The following is a father's advice to his son or daughter, who has just graduated from high school：

    First of all, congratulations on your graduation!Graduation from high school means that a new stage of life is ahead of you．At the beginning of this new stage, I have some advice for you．

    Clean your own room and do your own laundry(洗衣物的活). After you have messed up(弄乱)something, you should learn to clean it up yourself．Cleanliness is indeed close to godliness(信奉上帝)．

    Don't mistake knowledge for wisdom. No matter how much information or knowledge you have gained, you'll never make sound(正确的)judgments if you don't have wisdom. Wisdom comes from imagination and reflection(反省)．If you can imagine the possible future outcomes of your present decisions and actions, you can avoid mistakes．And if you can reflect on the mistakes you have made, you can avoid making the same mistakes again and again．Such is wisdom．

    Don't complain．When you take up a job, do your best to carry it out．Don't waste time complaining about it, no matter how difficult and boring it is．

    Finally, be an early bird．If you get up earlier than the sun, you can watch it rising up slowly into the sky．And the sight of the rising sun will warm your heart and give you energy for the day ahead．Besides, being an early bird, you have plenty of time to take exercise or do a lot of work．

    James Gross, a psychology professor at Stanford University, has a 13-year-old daughter who loves math and science. “It hasn't occurred to her yet that's unusual,” he says. “But I know in the next couple of years, it will.”

    She's already being pulled out of class to do advanced things with a couple of other kids, who are guys. And as someone who studies human emotion for a procession, Gross says, “I know as time goes on, she will feel increasingly lonely as a girl who's interested in math and science, and be at risk of narrowing her choices in life before finding out how far she could have gone.''

    Gross' concern clearly shows what has been a touchy subject in the world of science for a long time: Why are there still so few women in science, and how might that affect what we learn from research?

    Women now make up half the national workforce, earn more college and graduate degrees than men, and by some estimates represent the largest single economic force in the world. Yet the gender gap in science persists, to a greater degree than in other professions, particularly in high-end, math-intensive fields such as computer science and engineering.

    According to US Census Bureau statistics, women in fields commonly referred to as STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) made up 7 percent of that workforce in 1970, a figure that had jumped to 23 percent by 1990. But the rise essentially stopped there. Two decades later, in 2011, women made up 26 percent of the science workforce.

    When the weather is good, most children would like to play outside. So we asked some kids and their parents whether the following toys kept them happy.

All Surface Swingball, $35.99

    Played by Martin, nine, and five-year-old Alex in Crewe, Cheshire.

Mother Jennifer says, “The boys thought the toy was excellent and really wanted to play with it. It can be played with alone or with another child. It's for the right age range but I believe the toy can be played with by all ages and is suitable for the whole family.”
Rubberwood Quoits Set, $13.99

    Played by Jessica, four.

    Mother Lucy Hayburst, 37, in Chichester, West Sussex, says, “Jessica played with this toy for a few minutes but quickly stopped playing with it. Since we bought this toy for her, she only played several times. The quality is very good. It can be played with by one child or more. Besides, I believe it's more suitable for older kids.”

Wooden Animal Skittles, $14.99

    Played by Matthew, two.

    Father Richard Lee, 36, from Dartford, Kent, says, “Matthew was very interested in the toys and liked to play with them, but that only lasted for around five minutes. The skittles were fun at first but that feeling soon disappeared. Two or more children can play with the toy together. And I think they are most suitable for kids aged between three and seven. Our youngest son, Ethan, just kept trying to eat the lion's head.”

First Tailball Net Set, $22

    Played by James, five.

    Mother Sarah Schwar, 39, from Grays, Essex, says, “James loved the toy.” He enjoyed balls so it was perfect for him We used it in the summer as it was easy to take on trips It is suitable for kids over five years old I think the price is fair and your children deserve it.”

    A university in Nanjing, Jiangsu province, has installed facial recognition systems in classrooms to monitor students' behavior, sparking a heated debate online. China Pharmaceutical University recently installed the systems in two pilot classrooms as well as school gates, dormitory entrances, the library and laboratory buildings.

    Xu Jianzhen, director of the university's library and information center, told TbePaper.cn that the systems will help teachers check student attendance and monitor behavior during the lectures. "In the past, some students just checked their attendance and ditched the class or asked other students to check the attendance for them. Now with facial recognition, that would no longer be a problem," he said. "The moment you enter the classroom, the camera will monitor you all the way through and can tell how long you lower your head, whether you're playing with a smart phone, whether you're dozing off or reading other books," he added.

