I want to eat it, I'm hungry!" And Jamie had the most disgusted look on his face, but the kids didn't care at all, even knowing those nuggets were made out of trash.
There are kids who read the blog, as evidenced by some of the pictures that got submitted to the girl from around the world. But no, in general, kids probably aren't big blog readers or news watchers. You're the one saying kids are going to notice this and be "at risk" from it though. So you tell me, how are they going to be at risk if they didn't even notice anything happening because it wasn't on the news they don't watch anyway? You're kind of contradicting yourself here.
I never saw any criticism of the staff in the blog, I never saw anything in any of the articles I read either. I did not, however, read through every comment that got made either. If there's things I missed, please, send me the link and enlighten me.
Hello ixta, she's based in the UK...not the US, so your system doesnt apply here. So you know jackall about the UK school program. Guess what, i've been through the UK school system as recent as a few years ago and still assist my previous schools as a teaching assistant occasionally.
And did you watch the same programme as well? Plus I'm stating the British Jamie's school dinners not your American version considering the blogger, school, food are all UK based. So quit quoting your American system.
Oh, but if you insist, did YOU not watch the same programme, a third of Americans are obese primarily because the system fails them, yet you defend your country's system of educating school children about nutrition. Are you stating then that in Jamie's American Revolution, schools DO NOT serve pizza for breakfast? Or flavoured milk? Really?
And i never stated all americans are ignorant fools, I didnt even state you were, only you know less of the British system than I do because YOU ARE NOT FROM THE UK. Geez, are school cooks over there all so frustrating...??? Theres a lot more emphasis in the UK to teach kids about nutrition and food health, we have lessons from the ages of 9, in the same sort of style as fire safety and sex education. The concepts of healthy eating is being embedded in youth. The problem has never been kids, but their parents and how important food is in the family. Dont dump on kids ixta, they know a lot more than you think. The food industry has a less substantial hold on society in the UK than it does in the US, here we see a lot more of the detrimental effects of unhealthy, processed food eating than you guys do mainly because there is a lot less funding from the food industry to government than in the US.
Also why do you feel it is ok for kids to bring electronic devices into schools? Im an advocate for more technology in schools, and giving kids proper ICT lessons than the existing ones. What I dislike however is the deregulation of electronic devices in schools. I've not done any research and atm dont have any time to look into if any academic papers have been published but I can guarantee a corrolation between why in primary school in the UK, theres a smaller gap between top performing students and struggling pupils and the burgeoning differences between the same pupils come middle/high school, and I'd say it has something to do with the acceptability to have mobile phones in school. Electronic devices by themselves do not hinder performance or put students at risk directly, but the inherent nature of these things create an addiction and lack of concentration in classes. They are also controversial in the hands of kids, (ill simply cite happy slapping, if you dno it, look it up then). It is also why school policy prevents photographs from being taken of students unauthorised, with social networking sites becoming more accessible to paedophiles and the like, kids with phones who are taking pictures on school campus of fellow students would easily post these content onto the public domain.
Plus, ixta, if you had ACTUALLY read my previous posts than simply take one side and stick to it, you'd see I stated all this media hype has seen significant improvements to her school's food and raised money for charity....
Where did I say I was supporting the American system? I said I knew about it, I didn't say I liked it. There's many things that I absolutely think are ridiculous in the American system, which is one reason I liked this story so much in the first place. I admire people taking initiative.
I still think you're completely wrong about the dad though. Please find me even one shred of evidence to back up your claims about him being pushy or exploitive. The existence of the blog itself is not evidence of these things, and as people have noticed, the blog is almost never critical or negative at all.
As for your hypothesis about mobile devices causing an extended performance gap, I think you are wrong there as well. I will grant you that they can be distracting, this is true enough; however, I think that concentration is more related to the desire to do well in school, and being interested in the subjects, and probably something more along the lines of what you said here:
"The problem has never been kids, but their parents and how important food is in the family."
except applied to education: The problem has never been electronics, but their parents, and how important education is in the family.
