Likely, the throbbing mass of humanity at my university knows at least a little more than it did before last week, owing to an article in the student newspaper about the institutional animal care and use committee. (It was a front-page article, so the chances that it attracted eyeballs was reasonably good.)
A few things that jumped out at me:
Temptations that might become irresistable
… as a result of the incessant drive to make learning too darn safe.
Not that this is a terribly new development (I wrote about this sort of thing here and here), but it appears that anxieties about terrorists and meth-labs are sucking all the chemically goodness out of chemistry sets:
Current instantiations are embarrassing. There are no chemicals except those which react at low energy to produce color changes. No glass tubes or beakers, certainly no Bunsen burners or alcohol burners (remember the clear blue flames when the alcohol spilled out over the table). Today’s sets cover perfume mixing and creation of luminol (the ‘CSI effect’ I suppose).
Friday Sprog Blogging: did it have to be fish?
This post is dedicated to a donor to my Blogger Challenge who prefers to remain anonymous. The donor actually asked for artwork on the subject to which this discussion eventually turns; I hope the dialogue is an acceptable substitute.
* * * * *
Even though certain elements of the U.S. early grade school curriculum seem thoroughly ossified, some of them still end up sparking fresh thinking. For instance, in anticipation of Thanksgiving the younger Free-Ride offspring’s first grade class learned about how Squanto helped the pilgrims learn how to grow corn in the challenging terrain of Massachusetts — something we were taught a hundred years ago when I was a first grader.
But I don’t recall having a follow-up discussion like this one:
A bit of holiday shopping that brings a laptop to a child in the developing world.
I just found out about something cool for which the window of opportunity closes in eleven days:
Through November 26, the One Laptop Per Child project has a Give One Get One deal (in the U.S. and Canada) wherein you can donate a spiffy new and super-cool XO laptop to a child in a developing country and get one to give to a child in your life (although, presumably, your inner-child might persuade you to keep it for yourself if you aren’t acquainted with any kids).
The XO laptop is an impressive feat of engineering, and distributing these beauties is part of a plan that really speaks to me:
OLPC’s mission is to provide a means for learning, self-expression, and exploration to the nearly two billion children of the developing world with little or no access to education. While children are by nature eager for knowledge, many countries have insufficient resources to devote to education–sometimes less than $20 per year per child (compared to an average of $7,500 in the United States). By giving children their very own connected XO laptop, we are giving them a window to the outside world, access to vast amounts of information, a way to connect with each other, and a springboard into their future. And we’re also helping these countries develop an essential resource–educated, empowered children.
The Give One Get One offer won’t fit everyone’s budget — it’s $399 to donate an XO and to get your own (although $200 of that is tax deductible), which means that you’re actually paying for two of the laptops rather than magically scoring a freebie. But, in the event that it does fit your budget, it strikes me as an opportunity to help a kid’s possibilities get bigger while (paradoxically) making the world a little smaller and more interconnected.
Does valuable information want to be free?
The November 5, 2007 issue of Chemical & Engineering News has an editorial by Rudy M. Baum [UPDATE: notbehind a paywall; apparently all the editorials are freely accessible online] looking at the “Google model” for disseminating information.
Baum writes:
The Stemwedel Index of Luddite nature.
Over at The World’s Fair, David Ng dangles another meme before us:
… this meme asks that you come up with your own scientific eponym. What’s that exactly? Well, first read this excellent primer by Samuel Arbesman, which basically provides a step by step description of how to do this effectively. Then have a go at your own blog. If all goes well, I’d like to create a page at the Science Creative Quarterly, that collects (and links to) the good ones.
Since it is well known that I am a tremendous Luddite, it will come as no surprise that my scientific eponym is a measure of how tremendous a Luddite one is. I give you the Stemwedel Index of Luddite Nature:
Blogger Challenge 2007: how we did
The results of our drive to raise funds for teachers and students with DonorsChoose are, in a word, astounding. Ginny reported the morning-after stats:
Friday Sprog Blogging: humans and animals
The younger Free-Ride offspring seems to have developed a contrarian streak that’s about a kilometer wide. I haven’t given up hope that logic might be an effective antidote to it, but some days those heels dig in rather deep …
Younger offspring: There are lots of interesting animals that are mammals.
Dr. Free-Ride: Yes, there certainly are.
Younger offspring: And humans are mammals.
Dr. Free-Ride: That’s true.
Younger offspring: But humans aren’t animals.
Dr. Free-Ride: Say what?
A plea to vote in the Weblog Awards poll
… despite the fact that I’m deeply suspicious of claims that getting the most votes is truly indicative of being the best.
Anyhow, the category in which your vote might make a real difference (here at the last minute) is Best Science Blog:
I’m a big fan of In the Pipeline, Bootstrap Analysis and Invasive Species Weblog (and I hear that “Pharyngula” guy is a good read), in terms of the maximization of quality and “electability”, I urge you to vote for Bad Astronomy.
Cast your vote now, before it’s too late!
What I’d really like one of these semesters
… is to get all the way through the 16 weeks without a single incident of plagiarism turned in as “student work”.
Alas, it appears this will not be the semester in which my fantasy becomes a reality. Dammit.