From a draft document setting out guidelines for student group work:
"Where the group work is formally ‘legoised’ , the components produced by each student should be assessed individually (as well as the entire product if appropriate)."
There is a footnote explaining "legoised": "Formally subdivided into component parts".
Until reading this, I had never really considered my students' work as a "product". A ghastly new world of costs and valuations opens up before me...
>From a draft document setting out guidelines for student group work:
>"Where the group work is formally ‘legoised’ , the components >produced by each student should be assessed individually (as well as >the entire product if appropriate)."
>There is a footnote explaining "legoised": "Formally subdivided into >component parts".
>Until reading this, I had never really considered my students' work as >a "product". A ghastly new world of costs and valuations opens up >before me...
I foresee a polite and helpful, yet firm, guidance note winging its way from Messrs No Names, No Packdrill. BICBW. -- Paul
> LFS <la...@DRAGONspira.fsbusiness.co.uk> wrote >> From a draft document setting out guidelines for student >> group work:
>> "Where the group work is formally ‘legoised’ , the components >> produced by each student should be assessed individually (as well as >> the entire product if appropriate)."
>> There is a footnote explaining "legoised": "Formally >> subdivided into component parts".
>> Until reading this, I had never really considered my >> students' work as a "product". A ghastly new world of costs >> and valuations opens up before me...
> I foresee a polite and helpful, yet firm, guidance note > winging its way from Messrs No Names, No Packdrill. BICBW.
I'd never seen "legoized" before but it wouldn't it also need to imply "easily and quickly combined". I loved my Meccano (Erector) set as a child but my kids much preferred buliding sets that snapped together, like Legoes. Not that I despised Lego sets as a child; my most well-remembered case of covetousness occurred when the boy next door displayed the set that his uncle had liberated in Germany.
--
James Silverton Potomac, Maryland
Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
<la...@DRAGONspira.fsbusiness.co.uk> wrote: > From a draft document setting out guidelines for student group work:
>"Where the group work is formally ‘legoised’ , the components produced >by each student should be assessed individually (as well as the entire >product if appropriate)."
>There is a footnote explaining "legoised": "Formally subdivided into >component parts".
>Until reading this, I had never really considered my students' work as a >"product". A ghastly new world of costs and valuations opens up before me...
A component produced by a student should undergo a formal valuation. The student should then be paid in accordance with the valuation.
That should encourage the students to work harder and more thoughtfully.
Major Risk: plagiarism.
I apologise for writing this post in standard English, but I claim a littel credit for avoiding the b***s word.
<not.jim.silver...@verizon.net> wrote: > Paul wrote on Thu, 26 Feb 2009 17:27:28 +0000:
>> LFS <la...@DRAGONspira.fsbusiness.co.uk> wrote >>> From a draft document setting out guidelines for student >>> group work:
>>> "Where the group work is formally ‘legoised’ , the components >>> produced by each student should be assessed individually (as well as >>> the entire product if appropriate)."
>>> There is a footnote explaining "legoised": "Formally >>> subdivided into component parts".
>>> Until reading this, I had never really considered my >>> students' work as a "product". A ghastly new world of costs >>> and valuations opens up before me...
>> I foresee a polite and helpful, yet firm, guidance note >> winging its way from Messrs No Names, No Packdrill. BICBW.
>I'd never seen "legoized" before but it wouldn't it also need to imply >"easily and quickly combined". I loved my Meccano (Erector) set as a >child but my kids much preferred buliding sets that snapped together, >like Legoes. Not that I despised Lego sets as a child; my most >well-remembered case of covetousness occurred when the boy next door >displayed the set that his uncle had liberated in Germany.
>>> LFS <la...@DRAGONspira.fsbusiness.co.uk> wrote >>>> From a draft document setting out guidelines for student >>>> group work:
>>>> "Where the group work is formally ‘legoised’ , the components >>>> produced by each student should be assessed individually (as well as >>>> the entire product if appropriate)."
>>>> There is a footnote explaining "legoised": "Formally >>>> subdivided into component parts".
