His initiative, called Masti ki Pathshala, is a school for underprivileged children. Every morning, some kids gather around him outside the IIM and after he has greeted them with sweets, class begins. As the students learn from him in an absolute disciplined and manner, passersby are often seen halting right in their tracks in astonishment and awe.
A study at Dartmouth College of the English Wikipedia noted that, contrary to usual social expectations, anonymous editors were some of Wikipedia's most productive contributors of valid content. Wikipedia has harnessed the work of millions of people to produce the world's largest knowledge-based site along with software to support it, resulting in more than nineteen million articles written, across more than different language versions, in fewer than twelve years.
Areas of reliability Article instability and susceptibility to bias are two potential problem areas in a crowdsourced work like Wikipedia The reliability of Wikipedia articles can be measured by the following criteria: Accuracy of information provided within articles Appropriateness of the images provided with the article Appropriateness of the style and focus of the articles  Susceptibility to, and exclusion and removal of, false information Comprehensiveness, scope and coverage within articles and in the range of articles Identification of reputable third-party sources as citations Stability of the articles Susceptibility to editorial and systemic bias Quality of writing The first four of these have been the subjects of various studies of the project, while the presence of bias is strongly disputed, and the prevalence and quality of citations can be tested within Wikipedia.
For instance, "50 percent of [US] physicians report that they've consulted The most common criticisms were: Poor prose, or ease-of-reading issues 3 mentions Omissions or inaccuracies, often small but including key omissions in some articles 3 mentions Poor balance, with less important areas being given more attention and vice versa 1 mention The most common praises were: The non-peer-reviewed study was based on Nature's selection of 42 articles on scientific topics, including biographies of well-known scientists.
The articles were compared for accuracy by anonymous academic reviewers, a customary practice for journal article reviews. Based on their reviews, on average the Wikipedia articles were described as containing 4 errors or omissions, while the Britannica articles contained 3.
Only 4 serious errors were found in Wikipedia, and 4 in Britannica. The study concluded that "Wikipedia comes close to Britannica in terms of the accuracy of its science entries",  although Wikipedia's articles were often "poorly structured".
Among Britannica's criticisms were that excerpts rather than the full texts of some of their articles were used, that some of the extracts were compilations that included articles written for the youth version, that Nature did not check the factual assertions of its reviewers, and that many points the reviewers labeled as errors were differences of editorial opinion.
Britannica further stated that "While the heading proclaimed that 'Wikipedia comes close to Britannica in terms of the accuracy of its science entries,' the numbers buried deep in the body of the article said precisely the opposite: Wikipedia in fact had a third more inaccuracies than Britannica.
As we demonstrate below, Nature's research grossly exaggerated Britannica's inaccuracies, so we cite this figure only to point out the slanted way in which the numbers were presented. He wrote that Wikipedia is "surprisingly accurate in reporting names, dates, and events in U. However, he stated that Wikipedia often fails to distinguish important from trivial details, and does not provide the best references.
He also complained about Wikipedia's lack of "persuasive analysis and interpretations, and clear and engaging prose". A web-based survey conducted from December to May by Larry Press, a professor of Information Systems at California State University at Dominguez Hillsassessed the "accuracy and completeness of Wikipedia articles".
The survey did not attempt random selection of the participants, and it is not clear how the participants were invited.
Experts evaluated 66 articles in various fields. In overall score, Wikipedia was rated 3. Wikipedia's articles were compared to a consensus list of themes culled from four reference works in philosophy.
No errors were found, though there were significant omissions. In each case Wikipedia was described as "largely sound", "well handled", "performs well", "good for the bare facts" and "broadly accurate".
One article had "a marked deterioration towards the end" while another had "clearer and more elegant" writing, a third was assessed as less well written but better detailed than its competitors, and a fourth was "of more benefit to the serious student than its Encarta or Britannica equivalents".
No serious errors were noted in Wikipedia articles, whereas serious errors were noted in one Encarta and one Britannica article. The article compared Wikipedia's content to other popular online encyclopedias, namely Britannica and Encarta. The magazine asked experts to evaluate articles pertaining to their field.
A total of four articles were reviewed by three experts.
Wikipedia was comparable to the other encyclopedias, topping the chemistry category.Following a brief overview of the theoretical framework underlying the process of consecutive interpreting, the course concentrates on the development of skills essential to the task of effective interpreting including: memory and comprehension, note taking, vocabulary building, and handling linguistic and ethical challenges assertively.
Oct 26, · DISPLAY BOARDS CHALK BOARD DEFINITION A chalkboard or blackboard is a reusable writing surface on which text or drawings are made with chalk or other erasable feelthefish.comoards were originally made of smooth, thin sheets of black or dark grey slate stone.
Modern versions are often green or brown and are thus sometimes called a greenboard or . The teaching of the art of reading, in primary and elementary schools, through the vernacular, is of greater and wider utility than by Latin texts.
The vernacular is more easily taught to children, who already possess some knowledge of it, than the Latin of which they are wholly ignorant. It. Many times regulated standards and skills information are imported to your gradebook; however you can manually enter the information. Communication, and Writing; and for a Math teacher standards may include Whole Numbers, Fractions, and Number Theory.
Standards are then divided into separate skills. (skill assessment value). Wheebox is India's leading online talent assessment company in Gurgaon offer validated list of online assessment test measuring world's talent & skill potential.
I’ve considered writing something new on that “blackboard” several times. I can write on it with chalk, erase it, and use it again. I can write on it with chalk, erase it, and use it again.
But I don’t.