Essay on examinations.

Currently, in schools and colleges, examinations are mostly presented in the form of tests. Tests can have their benefits, but I think there are other ways of examinating which also could be beneficial. Namely, essays and daily works.

These modes of testing have large numbers of advantages. To start with, they continuously give students a goal to work towards. As human beings, students tend to procrastinate, it is in their nature. Therefore, they begin studying for tests only a llitle time before they take place. And the time they are not studying is lost time for them and for teachers. It is not necessary to explain why it is lost time for them, it may be more complicated to understand why it is a loss of time for teachers. Well, they are losing time because they talk to attendees that neither understand nor are paying attention since they do not have the motivation to do so, they see the tests period a long distance away and they prefer idleness rather than studying.

What is more, essays or works make students to live the process of creation, a process which triggers imagination and creativity and can be much more rewarding than sitting for an exam. In addition, this process raises doubts and odds are that students are much more prone to remember a doubt they solved than a sentence they studied by heart. Creation also helps students to link and understand content and I believe this is a much more fun way of learning.

All said, tests provide a very practical method for comparing students. The daily correction of works and essays requires much more resources. This is to say much more teachers. Furthermore, the comparison of students becomes much less subjective in tests, eliminating any possible favoritism.

In conclusion, I am in favor of taking tests to compare the students. Nevertheless, I think these tests must be accompanied by other kinds of examinations all along the year which would help the students with the most important task: learning.

Essay on the school curriculum.

Nowadays, it seems to prevail a one fits all school curriculum, which covers traditional subjects and lacks from a link to reality. This situation should change to address individual traits and to prepare kids for the real world.

Each children has unique characteristics, likes and aptitudes. It is preposterous a system where every child must learn the same things in the same way, it is against our nature. Content should be tailored to the children, not the other way around. This would implie more costs, more effort, but this way a bigger cost is prevented. The cost of raising a child with no interest in school, a lazy child that studies to pass, and not to learn, only because he does not care about the subjects he is obliged to study. Take the example of a kid with strengths in practical areas and weaknesses in more abstract subjects who must study a historical treatise. Save him from that burden! That innocent little person will wake up every day hating school, an unnecesary and most importantly counter productive situation, because a child who loves what he learns, learns a great deal more.

If you ask a kid who is in charge of solving economic issues on its own country, he may answer he does not know. That is unacceptable, as a future citizen, he has to be prepared to live in democracy and he should know that. Nonetheless, the same kid might know the date when Napoleon died. Somebody could think this is ironical, but it is the mere result of an old system of education. The areas included in the school curriculum need take a grip to reality. For instance, they could include accountancy, and why not real life skills. schools must re-evaluate thorougly what they want to teach the children and the medium to achieve it. Instead of using history as a medium to deliver the cause and effect concept, they could use real world physics, or real business cases, for example.

In conclusion, in order to succeed in its educational objective school must be fun for everyone, and should help the children to insert into the volatile world they have to live on.

Two deaths in a row.

The launch of eReaders mark the end of the story for physical books. 

Picture this: You live in lonely island and you decide you want to read Wilbur Smith's last best seller. You have two choices: Get your boat and get to the nearest bookstore 1000 miles away fearing the possibility of being shark's food or turn on your computer and download it in 0,0001 seconds. No need for further comments.   

So we have at least one obvious market which will prefer the e-reader. But what about the person that lives one block away from Barnes & Noble? If that person is looking for a "rare" book, then the logic for the lonely island is valid again, because the book might not be available, but suppose that person wants to read a best-selling book. Which one would he or she choose? The electronic book or the physical one?

I am sure my grandmother would not doubt to choose the physical one. Please grandmothers do not get me wrong, I am not saying that you are not tech geeks. I am saying mine is not. And lots of people would share that same choice, the physical over the electronic.  

This reaction to innovations is common, tradition is hard rooted and it doesn't let some people to grasp the magnitude of the advantages. Because availability is not the only benefit. E-readers let you have your entire library in your pocket, what's more, you don't even have to walk two blocks to get it, you just have to turn on your computer. And if you tell me you prefer to hold a book or that screen light damages your eyes you are raving, and I am sorry for you.

All said, I don't like to be authoritative, so assume that phyisical books attributes outbeat electronic books ones, there is still the matter of the cost. It is much cheaper to get a file into your computer than getting the book into your hand, and that is obvious. And people choose lowest prices, and with lesser costs, prices can be cut down. So this is it for physical books. 1 minute of silence please. 

So let's evaluate the e-readers on the market. We have Amazon's Kindle, and.. Ehm, that's it! Oh, Sony launched an e-reader! But there are no books for it. Sad. If we look at things this way, we may think that the Kindle is going to be the ultimate reading device. However, let's take a look at the electronic devices we already know and try to think if anyone of them resembles the e-reader, even if it does it slightly. Ehm, we have the computer, but I think it is quite bigger.. We have the radio, but it lacks screen. Oh, gotcha! There is one cell phone, the iPhone, which looks just like the Kindle, but you can use it for lots of things, say making calls, browse the web, play games, and so on.

I smell another death. I know Kindle is the market king, but I prefer one device in my pocket instead of two, and so does people without kleptomaniac tendendencies, therefore there is room for only one pocket device, and my guess is it is gonna be the iPhone the one who gets that place. There is no need for making a list of the things that the iPhone does and the Kindle does not. So Apple, please do me a favour and bring the books I love to my cell!