[continued from previous message]   
      
   Because folks have opted to buy "added value" from others.  I am always amused   
   at the rationale:  "So, we won't have to design a PCB!"  (Really?  That   
   purchased board won't be a daughter card on some OTHER card THAT YOU DESIGN??   
   What are you going to do when the supplier makes some change to some aspect   
   of the subassembly -- particularly, the software?)   
      
   Note that the market for EEs pays considerably less than software engineers   
   so *it* has decided where the value added lies.  How many designs benefit from   
   all those "mother/daughter cards" designed by a handful of EEs?   
      
   >> "Solve the maze"   
   >>   
   >> The income level or socio-economic status of the student plays no role in   
   how   
   >> well they can perform.  Rather, assembling sequences of actions and LEARNING   
   >> from their shortcomings is the route to success.   
   >>   
   >> [It is highly unlikely that they will even use said language in a job -- or,   
   >> ever be called upon to solve a maze!  Yet, they have learned how to learn.]   
   >   
   > Learn how to learn is fine but today's students do seem to have difficulty   
   solving   
   > problems. Even when, these days,  the answer would be in their face if they   
   did a   
   > bit of online research.   
      
   They haven't been *required* to do so.  Someone always steps in to ease their   
   burden.   
      
   The class I mentioned above doesn't let the students feel inferior.  Their   
   folks aren't clamoring to "pass" little Timmy even though his solution was   
   suboptimal.  Timmy had fun.  Timmy LEARNED something.  AND, learned that he   
   could learn from his peers instead of being preached at!   
      
   We've designed the curriculum to challenge them with unanticipated -- though   
   NOT unexpected! -- problems.   
      
   E.g., we let them walk through a real maze (built from office partitions)   
   blindfolded.  I.e., they can PROBE (with their hands), ROTATE their bodies,   
   MOVE left/right/forward/backwards, etc.  But, can't SEE beyond their immediate   
   confines.   
      
   We then make the passageway wider (they almost universally extend their arms   
   outwards to feel -- probe -- both walls in the first maze) so they can only   
   probe in a single explicit direction.  I.e., they have to rely on a more   
   open-loop strategy.   
      
   They invariably "discover" the wall-following approach.   
      
   Then, we bias the maze "the other way" -- so left hand following yields a   
   faster solution than right hand -- and wait for them to sort out why their   
   results were different.   
      
   Then, we have them start in the CENTER of the maze and find their way out.   
      
   Then, arrange for the center portion to be an *island* and have them   
   sort out why nothing works, anymore.   
      
   We don't care if they know the product of 1234567 * 7654321.  That's a skill   
   they can learn on their own with time, patience and determination.  But,   
   walking a maze is something they likely WON'T have an opportunity to do, ever!   
   And, thinking about HOW to walk the maze is even less likely to cross their   
   minds!   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)