Zum Seitenende Übersicht Artikel Home & Impressum
First the link to this week's complete list as HTML and as PDF.
Question: This blog grew out of the weekly additions to my database of all the articles I might want to cite or refer back to some time. The new category “Aktuell” for those articles I do not want to archive but found worth reading anyway is of no use to myself and only added for the blog. Does anybody find it useful at all? N.B: The answers or lack of them to this question will also tell me whether anybody except bots and crawlers ever reads this blog.
This time I include a blog entry of my own. Today, when online sources have more or less completely superseded the printed paper, inadvertent and unrecognized falsification becomes the real problem, that blind trust in barely understood technology has been anyway. Do not, please, take the issue lightly.
Things are beginning to change in authorship. Goldbogen & Pyenson et al. is neither the first nor the only example where I have found
“All authors read,
edited, and discussed the manuscript.” May the trend continue and become ubiquitous.
I know about teaching near exclusively from the receiving side and exactly those silly stunts that Khan extols make me cringe and wish I had not wasted all the time travelling to and sitting in that lecture. Yes, in all first semesters you get those who are bored by and disinterested in the subject matter and would rather giggle on Fecesbook and those who prefer not knowing to being seen to ask a question. These are the ones who should not and do not want to study in the first place and whom ambitious, well meaning, and ill advised parents made do it. That's what the first and second semester exams are for. After those these kinds of problem are solved. I know many good and fewer, but too many bad lecturers and all those engaging in the kind of silliness described here fall squarely in the second category.
I’m not sure what it is that Song et al. are measuring and whether their results might be relevant for anything or not. But one thing is certain, when 60 % of a population consistently rise several decades in a row and only 15 % sink, this is not and can't be “social mobility” in any meaningful definition of the word.
Zum Anfang Übersicht Artikel Home & Impressum