>>>> Until reading this, I had never really considered my >>>> students' work as a "product". A ghastly new world of costs >>>> and valuations opens up before me...
>>> I foresee a polite and helpful, yet firm, guidance note >>> winging its way from Messrs No Names, No Packdrill. BICBW.
>>I'd never seen "legoized" before but it wouldn't it also need to imply >>"easily and quickly combined". I loved my Meccano (Erector) set as a >>child but my kids much preferred buliding sets that snapped together, >>like Legoes. Not that I despised Lego sets as a child; my most >>well-remembered case of covetousness occurred when the boy next door >>displayed the set that his uncle had liberated in Germany.
It's disappointing to see a new bunch of bureaucrats make up new words that aren't needed, when we were lincolnlogging and tinkertoying decades before they were born....r
-- "You got Schadenfreude on my Weltanschauung!" "You got Weltanschauung in my Schadenfreude!"
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 20:01:50 +0100, p...@RQNNE.invalid (Per Rřnne) wrote: >James Silverton <not.jim.silver...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> the boy next door displayed the set that his uncle had liberated in >> Germany.
>'Liberated' ? I guess in 1945 ...
Or later.
OED:
liberate, v.
c. To loot (property), to misappropriate. slang.
1944 Daily Express 7 Oct. 4/3 (caption) Excuse me, Canon, but I rather think you've liberated my matches. .... 1965 G. MELLY Owning-Up vi. 59 He..wore a sombrero liberated, I suspect, from the wardrobe of some Latin American group he had worked with in the past. .... 1974 S. E. MORISON European Discovery of America: Southern Voyages viii. 164 Drake's flagship Golden Hind carried no bell, but his men ‘liberated’ one from the church of Guatulco, Mexico, in 1579.
>>> LFS <la...@DRAGONspira.fsbusiness.co.uk> wrote >>>> From a draft document setting out guidelines for student >>>> group work:
>>>> "Where the group work is formally ‘legoised’ , the components >>>> produced by each student should be assessed individually (as well as >>>> the entire product if appropriate)."
>>>> There is a footnote explaining "legoised": "Formally >>>> subdivided into component parts".
>>>> Until reading this, I had never really considered my >>>> students' work as a "product". A ghastly new world of costs >>>> and valuations opens up before me...
>>> I foresee a polite and helpful, yet firm, guidance note >>> winging its way from Messrs No Names, No Packdrill. BICBW.
>>I'd never seen "legoized" before but it wouldn't it also need to imply >>"easily and quickly combined". I loved my Meccano (Erector) set as a >>child but my kids much preferred buliding sets that snapped together, >>like Legoes. Not that I despised Lego sets as a child; my most >>well-remembered case of covetousness occurred when the boy next door >>displayed the set that his uncle had liberated in Germany.
>>> Paul wrote on Thu, 26 Feb 2009 17:27:28 +0000:
>>>> LFS <la...@DRAGONspira.fsbusiness.co.uk> wrote >>>>> From a draft document setting out guidelines for student >>>>> group work:
>>>>> "Where the group work is formally ‘legoised’ , the components >>>>> produced by each student should be assessed individually (as well as >>>>> the entire product if appropriate)."
>>>>> There is a footnote explaining "legoised": "Formally >>>>> subdivided into component parts".
>>>>> Until reading this, I had never really considered my >>>>> students' work as a "product". A ghastly new world of costs >>>>> and valuations opens up before me...
>>>> I foresee a polite and helpful, yet firm, guidance note >>>> winging its way from Messrs No Names, No Packdrill. BICBW.
>>>I'd never seen "legoized" before but it wouldn't it also need to imply >>>"easily and quickly combined". I loved my Meccano (Erector) set as a >>>child but my kids much preferred buliding sets that snapped together, >>>like Legoes. Not that I despised Lego sets as a child; my most >>>well-remembered case of covetousness occurred when the boy next door >>>displayed the set that his uncle had liberated in Germany.
