QUOTE(Jon Awbrey @ Sat 19th March 2011, 9:06am)
QUOTE(Zoloft @ Sat 19th March 2011, 3:15am)
To answer the question asked by the topic title:
“Will Wikipedia Replace Your Kid's Teacher?”
No. Wikipedia does not contain any mechanism for teaching anything.
Thank you verra much.
Zoloft and All,
The title introduces the subject by way of a notorious and timely example, but the question is obviously much bigger than that.
I think that subsequent discussion, despite its divers digressions, has demonstrated the fundamental importance of that larger question.
So let's keep our eyes on the prize, and pry a bit deeper thereinto.
Ahem. The tone and scope of this thread was set by the first two posters, and here they are:
QUOTE(Jon Awbrey @ Mon 7th March 2011, 10:52pm)
QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Tue 8th March 2011, 12:35am)
Obama has been hanging out with Bill and Melinda Gates
, and other persons who really care about education
. Their consensus seems to be that all those people who said that a high student-to-teacher ratio was harmful were wrong, and that we can really think about getting rid of a lot of those teachers and replacing them with on-line instruction. With increasing emphasis on drill-and-grill and other regressive educational techniques, does this not put Wikipedia in more significant role as an educational [ahem] resource?
I think this is just one more component of the Corporate Totalitarian Agenda, replacing everything that we have been accustomed to regard as the Public Sector with the Non-Representative Government of Privateerism.
I think a lot of people are being suckered into it out of sheer naivete, but the corporate con artists know perfectly well what they want and how they plan to get it.
After which, the only people actually giving quantitative information about the "Public Sector with the Non-Representative Government of Privateerism" (Greg Kohs and myself) got split off into a parody religious thread, so you can have this one to yourself, with no figures at all. And behold, you're now the main contributor to this thread, with 25 of 46 posts, but none of them containing a single hard fact.
So, that's the last time I get caught up on one of your meta threads where the evidient meta-object is for you to meta play with yourself. I think you can enjoy THAT all by your lonesome, without having to count a single stroke.
QUOTE(Jon Awbrey @ Fri 18th March 2011, 11:22pm)
Moderator Note —
And somewhat non-tangentially: as a meta-moderator, you meta-suck.