Summize, an App with the Technology to Make Our Children Learn. But Is They?
August 2, 2016
The article on TheNextWeb titled Teenagers Have Built a Summary App that Could Help Students Ace Exams might be difficult to read over the sound of a million teachers weeping into their syllabi. It’s no shock that students hate to read, and there is even some cause for alarm over the sheer amount of reading that some graduate students are expected to complete. But for middle schoolers, high schoolers, and even undergrads in college, there is a growing concern about the average reading comprehension level. This new app can only make matters worse by removing a student’s incentive to absorb the material and decide for themselves what is important. The article describes the app,
“Available for iOS, Summize is an intelligent summary generator that will automatically recap the contents of any textbook page (or news article) you take a photo of with your smartphone. The app also supports concept, keyword and bias analysis, which breaks down the summaries to make them more accessible. With this feature, users can easily isolate concepts and keywords from the rest of the text to focus precisely on the material that matters the most to them.”
There is nothing wrong with any of this if it is really about time management instead of supporting illiteracy and lazy study habits. This app is the result of the efforts of an 18-year-old Rami Ghanem using optical character recognition software. A product of the era of No Child Left Behind, not coincidentally, exposed to years of teaching to the test and forgetting the lesson, of rote memorization in favor of analysis and understanding. Yes, with Summize, little Jimmy might ace the test. But shouldn’t an education be more than talking point mcnuggets?
Chelsea Kerwin, August 2, 2016
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
National Geographic Sells Out
September 30, 2015
The National Geographic Society is one of the most respected institutes in regards to science and journalism related to nature. For 127 years, National Geographic managed itself as a non-profit organization. Buzzfeed reports that 21st Century Fox purchased National Geographic in the article, “Rupert Murdoch Is Buying National Geographic.” Before you start getting upset that National Geographic has “sold out” in the same manner that Sesame Street has a new partnership with HBO, be aware that 21st Century Fox already owned and operated a joint-venture partnership with the company.
The bulk of National Geographic’s properties are being turned over to 21st Century Fox, who will manage them and allow the National Geographic Society to focus on:
“The National Geographic Society said the deal will let the foundation invest more money in sponsoring explorers and scientists. ‘The value generated by this transaction, including the consistent and attractive revenue stream that National Geographic Partners will deliver, ensures that we will have greater resources for this work, which includes our grant making programs,’ said CEO Gary Knell, in a statement.”
While National Geographic is still popular, it faces stiff competition from other news outlets that generate similar if not more content. National Geographic wants to have better, modern storytelling “so that we may all know more of the world upon which we live.”
Hopefully this will free up more monies for scientific research, endeavors to protect endangered species, educational programs, and better ways to educate people on the natural world.
Whitney Grace, September 30, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
Bar Exam Brouhaha
September 7, 2015
We cannot resist sharing this article with you, though it is only tangentially related to search; perhaps it has implications for the field of eDiscovery. Bloomberg Business asks and answers: “Are Lawyers Getting Dumber? Yes, Says the Woman who Runs the Bar Exam.”
Apparently, scores from the 2014 bar exam dropped significantly across the country compared to those of the previous year. Officials at the National Conference of Bar Examiners (NCBE), which administers the test, insist they carefully checked their procedures and found no problems on their end. They insist the fault lies squarely with that year’s crop of law school graduates, not with testing methods. Erica Moeser, head of the NCBE, penned a letter to law school officials informing them of the poor results, and advising they take steps to improve their students’ outcomes. To put it mildly, this did not go well with college administrators, who point out Moeser herself never passed the bar because she practices in Wisconsin, the only state in which the exam is not required to practice law.
So, who is right? Writer Natalie Kitroeff points out this salient information:
“Whether or not the profession is in crisis—a perennial lament—there’s no question that American legal education is in the midst of an unprecedented slump. In 2015 fewer people applied to law school than at any point in the last 30 years. Law schools are seeing enrollments plummet and have tried to keep their campuses alive by admitting students with worse credentials. That may force some law firms and consumers to rely on lawyers of a lower caliber, industry watchers say, but the fight will ultimately be most painful for the middling students, who are promised a shot at a legal career but in reality face long odds of becoming lawyers.”
The 2015 bar exam results could provide some clarification, but those won’t start coming out until sometime in September. See the article for much more information on Moeser, the NCBE, the bar exam itself, and the state of legal education today. Makers of eDiscovery software may want to beef up their idiot-proofing measures as much as possible, just to be safe.