> This page is dedicated to the Stockport Road area of Levenshulme, > and the shops that existed in the 50's & 60's.
> I knew the area slightly during the 1960s.
> Nostalgic.
I occasionally drive up Stockport Road when I go to the Micro Direct warehouse, which is opposite the biscuit factory.
I like the Jag in the picture of the Tri-ang railway, which is so very much like my modern S-Type. There is more difference visible from front or rear than from the side.
>> James Silverton <not.jim.silver...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>> the boy next door displayed the set that his uncle had >>> liberated in Germany.
>> 'Liberated' ? I guess in 1945 ... > Or later. > OED: > liberate, v. > c. To loot (property), to misappropriate. slang. > 1944 Daily Express 7 Oct. 4/3 (caption) Excuse me, Canon, > but I > rather think you've liberated my matches. > .... > 1965 G. MELLY Owning-Up vi. 59 He..wore a sombrero > liberated, I > suspect, from the wardrobe of some Latin American group he > had > worked with in the past. > .... > 1974 S. E. MORISON European Discovery of America: Southern > Voyages > viii. 164 Drake's flagship Golden Hind carried no bell, > but his men > ‘liberated’ one from the church of Guatulco, Mexico, in > 1579.
1945 exactly! There is some argument about the date at which Legos appeared in other countries than Denmark but my friend's uncle was a soldier in Germany. I may be slandering him since it's just possible he actually bought them.
--
James Silverton Potomac, Maryland
Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
> 1945 exactly! There is some argument about the date at which Legos > appeared in other countries than Denmark but my friend's uncle was a > soldier in Germany. I may be slandering him since it's just possible > he actually bought them.
Data point which we've mentioned here before: AmE treats "Lego" as countable, while OurE has to circumlocute with "a piece of Lego" or "some Lego".
>> From a draft document setting out guidelines for student group work:
>> "Where the group work is formally 'legoised' , the components >> produced by each student should be assessed individually (as well as >> the entire product if appropriate)."
>> There is a footnote explaining "legoised": "Formally subdivided into >> component parts".
So then "*formally* legoized" would mean "formally formally subdivided into component parts". *Hmm*!
Paul Wolff:
> I foresee a polite and helpful, yet firm, guidance note winging its way
From the trademark lawyers of the Lego Group?
> from Messrs No Names, No Packdrill. BICBW.
I'm not sure what that's supposed to me mean, except for the acronym. -- Mark Brader | "[Your orders are] to figure out what I would have ordered m...@vex.net | you to do, if I really understood the situation ... [and] Toronto | to follow those orders I hypothetically would have given." -- Shan (John Barnes, "Earth Made of Glass")
>Laura Spira: >>> From a draft document setting out guidelines for student group work:
>>> "Where the group work is formally 'legoised' , the components >>> produced by each student should be assessed individually (as well as >>> the entire product if appropriate)."
>>> There is a footnote explaining "legoised": "Formally subdivided into >>> component parts".
>So then "*formally* legoized" would mean "formally formally subdivided >into component parts". *Hmm*!
"Shape up, blockheads!" Tom said formally....r
-- "You got Schadenfreude on my Weltanschauung!" "You got Weltanschauung in my Schadenfreude!"
"Mike Lyle" <mike_lyle...@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> writes: > James Silverton wrote: > [...]
>> 1945 exactly! There is some argument about the date at which Legos >> appeared in other countries than Denmark but my friend's uncle was a >> soldier in Germany. I may be slandering him since it's just possible >> he actually bought them.
> Data point which we've mentioned here before: AmE treats "Lego" as > countable, while OurE has to circumlocute with "a piece of Lego" or > "some Lego".
> I don't think I'd seen Lego till after about '56.
>Laura Spira: >>> From a draft document setting out guidelines for student group work:
>>> "Where the group work is formally 'legoised' , the components >>> produced by each student should be assessed individually (as well as >>> the entire product if appropriate)."
>>> There is a footnote explaining "legoised": "Formally subdivided into >>> component parts".