Kids who's families aren't fully supportive of learning are probably more apt to be distracted by things, and more interested in the games or getting texts, whereas kids who grow up being taught the value of education are probably more able to put down their phones and focus for the duration of class. If this was 100 years ago, the same kids who get distracted by electronics today would probably have been distracted just the same amount by something else.
This would be something interesting to learn about though. ^_^ I wonder what I'd be able to find....
Dank clearly you can see the difference between kids/others having cameras at schools and governments/authorities doing so. I doubt you'd need me to explain to you the obvious flaws in your examination....hint, privacy and the uses of such content in the wrong hands.
So you're saying that companies and governments deserve rights but individuals do not? You are aware that they intend to place microphones in appliances? If not let me be the first to inform you that they will. The new drones flying overhead will see all kinds of interesting things. I do think cameras in schools is overboard but it's nothing compared to what they have planned for us. If the school wants to send a laptop home with my kid and be able to watch them on camera... yeah I want to watch you teaching my kid at school. As a matter of fact I want to be able to watch you on your school laptop and use your microphone regardless of where you have it. Just like you want to do to my kid. What's the problem what's the hesitation? I think it's a scary world when we don't have any problem letting them do this to us but somehow corporations need to be protected from it.
I wonder how exactly this food reward system works, i mean don't they have to feed the prisoners anyway? Or is food normally sold to them instead of being freely supplied by the prison? And in any case wouldn't a cash incentive be more motivational?
I've never been to jail but my brother is a frequent flyer. They will serve you the regular daily allotments of gruel but in addition to that you can buy from a commissary. I pulled up a random list off Google. It's got all kinds of stuff on it and of course you can use these items to barter off somebody that doesn't have any cash. If you go into jail without any cash and nobody brings you anything you'll probably trade whatever matches, cigs, drugs, etc. to get a taste of anything else. My bro could care less about going to jail but if he doesn't get any money for the commissary he will totally flip out.
Dank clearly you can see the difference between kids/others having cameras at schools and governments/authorities doing so. I doubt you'd need me to explain to you the obvious flaws in your examination....hint, privacy and the uses of such content in the wrong hands.
So you're saying that companies and governments deserve rights but individuals do not? You are aware that they intend to place microphones in appliances? If not let me be the first to inform you that they will. The new drones flying overhead will see all kinds of interesting things. I do think cameras in schools is overboard but it's nothing compared to what they have planned for us. If the school wants to send a laptop home with my kid and be able to watch them on camera... yeah I want to watch you teaching my kid at school. As a matter of fact I want to be able to watch you on your school laptop and use your microphone regardless of where you have it. Just like you want to do to my kid. What's the problem what's the hesitation? I think it's a scary world when we don't have any problem letting them do this to us but somehow corporations need to be protected from it.
Oh I guess its fine for you if paedos walk around schools with cameras eh.
Where did I say I was supporting the American system? I said I knew about it, I didn't say I liked it. There's many things that I absolutely think are ridiculous in the American system, which is one reason I liked this story so much in the first place. I admire people taking initiative.
I still think you're completely wrong about the dad though. Please find me even one shred of evidence to back up your claims about him being pushy or exploitive. The existence of the blog itself is not evidence of these things, and as people have noticed, the blog is almost never critical or negative at all.
As for your hypothesis about mobile devices causing an extended performance gap, I think you are wrong there as well. I will grant you that they can be distracting, this is true enough; however, I think that concentration is more related to the desire to do well in school, and being interested in the subjects, and probably something more along the lines of what you said here:
"The problem has never been kids, but their parents and how important food is in the family."
except applied to education: The problem has never been electronics, but their parents, and how important education is in the family.