Cynthia Murrell, September 7, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
Monopoly On Scientific Papers
August 31, 2015
If you work in the academic community this headline from Your News Wire shouldn’t come as a surprise: “Nearly All Scientific Papers Controlled By Same Six Corporations.” A group of researchers studied scientific papers published between 1973-2013 and discovered that six major publishers ruled the industry: Wiley-Blackwell, Springer, Taylor & Francis, Sage, Reed Elsevier, and ACS. During the specified time period, it was found that the larger ones absorbed smaller publishers. Another, more startling, fact came to light as well: academic research groups must rely more and more on the main six publishers’ interests if they want to get their research published.
“Much of the independence that was once cherished within the scientific community, in other words, has gone by the wayside as these major publishers have taken control and now dictate what types of content get published. The result is a publishing oligopoly in which scientists are muzzled by and overarching trend toward politically correct, and industry-favoring, ‘science.’”
The six publishers publish subjects that benefit their profit margin and as a direct result they influence major scientific fields. Fields concerning chemistry, social sciences, and psychology are the most influenced by the publishers. This leads to corruption in the above disciplines and researchers are limited by studies that will deliver the most profits to the publishers. The main six publishers can also publish the papers digitally for a 40% profit margin.
There is good news. The study did find that publishing a paper via a smaller venue does not affect its reach. It also has the added benefit of the smaller venue not pushing a special interest agenda. The real question is are big publishers even needed in a digital age anymore?
Whitney Grace, August 31, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
Viva The Academic Publisher Boycott!
July 30, 2015
Academic databases provide access to quality research material, which is key for any student, professor, or researcher to succeed in their work. One major drawback to academic databases is the high cost associated with subscription fees. Individual researchers cannot justify subscribing to an academic database and purchasing a single article runs high. This is why they rely on academic libraries to cover the costs. Due to changing publishing trends, academic publishers are raising subscription fees.
Elsevier is one of the largest and most well-known scientific journal database, but it is also the most notorious for its expensive subscription fee and universities are getting tired of it. Univers reports that “Dutch Universities Start Their Elsevier Boycott.” The Netherlands, led by state secretary Sander Dekker, want all scientific content to be free online. In order to be published, the university or financier pays to be so. All content by Dutch scientists will hopefully be open access by 2024.
In the meantime, the Association of Universities in the Netherlands has asked all Dutch scientists that work with Elsevier to resign from their positions. As to be expected, some are willing and others are more reluctant. The goal is to pressure Elsevier to change its practices.
“In Univers nr. 8, in January, professor Jan Blommaert called the current publishing system ‘completely absurd’. Not only because of the costs for subscription, but also because the journals have a lot of power over the content: ‘A young PhD student who has been able to get an article accepted by a journal may still have to wait 18 months for it to be published, because the editors prefer well-known names. It is not unthinkable that if I would submit a love letter, it would be published sooner than an intelligent scholarly article by a young researcher.’ ”
The Dutch universities are setting a standard that many libraries and universities will also follow, but the hardest part is encouraging more to participate. Libraries and universities have an obligation to provide needed materials to researchers and a boycott will hinder the step. Large boycotts, rather than individual, will be more effective and instrumental in changing Elsevier’s practices.
Whitney Grace, July 30, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
Chris McNulty at SharePoint Fest Seattle
June 18, 2015
For SharePoint managers and users, continued education and training is essential. There are lots of opportunities for virtual and face-to-face instruction. Benzinga gives some attention to one training option, the upcoming SharePoint Fest Seattle, in their recent article, “Chris McNulty to Lead 2 Sessions and a Workshop at SharePoint Fest Seattle.”
The article begins:
“Chris McNulty will preside over a full day workshop at SharePoint Fest Seattle on August 18th, 2015, as well as conduct two technical training sessions on the 19th and 20th. Both the workshops and sessions are to be held at the Washington State Convention Center in downtown Seattle.”
In addition to all of the great training opportunities at conferences and other face-to-face sessions, staying on top of the latest SharePoint news and online training opportunities is also essential. For a one-stop-shop of all the latest SharePoint news, stay tuned to Stephen E. Arnold’s Web site, ArnoldIT.com, and his dedicated SharePoint feed. He has turned his longtime career in search into a helpful Web service for those that need to stay on top of the latest SharePoint happenings.
Emily Rae Aldridge, June 18, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