    The news has raised wide debate on Chinese social media, with many questioning if the cameras will violate students' privacy. A Sina Weibo user said: "I oppose such methods, and it is not clear whether the systems are developed by the school itself or by third parties. If it is the latter, is there any regulation of security? Where will the information be sent and stored?"

    Gan Xiangsi, a senior student from the university, said she welcomed the systems being applied in dormitories and libraries as this can help prevent personal belongings being stolen，but it is not necessary to use such technology in the classroom. "If the teacher teaches well，the students will be interested," she said. "On the contrary, this kind of monitoring will make everyone feel resistant."

    China Pharmaceutical University is not the first university to use facial recognition technology on campus. Many universities across the country have installed cameras at campus entrances to ensure safety. But many are also hesitant when it comes to applying such technology in classrooms.

    "This issue has been debated for quite a long time," Chu Zhaohui, a senior researcher at the National Institute of Education Sciences, told China National Radio. According to Chu, teachers and students who are under observation might not behave as they normally would since they know they are being watched. "Cameras should not be installed in classrooms merely for effective teaching purposes," Chu said, as teachers are also being observed. He agreed that "students' privacy needs to be protected". He also said that not putting classrooms under control is an important principle. "If you don't follow this principle, students will falsify and disguise their state of listening，and teachers may also not perform as well. Then real teaching will not occur," he added.

"Assume you are wrong." The advice came from Brian Nosek, a psychology professor, who was offering a strategy for pursuing better science.

To understand the context for Nosek's advice, we need to take a step back to the nature of science itself. You see despite what many of us learned in elementary school, there is no single scientific method. Just as scientific theories become elaborated and change, so do scientific methods.

But methodological reform hasn't come without some fretting and friction. Nasty things have been said by and about methodological reformers. Few people like having the value of their life's work called into question. On the other side, few people are good at voicing criticisms in kind and constructive ways. So, part of the challenge is figuring out how to bake critical self-reflection into the culture of science itself, so it unfolds as a welcome and integrated part of the process, and not an embarrassing sideshow.

What Nosek recommended was a strategy for changing the way we offer and respond to critique. Assuming you are right might be a motivating force, sustaining the enormous effort that conducting scientific work requires. But it also makes it easy to interpret criticisms as personal attacks. Beginning, instead, from the assumption you are wrong, a criticism is easier to interpret as a constructive suggestion for how to be less wrong—a goal that your critic presumably shares.

One worry about this approach is that it could be demoralizing for scientists. Striving to be less wrong might be a less effective motivation than the promise of being right. Another concern is that a strategy that works well within science could backfire when it comes to communicating science with the public. Without an appreciation for how science works, it's easy to take uncertainty or disagreements as marks against science, when in fact they reflect some of the very features of science that make it our best approach to reaching reliable conclusions about the world. Science is reliable because it responds to evidence: as the quantity and quality of our evidence improves, our theories can and should change, too.

Despite these worries, I like Nosek's suggestion because it builds in cognitive humility along with a sense that we can do better. It also builds in a sense of community—we're all in the same boat when it comes to falling short of getting things right.

Unfortunately, this still leaves us with an untested hypothesis （假说）: that assuming one is wrong can change community norms for the better, and ultimately support better science and even, perhaps, better decisions in life. I don't know if that's true. In fact, I should probably assume that it's wrong. But with the benefit of the scientific community and our best methodological tools, I hope we can get it less wrong, together.

As we all know, all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. Now scientists have given us another warning: spending too much time on smart phones or computers makes you dull too.

"Many focus on the benefits of digital devices (设备) in education but ignore the costs," said Patricia Greenfield from the University of California, "losing the ability to understand the emotions of other people is one of the costs." Greenfield and her research team did an experiment. They worked with 105 children who spent about 4.5 hours in front of screens on a school day. The students were asked to describe the emotions towards the pictures of people who were happy, sad, angry or scared. Then, half of them attended a five-day nature and science camp. There they had no smart phones, TV, or computers. The other half stayed in school and spent the five days as usual. Five days later, all the children took the test again.

Students who had been to the camp got about 5 percent more answers correct than they had done before the camp. But the other group of students didn't show much improvement. The study is not perfect in some ways, said the researchers. But scientists say that the study is still a warning for us.

"Emotional skills develop in practice and the brain develops through real interaction." said Professor Taylor, a professor at the University of San Francisco.

Researchers talked to 2,000 parents of children aged 2-16 in the UK about what activities their children could do confidently. The results were surprising: Their children could use a tablet (平板电脑) (59%) and work a mobile phone (57%) more confidently than they could tie their shoe laces (鞋带) (53%)! So, spend more time away from mobile phones and computers if you want to be an understanding friend, and not a member of what the Daily Mail called "Generation Helpless".