Kids who's families aren't fully supportive of learning are probably more apt to be distracted by things, and more interested in the games or getting texts, whereas kids who grow up being taught the value of education are probably more able to put down their phones and focus for the duration of class. If this was 100 years ago, the same kids who get distracted by electronics today would probably have been distracted just the same amount by something else.
This would be something interesting to learn about though. ^_^ I wonder what I'd be able to find....
Being a student more recently than you in the modern era, I can tell you electronic devices is the primary distraction. I come from a family of university graduates and is the third generation to go to university, from an early age (being asian), we are told to focus on our education first and everything else second. I have to say upto middle/high school, my performance was usually top of the year, but it was when I started using mobiles and gaming more, that my academic performances deteriorated. The addiction that is electronic devices is the same sort of addiction that comes with alcohol, drugs and food, you just can't get enough of it yet are always being restricted. As a teenager, you are often in denial and think all adults are against you even though they are right. This distraction affected me all throughout my GCSEs, A Levels, up until University even.
I do agree, having the desire to do well and an interest in a subject will significantly enhance one's performance but you cannot deny that technology has become as much a hinderance from academic performance as it has aided it.
From a lot of my friends whose parents were less supportive and allowed their children to be more free (ie, play more games etc), they never feel pressured to work hard and some fail to succeed whilst others blossom. I felt that as a child, I should have been permitted to playing games once I finished my work etc, but because I had become so focused on academic achievement with afterschool clubs and other stuff, I never had time to play or were permitted. Therefore my mind was never fully concentrated on work and was always thinking of gaming, films and other stuff.
and Ixta, I bear you no grudges, I was actually trolling you as I liked the article as well and have read all her blog posts, I just wanted to see how much BS i could squeeze out of the article. Although about technology on changing attitudes with youth, I think it makes a far more exciting discussion.
Finally, to your last point, I disagree, the generation before me had little distractions because less time was spent on leisure activities and academic performance is not as important as it is now. For this I know I am right as the statistics are there to prove. In the past you need not be a straight A student and/or university graduate to get into good jobs, simply because there was a lot less competition for jobs. Primary industry was flourishing and the influx of workers meant unemployment is not as devasting on western society as it is today. People worked more and had less goals to reach, less targets to meet and less dreams than they do now. Everyone now dreams of not necessarily to become famous and rich, but rather to live like someone who is famous and rich as they see on TV/Film, and the large corporations are only willing to keep feeding our greed for leisurely activity. Look at teenage kids and the amount of phones they go through, is there really a necessity to change phones every 6 months? 100 years ago, there wasn't anything near to this, nowadays you can go on holidays everywhere with your mates, 100 years ago, it was travelling only across states or different counties with your family members because family values were much stronger than the disjointed state it is nowadays.
Society has changed, the economy has changed (collapsed), but you're trolling me again by saying people had fewer dreams and goals in the past. Goals and dreams may have been different, due to the differences in society and available options, but they were no less present, or less strong. And basic human impulses haven't changed either. You think greed, laziness, and envy are new? 100 years ago people didn't desire to be rich and live a life of leisure? They might not have been buying phones every 6 months in the past, but they were buying other things just as often if they could afford it. Keeping up with the Jones' isn't exactly new either.
As for family values... Sometimes I wonder if they were actually stronger, or if there was just the perception that they were stronger?
I think our length of attention has decreased greatly. We may have more ambitions, but our definition of dream and completion of said ambition may have weakened.
I dunno, I didn't read most of that stuff cause i gots no attention. ok bye
Possibly, i can see the case where if the kid is going to wear them then there's often little that can (will?) be done to stop them and they aren't targeted at all girls but those who's parents are most likely to over indulge their kids with things worse than high fashion shoes. Yet i agree that it's probably not the best idea given the heath risks. It's already been shown that when worn improperly and/or if the heel is too high there is most often significant damage to feet and legs, something that could be exaggerated by introducing such heels and too young an age.
