Late last year, Education Week published a commentary called What the standards-based movement got wrong. While I think the title was provocative, the author missed the boat in her diagnosis of the problems of the standards movement.
Where Our Standards Went Wrong
Download Zip: https://9giofulsqualdzu.blogspot.com/?file=2vFrii
"Ethics has to do with what my feelings tell me is right or wrong.""Ethics has to do with my religious beliefs.""Being ethical is doing what the law requires.""Ethics consists of the standards of behavior our society accepts.""I don't know what the word means."
What, then, is ethics? Ethics is two things. First, ethics refers to well-founded standards of right and wrong that prescribe what humans ought to do, usually in terms of rights, obligations, benefits to society, fairness, or specific virtues. Ethics, for example, refers to those standards that impose the reasonable obligations to refrain from rape, stealing, murder, assault, slander, and fraud. Ethical standards also include those that enjoin virtues of honesty, compassion, and loyalty. And, ethical standards include standards relating to rights, such as the right to life, the right to freedom from injury, and the right to privacy. Such standards are adequate standards of ethics because they are supported by consistent and well-founded reasons.
The purpose of this paper is to review the history, progress and results of one area of international standardization--the ergonomics of human-system interaction. It is a personal perspective based on my experiences as Chairman of ISO/TC159/SC4 over the past 17 years. The paper starts with some historical background and summarizes the main work of the Committee. It then identifies five areas where the results of the standardization work could have been more successful and discusses what went wrong. These problems include the long time-scale for development, how the standards were misunderstood, how political the process can be, how we may have tried to be too clever and how the abundance of help at times may have been a problem. The paper concludes with an explanation of why the activity and the results were not all bad. The five positive areas include the benefits that can come from the slow pace of the work, the benefits of structure and formality, why standards do not have to be restrictive, how the standards themselves are only part of the outcome and how being a truly international experience makes it all worthwhile.
This brings us back to where we started. Under a gold standard, inflation, growth and the financial system are all less stable. There are more recessions, larger swings in consumer prices and more banking crises. When things go wrong in one part of the world, the distress will be transmitted more quickly and completely to others. In short, re-creating a gold standard would be a colossal mistake.
This task has students explore a very common multiplication error that occurs when using the standard algorithm. Often, students are not thinking about the meaning of a particular digit based on its place in the number, and in fact, that is one of the advantages of the algorithm--you only need single-digit multiplication facts to use it. However, it is easy to forget a step or misalign the addends if you aren't thinking about the value of a particular digit. This task is designed to help students catch these kinds of errors. Part (a) asks them to think about the reasonableness of an answer and part (b) asks them to analyze the error. Part (c) helps students see and explain what went wrong and also helps them develop flexibility in solving multi-digit multiplication problems, which is an aspect of fluency.
Raised when the interpreter finds an internal error, but the situation does notlook so serious to cause it to abandon all hope. The associated value is astring indicating what went wrong (in low-level terms).
Parents and other authority figures often blame children for things that they themselves are fundamentally, responsible for. Or they hold the child to impossible standards and expectations where the child is punished for making mistakes or being imperfect and blamed for failing.
Unlike people with strong narcissistic tendencies and similar dark personality traits who never take responsibility for their actions, people who suffer from false responsibility and toxic guilt are very quick to attribute what went wrong to themselves and blame themselves for it.
The Federal Reserve could have prevented deflation by preventing the collapse of the banking system or by counteracting the collapse with an expansion of the monetary base, but it failed to do so for several reasons. The economic collapse was unforeseen and unprecedented. Decision makers lacked effective mechanisms for determining what went wrong and lacked the authority to take actions sufficient to cure the economy. Some decision makers misinterpreted signals about the state of the economy, such as the nominal interest rate, because of their adherence to the real bills philosophy. Others deemed defending the gold standard by raising interests and reducing the supply of money and credit to be better for the economy than aiding ailing banks with the opposite actions. 2ff7e9595c
Comments