>So then "*formally* legoized" would mean "formally formally subdivided >into component parts". *Hmm*!
My turn not to get it. Change 's' to 'z' and double the formality?
>Paul Wolff: >> I foresee a polite and helpful, yet firm, guidance note winging its way
>From the trademark lawyers of the Lego Group? Yes
>> from Messrs No Names, No Packdrill. BICBW.
>I'm not sure what that's supposed to me mean, except for the acronym.
I know who they are, but didn't want to draw attention by identifying the firm here. -- Paul
> From a draft document setting out guidelines for student group work:
> "Where the group work is formally ‘legoised’ , the components produced by > each student should be assessed individually (as well as the entire > product if appropriate)."
> There is a footnote explaining "legoised": "Formally subdivided into > component parts".
I would take legoised to mean the opposite, i.e. put together, rather than taken apart. I wonder who came up with this term? And is there consensus on its meaning? It gets fewer than 100 ghits so it must be recent. I suggest that it be ditched before it spreads yet more confusion.
> >> Paul wrote on Thu, 26 Feb 2009 17:27:28 +0000:
> >>> LFS <la...@DRAGONspira.fsbusiness.co.uk> wrote > >>>> From a draft document setting out guidelines for student > >>>> group work:
> >>>> "Where the group work is formally ‘legoised’ , the components > >>>> produced by each student should be assessed individually (as well as > >>>> the entire product if appropriate)."
> >>>> There is a footnote explaining "legoised": "Formally > >>>> subdivided into component parts".
> >>>> Until reading this, I had never really considered my > >>>> students' work as a "product". A ghastly new world of costs > >>>> and valuations opens up before me...
> >>> I foresee a polite and helpful, yet firm, guidance note > >>> winging its way from Messrs No Names, No Packdrill. BICBW.
> >>I'd never seen "legoized" before but it wouldn't it also need to imply > >>"easily and quickly combined". I loved my Meccano (Erector) set as a > >>child but my kids much preferred buliding sets that snapped together, > >>like Legoes. Not that I despised Lego sets as a child; my most > >>well-remembered case of covetousness occurred when the boy next door > >>displayed the set that his uncle had liberated in Germany.
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 19:43:57 -0600, m...@vex.net (Mark Brader) wrote: >Laura Spira: >>> From a draft document setting out guidelines for student group work:
>>> "Where the group work is formally 'legoised' , the components >>> produced by each student should be assessed individually (as well as >>> the entire product if appropriate)."
>>> There is a footnote explaining "legoised": "Formally subdivided into >>> component parts".
>So then "*formally* legoized" would mean "formally formally subdivided >into component parts". *Hmm*!
>Paul Wolff: >> I foresee a polite and helpful, yet firm, guidance note winging its way
>From the trademark lawyers of the Lego Group?
>> from Messrs No Names, No Packdrill. BICBW.
>I'm not sure what that's supposed to me mean, except for the acronym.
"No names, no packdrill" is a military saying.
"Packdrill" is a form of punishment. The malefactor is forced to march wearing a heavy backpack.
"No names, no packdrill" will be said by a person in charge (typically an NCO) to a group of people among whom is one or more wrong doers. It is a warning to the wrongdoers that the person I/C is aware of the wrongdoing and knows those responsible but will not take action against them on this occasion.
OED:
pack-drill n. Mil. a form of drill used as a punishment and involving marching in full uniform carrying a heavy pack (no names, no pack-drill: see no names, no pack drill at NAME n. and adj. Phrases 20).
name n.
P20. colloq. (orig. Army slang). no names, no pack drill: used proverbially or parenthetically to indicate that the person or persons guilty of a misdemeanour will not be named, in order to spare them recrimination. Now usu. humorous in more general use.
1923 O. ONIONS Peace in our Time I. ii. 25 Men had a way of omitting the names of those of whom they spoke; no names no pack-drill.
1926 E. WALLACE More Educated Evans vii. 160 There's a certain party{em}no names no pack-drill{em}who's fairly doggin' me to get information.