Then again, i'm wholly unqualified to comment on this subject and making most of this up as i go along :P
Society has changed, the economy has changed (collapsed), but you're trolling me again by saying people had fewer dreams and goals in the past. Goals and dreams may have been different, due to the differences in society and available options, but they were no less present, or less strong. And basic human impulses haven't changed either. You think greed, laziness, and envy are new? 100 years ago people didn't desire to be rich and live a life of leisure? They might not have been buying phones every 6 months in the past, but they were buying other things just as often if they could afford it. Keeping up with the Jones' isn't exactly new either.
As for family values... Sometimes I wonder if they were actually stronger, or if there was just the perception that they were stronger?
Its pointless arguing with a mule....so I'll stop bothering. Lets just agree to disagree. Though i'd point out being younger than you and more recently through the education system, I have more knowledge and experience than you of its current problems....in the UK of course.
What I said there has nothing to do with schooling, just human nature through history. But you're right, you are younger, so I guess I can't expect you to have the life experience to understand such difficult concepts.
What I said there has nothing to do with schooling, just human nature through history. But you're right, you are younger, so I guess I can't expect you to have the life experience to understand such difficult concepts.
8-X
Life experience? BS. Just an excuse that you're going through menopause and realising everything that should be pointing up has started to drool.
XD drool? Wow, I don't even want to know what you're seeing your mom go through.
Lol...Ixta...you're above 'your mom' jokes. But I guess since you are a mother, youve put on some weight since your kids popped out and those titties been sucked dry.
This is neat, but not as fun as when they did monopoly on Google maps. Though i feel rather useless having posted this and am unable to come up with something interesting to make. Sorry rest of the world who don't have access.
XD LOLOLOLOL I thought this only really happened in movies, though i once had a friend do something like this. He got smart to another of my mates dad and turned to run away, only to slam straight into a door he himself closed moments earlier.
I'm not sure about funny... I'm more wondering how she hid/he missed all those shoes. I mean that's not something easily concealed...
And that second one sucks indeed. It's bad enough when they do that with video games but to reduce students marks if they don't comply on top of that? That's too much.
Comments
As for the risk of bringing electronics to school, I have no idea what you're imagining will happen with this, but they didn't need this for an excuse. Kids are always trying to smuggle their phones around and stuff anyway.
And you think parents dont care about food for their kids? Because you're based in the US, you have jackall knowledge of the school schemes being proposed around the country to improve school lunches, the attention raised by Jamie Oliver a few years ago. Kids care about what they eat anyways, and you think kids will read another strange girl's blog? How ignorant. This news didn't even get picked up by the UK's children's news programmes, let alone many kids who actually watch it...kids dont watch the news, hint hint.
The staff was NEVER threatened? The staff got threatened on every forum, blog, comment page this 'news' was posted under, including the BBC. Clearly being outside the UK, you have no knowledge of what goes on here and the school systems in place. Dank clearly you can see the difference between kids/others having cameras at schools and governments/authorities doing so. I doubt you'd need me to explain to you the obvious flaws in your examination....hint, privacy and the uses of such content in the wrong hands.
"Because you're based in the US, you have jackall knowledge of the school schemes being proposed around the country to improve school lunches"
Right, all Americans are OBVIOUSLY ignorant fools. Except this is actually part of my job Lews. I mentioned being the purchaser for my school already right? Part of that job is making sure we're complying with the government food program. I have to know exactly what kids are supposed to get at every point of the meal, and every other requirement of the program.
Here's a nice little link of the American program for you:
http://www.providerschoice.com/pdfs/meal pattern for children.pdf
On top of just having the quantity stuff memorized, I have to make sure we're following the changes when they make new rules about things like how much fresh fruit and vegetables you're required to serve vs how much canned stuff you serve, etc. We're also always trying to improve our own program, and searching for ways to do better without raising costs, so I pay attention to what other people are coming up with.
So guess what? You know jack all about what I know about school food programs.
