<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why &#8220;computer time&#8221; and &#8220;cheating&#8221; are good for students</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ikiw.org/2007/05/07/why-computer-time-and-cheating-are-good-for-students/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ikiw.org/2007/05/07/why-computer-time-and-cheating-are-good-for-students/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2010 22:21:38 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mick</title>
		<link>http://www.ikiw.org/2007/05/07/why-computer-time-and-cheating-are-good-for-students/comment-page-1/#comment-136598</link>
		<dc:creator>Mick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 31 May 2008 07:42:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ikiw.org/2007/05/07/why-computer-time-and-cheating-are-good-for-students/#comment-136598</guid>
		<description>What a completely asinine post. You may have all sorts of ideas about how education should be done differently, and that&#039;s fine.  But attempting to redefine the word &quot;cheating&quot; is beyond silly.

If an instructor disallows reference material, and a student uses electronic reference material to get a higher score, that&#039;s cheating.  I don&#039;t think that&#039;s debatable.

You&#039;ll have a hard time getting rational people to pay any attention to your musings on education if you play weird semantic games to define cheaters out of existence because you think their method of cheating is creative and useful.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What a completely asinine post. You may have all sorts of ideas about how education should be done differently, and that&#8217;s fine.  But attempting to redefine the word &#8220;cheating&#8221; is beyond silly.</p>
<p>If an instructor disallows reference material, and a student uses electronic reference material to get a higher score, that&#8217;s cheating.  I don&#8217;t think that&#8217;s debatable.</p>
<p>You&#8217;ll have a hard time getting rational people to pay any attention to your musings on education if you play weird semantic games to define cheaters out of existence because you think their method of cheating is creative and useful.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: weblog.histnet.ch &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Digitale Demenz?</title>
		<link>http://www.ikiw.org/2007/05/07/why-computer-time-and-cheating-are-good-for-students/comment-page-1/#comment-69359</link>
		<dc:creator>weblog.histnet.ch &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Digitale Demenz?</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jun 2007 21:25:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ikiw.org/2007/05/07/why-computer-time-and-cheating-are-good-for-students/#comment-69359</guid>
		<description>[...] angebracht, Prüflinge in einem überwachten Raum unter Verbot von Hilfsmitteln (zum Beispiel von iPods, die als Audio-Spickzettel genutzt werden) auswendig gelerntes Wissen zu reproduzieren? Oder hat das schon etwas Anachronistisches? Ginge es [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] angebracht, Prüflinge in einem überwachten Raum unter Verbot von Hilfsmitteln (zum Beispiel von iPods, die als Audio-Spickzettel genutzt werden) auswendig gelerntes Wissen zu reproduzieren? Oder hat das schon etwas Anachronistisches? Ginge es [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
