It is also argued that the curriculum is at one level «Philistine» as children will be expected to
acquire less knowledge.
In the longer run, that means people will
acquire less knowledge or fewer skills, and less infrastructure will get built for the same money.
Not exact matches
I was going to set aside all the
knowledge and experience I'd
acquired to pursue a career that I knew far
less about and only imagined might be a better fit.
You probably have friends or colleagues that ask you how they can invest into cryptocurrencies, but
acquiring digital assets isn't a straightforward process for people with
less technical
knowledge.
Knowledge is tricky — it's like Energy & Entropy, the more you
acquire of it, the
less free your mindset becomes.
«the
less free your mindset becomes» If you mean that, the more
knowledge you
acquire, the
less likely it becomes to ignore the fact that Christianity if full of inconsistencies, illogic, and other problems, then yes.
Those who
acquire power in the form of
knowledge may find that it «separates them from the society of others, and the greater the
knowledge, the
less wise they are in the virtue of concord.
While standardized tests didn't cause the curriculum to narrow, they're a useful reminder that some students have
acquired a lot
less knowledge than others.
The longer we wait to apply
acquired knowledge, the
less we remember it.
That's particularly true for low - income students, who are far
less likely to
acquire academic
knowledge at home.
That's particularly harmful for poor kids, who are
less likely to
acquire that kind of
knowledge at home.
And low - income kids, who are far
less likely to
acquire knowledge at home, start out at a disadvantage and fall farther behind with each passing year.
All kids benefit from a
knowledge - rich curriculum, but poor kids, who are
less likely to
acquire knowledge at home, need it the most.
What if education were
less about
acquiring skills and
knowledge and more about cultivating the dispositions and habits of mind that students will need for a lifetime of learning, problem solving and decision making?
Although, FWIW, my take was from the POV that Nurse appears to have
acquired his «
knowledge» — both of climate science and of skeptics — from no
less a tutor than the world - renowned «expert» (and erstwhile RS employee), Bob < fast - fingered obsessive whiner par excellence > Ward!
For policymakers these details matter, for they need to know if they are acting on the best of scientific
knowledge,
acquired through the application of the most rigorous of scientific practices and observation of scientific ethics, or whether well - intentioned scientist - activists are shaping climate policy on the basis of
less - than - transparent scientific practices — and I refer here to even minor oversights or the exclusion of seemingly trivial caveats that may take on great importance in an unpredicted future — and unstated personal and political aims.
«The defence protection is
less controversial and it is where advocates are trying to stop people from
acquiring intellectual property rights over traditional
knowledge.
The defensive protection is
less controversial, where advocates of traditional
knowledge protection are trying to stop people from
acquiring IP rights over traditional
knowledge — for example, if a pharmaceutical company goes into an indigenous community, learns about the use of a certain plant for treatment of disease, does a little more research, and then patents the
knowledge.
A dedicated, flexible reliable employee that is willing to
acquire the
knowledge and skills necessary to perform an admirable, quality job in
less time than is possible with others.