"Jamie Oliver/ Kids care about what they eat anyways"
^Did you watch the same program I watched? Because really, they don't. At the very start of the show he did that "how to make chicken nuggets" lesson, which shows how they grind up the bones of the chicken carcass and then add a bunch of fake flavoring to make the patties, and the kids were like, "yeah I want to eat it, I'm hungry!" And Jamie had the most disgusted look on his face, but the kids didn't care at all, even knowing those nuggets were made out of trash.
There are kids who read the blog, as evidenced by some of the pictures that got submitted to the girl from around the world. But no, in general, kids probably aren't big blog readers or news watchers. You're the one saying kids are going to notice this and be "at risk" from it though. So you tell me, how are they going to be at risk if they didn't even notice anything happening because it wasn't on the news they don't watch anyway? You're kind of contradicting yourself here.
I never saw any criticism of the staff in the blog, I never saw anything in any of the articles I read either. I did not, however, read through every comment that got made either. If there's things I missed, please, send me the link and enlighten me.
And did you watch the same programme as well? Plus I'm stating the British Jamie's school dinners not your American version considering the blogger, school, food are all UK based. So quit quoting your American system.
Oh, but if you insist, did YOU not watch the same programme, a third of Americans are obese primarily because the system fails them, yet you defend your country's system of educating school children about nutrition. Are you stating then that in Jamie's American Revolution, schools DO NOT serve pizza for breakfast? Or flavoured milk? Really?
And i never stated all americans are ignorant fools, I didnt even state you were, only you know less of the British system than I do because YOU ARE NOT FROM THE UK. Geez, are school cooks over there all so frustrating...???
Theres a lot more emphasis in the UK to teach kids about nutrition and food health, we have lessons from the ages of 9, in the same sort of style as fire safety and sex education. The concepts of healthy eating is being embedded in youth. The problem has never been kids, but their parents and how important food is in the family. Dont dump on kids ixta, they know a lot more than you think. The food industry has a less substantial hold on society in the UK than it does in the US, here we see a lot more of the detrimental effects of unhealthy, processed food eating than you guys do mainly because there is a lot less funding from the food industry to government than in the US.
Also why do you feel it is ok for kids to bring electronic devices into schools? Im an advocate for more technology in schools, and giving kids proper ICT lessons than the existing ones. What I dislike however is the deregulation of electronic devices in schools. I've not done any research and atm dont have any time to look into if any academic papers have been published but I can guarantee a corrolation between why in primary school in the UK, theres a smaller gap between top performing students and struggling pupils and the burgeoning differences between the same pupils come middle/high school, and I'd say it has something to do with the acceptability to have mobile phones in school. Electronic devices by themselves do not hinder performance or put students at risk directly, but the inherent nature of these things create an addiction and lack of concentration in classes. They are also controversial in the hands of kids, (ill simply cite happy slapping, if you dno it, look it up then). It is also why school policy prevents photographs from being taken of students unauthorised, with social networking sites becoming more accessible to paedophiles and the like, kids with phones who are taking pictures on school campus of fellow students would easily post these content onto the public domain.
Plus, ixta, if you had ACTUALLY read my previous posts than simply take one side and stick to it, you'd see I stated all this media hype has seen significant improvements to her school's food and raised money for charity....
so I dno what you are constantly moping about.
I still think you're completely wrong about the dad though. Please find me even one shred of evidence to back up your claims about him being pushy or exploitive. The existence of the blog itself is not evidence of these things, and as people have noticed, the blog is almost never critical or negative at all.
As for your hypothesis about mobile devices causing an extended performance gap, I think you are wrong there as well. I will grant you that they can be distracting, this is true enough; however, I think that concentration is more related to the desire to do well in school, and being interested in the subjects, and probably something more along the lines of what you said here:
"The problem has never been kids, but their parents and how important food is in the family."
except applied to education:
The problem has never been electronics, but their parents, and how important education is in the family.