1931 P. MACDONALD Crime Conductor I. i. 7 ‘Meaning?’ said Cuthbertson. ‘No names,’ said Garth Johnson quickly, ‘no pack drill!’
1955 M. ALLINGHAM Beckoning Lady ii. 32 It just means no name, no pack drill, and always speak well of them as has money to sue.
1962 ‘B. GRAEME’ Undetective iii. 32 ‘It's a lie, mister. Who told you?’ ‘No names, no pack drill.’
1990 D. LUCIE Fashion (1991) 265 There was a guy..being told by an Oxbridge twit, no names no pack drill,..that he was a morally bankrupt, senseless philistine.
>>> LFS <la...@DRAGONspira.fsbusiness.co.uk> wrote >>>> From a draft document setting out guidelines for student >>>> group work:
>>>> "Where the group work is formally ‘legoised’ , the components >>>> produced by each student should be assessed individually (as well as >>>> the entire product if appropriate)."
>>>> There is a footnote explaining "legoised": "Formally >>>> subdivided into component parts".
>>>> Until reading this, I had never really considered my >>>> students' work as a "product". A ghastly new world of costs >>>> and valuations opens up before me...
>>> I foresee a polite and helpful, yet firm, guidance note >>> winging its way from Messrs No Names, No Packdrill. BICBW.
>>I'd never seen "legoized" before but it wouldn't it also need to imply >>"easily and quickly combined". I loved my Meccano (Erector) set as a >>child but my kids much preferred buliding sets that snapped together, >>like Legoes. Not that I despised Lego sets as a child; my most >>well-remembered case of covetousness occurred when the boy next door >>displayed the set that his uncle had liberated in Germany.
>>> Paul wrote on Thu, 26 Feb 2009 17:27:28 +0000:
>>>> LFS <la...@DRAGONspira.fsbusiness.co.uk> wrote >>>>> From a draft document setting out guidelines for student >>>>> group work:
>>>>> "Where the group work is formally ‘legoised’ , the components >>>>> produced by each student should be assessed individually (as well as >>>>> the entire product if appropriate)."
>>>>> There is a footnote explaining "legoised": "Formally >>>>> subdivided into component parts".
>>>>> Until reading this, I had never really considered my >>>>> students' work as a "product". A ghastly new world of costs >>>>> and valuations opens up before me...
>>>> I foresee a polite and helpful, yet firm, guidance note >>>> winging its way from Messrs No Names, No Packdrill. BICBW.
>>>I'd never seen "legoized" before but it wouldn't it also need to imply >>>"easily and quickly combined". I loved my Meccano (Erector) set as a >>>child but my kids much preferred buliding sets that snapped together, >>>like Legoes. Not that I despised Lego sets as a child; my most >>>well-remembered case of covetousness occurred when the boy next door >>>displayed the set that his uncle had liberated in Germany.
>It's disappointing to see a new bunch of bureaucrats make up new words that >aren't needed, when we were lincolnlogging and tinkertoying decades before they >were born....r
Nursery school --> Tinker Toys --> Lincoln Logs --> Erector Set --> more schooling -- > engineering degree, in my case. --
Adrian Bailey wrote: > "LFS" <la...@DRAGONspira.fsbusiness.co.uk> wrote in message > news:70o0lmFgnhq9U1@mid.individual.net... >> From a draft document setting out guidelines for student group work:
>> "Where the group work is formally ‘legoised’ , the components produced >> by each student should be assessed individually (as well as the entire >> product if appropriate)."
>> There is a footnote explaining "legoised": "Formally subdivided into >> component parts".
> I would take legoised to mean the opposite, i.e. put together, rather > than taken apart.
Exactly.
I wonder who came up with this term?
I suspect the author of the document, our professor of learning and teaching.
And is there
> consensus on its meaning?
Among the readers of the document with whom I have spoken, it appears not.
It gets fewer than 100 ghits so it must be
> recent. I suggest that it be ditched before it spreads yet more confusion.
|
