Steve Ballmer Gets Egged at Hungarian University

May 20, 2008, 3:26 pm

Steve Ballmer, CEO of Microsoft, was egged during a recent speech at Corvinus University of Budapest, Hungary.

The egger accused Microsoft of stealing billions from the Hungarian people and demanded that Mr. Ballmer “give that money back right now.” Mr. Ballmer didn’t even have time to fork over his wallet, however, before the attacker began chucking eggs.

After ducking behind a desk, Mr. Ballmer coolly returned to his speech once the attacker was escorted from the room. —Catherine Rampell

This entry was posted in Video. Bookmark the permalink.

E-mail

5 Responses to Steve Ballmer Gets Egged at Hungarian University

Andy Rundquist - January 2, 2012 at 9:30 am

I’ve been doing an implementation of SBG in a couple physics classes and I plan to expand to all my courses moving forward. I really like the clarity having a well articulated set of learning outcomes gives to my courses. Everything I plan to do in class (assessments, demos, examples, etc) is centered on the outcomes, often explicitly. Occasionally that means not doing tangential concepts that don’t fit, and sometimes that bothers me a little. However, the focus the class has is worth it.

busynessgirl - January 2, 2012 at 12:54 pm

I post the learning objectives on every folder in my online shell, which is also helpful to me. But I wonder, do you think the students read or use these objectives? I worry that it just becomes more text for them to ignore. Do you have any evidence to the contrary?

Robert Talbert - January 2, 2012 at 1:57 pm

I can’t say I have actually measured anything on this, but I do explicitly write out what those learning objectives are on the test itself, we go over them explicitly when reviewing for tests, and I bring them up in class, so you have to work pretty hard not to be aware of them on some level. They’re out there in a separate document that I ask students to read, but that’s the only time they show up.

Robert Talbert - January 2, 2012 at 1:59 pm

I think that’s one of the major benefits of focusing like this on learning objectives: You learn what the tangential stuff is, and you have a reason to cut it. I found several items in Calc 2 that I used to think of as “essential” turned out really to be tangential. (Example: Integration by trig substitution. Useful but not essential. And yeah, you can argue with that.)

Peter Newbury - January 2, 2012 at 2:37 pm

We try very hard to write learning objectives for each course we “transform” at UBC through the Carl Wieman Science Education Initiative. We aim for a handful of “course-level” objectives: big picture goals that can’t be assessed by a single activity. Things like “critique the physics and astronomy you read about in the newspaper or see on TV”. Of course, there are lots of “topic-level” objectives, too.

Something I started doing was making a table with 1 column for each course-level objective and 1 row for each section of the course. The cells in the row are filled with that section’s topic-level objectives, in the column who’s course-level objective the item contributes to. When you’re done filling in the table, some interesting things jump out. For example, there might be a column with no entries: a course level objective with no supporting instruction. Either add some content or re-think the “hidden agenda” you have. Sometimes there are topic-level goals that don’t fit in any column: then why are teaching it?

We’ve found this table a nice way to sync the big- and small-pictures of the course.