Kids who's families aren't fully supportive of learning are probably more apt to be distracted by things, and more interested in the games or getting texts, whereas kids who grow up being taught the value of education are probably more able to put down their phones and focus for the duration of class. If this was 100 years ago, the same kids who get distracted by electronics today would probably have been distracted just the same amount by something else.
This would be something interesting to learn about though. ^_^ I wonder what I'd be able to find....
http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/7153449/Inmates-to-test-jails-new-locks
I wonder how exactly this food reward system works, i mean don't they have to feed the prisoners anyway? Or is food normally sold to them instead of being freely supplied by the prison? And in any case wouldn't a cash incentive be more motivational?
http://free-kevin-walsh.tripod.com/asp_commissary_list.html
I do agree, having the desire to do well and an interest in a subject will significantly enhance one's performance but you cannot deny that technology has become as much a hinderance from academic performance as it has aided it.
From a lot of my friends whose parents were less supportive and allowed their children to be more free (ie, play more games etc), they never feel pressured to work hard and some fail to succeed whilst others blossom. I felt that as a child, I should have been permitted to playing games once I finished my work etc, but because I had become so focused on academic achievement with afterschool clubs and other stuff, I never had time to play or were permitted. Therefore my mind was never fully concentrated on work and was always thinking of gaming, films and other stuff.
and Ixta, I bear you no grudges, I was actually trolling you as I liked the article as well and have read all her blog posts, I just wanted to see how much BS i could squeeze out of the article. Although about technology on changing attitudes with youth, I think it makes a far more exciting discussion.
Finally, to your last point, I disagree, the generation before me had little distractions because less time was spent on leisure activities and academic performance is not as important as it is now. For this I know I am right as the statistics are there to prove. In the past you need not be a straight A student and/or university graduate to get into good jobs, simply because there was a lot less competition for jobs. Primary industry was flourishing and the influx of workers meant unemployment is not as devasting on western society as it is today. People worked more and had less goals to reach, less targets to meet and less dreams than they do now. Everyone now dreams of not necessarily to become famous and rich, but rather to live like someone who is famous and rich as they see on TV/Film, and the large corporations are only willing to keep feeding our greed for leisurely activity. Look at teenage kids and the amount of phones they go through, is there really a necessity to change phones every 6 months? 100 years ago, there wasn't anything near to this, nowadays you can go on holidays everywhere with your mates, 100 years ago, it was travelling only across states or different counties with your family members because family values were much stronger than the disjointed state it is nowadays.
As for family values... Sometimes I wonder if they were actually stronger, or if there was just the perception that they were stronger?
I dunno, I didn't read most of that stuff cause i gots no attention. ok bye
Here's another kiddie one. Seems maybe blown out of proportion to me?
Then again, i'm wholly unqualified to comment on this subject and making most of this up as i go along :P
missin tag?
[/b]
[/i]
[/u]
8-X
Rub some vaseline...it may help :P
*evil smile*
This is neat, but not as fun as when they did monopoly on Google maps. Though i feel rather useless having posted this and am unable to come up with something interesting to make. Sorry rest of the world who don't have access.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/strange-but-true/news/article.cfm?c_id=500835&objectid=10813208
XD LOLOLOLOL I thought this only really happened in movies, though i once had a friend do something like this. He got smart to another of my mates dad and turned to run away, only to slam straight into a door he himself closed moments earlier.
This is pretty funny too. 700 pairs of Louboutins, geez.
This, however, sucks:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/47969316/ns/technology_and_science-security/t/professor-patents-way-stop-textbook-sharing-students/?fb_ref=.T-pgTaPLC8s.like&fb_source=home_multiline#.T-vX6pGd2Sp
And that second one sucks indeed. It's bad enough when they do that with video games but to reduce students marks if they don't comply on top of that? That's too much.
No I'm saying the freely accessible nature of technology has lead to paedos being more openly close to kids in schools....
Update: So, it wasn't Bath Salts. Still creepy though...