I'll preface this by saying that I hate standardized tests, but this is a good reading comprehension question (and the author clearly has poor reading comprehension.)
The description clearly says:
> 4. To avoid crushing the glass slide when focusing, begin with the lens close to the specimen and back off focusing.
This article seems to be celebrating that people can't follow instructions properly. If I were to get some students to play with robotics kits (which may or may not include microscopes) step 1 would be making sure that they understand the instructions for the kits. And a series of questions like this seems like a pretty valid way to test that. Tests are good. I'd even say tests can be crucial before you let kids play with expensive electronics and explosives.
> step 1 would be making sure that they understand the instructions for the kits
That's not the point of hacking.
If I were to get some students to play with robotic kits, I'd give them the parts, instructions and let them do whatever they want. If you remove the "discovery" part, you get something not much different than standarized test itself. If you have kids follow instructions precisely, well, they may as well just watch how it's done on youtube. They won't learn much more from it anyway.
The description clearly says:
> 4. To avoid crushing the glass slide when focusing, begin with the lens close to the specimen and back off focusing.
This article seems to be celebrating that people can't follow instructions properly. If I were to get some students to play with robotics kits (which may or may not include microscopes) step 1 would be making sure that they understand the instructions for the kits. And a series of questions like this seems like a pretty valid way to test that. Tests are good. I'd even say tests can be crucial before you let kids play with expensive electronics and explosives.