【推荐1】Kodak’s decision to file for bankruptcy (破产) protection is a sad, though not unexpected, turning point for a leading American corporation that pioneered consumer photography and dominated the film market for decades, but ultimately failed to adapt to the digital revolution.

Although many attribute Kodak’s downfall to “complacency (自满),” that explanation doesn’t acknowledge the lengths to which the company went to reinvent itself. Decades ago, Kodak anticipated that digital photography would overtake film — and in fact, Kodak invented the first digital camera in 1975 — but in a fateful decision, the company chose to shelf its new discovery to focus on its traditional film business.

It wasn’t that Kodak was blind to the future, said Rebecca Henderson, a professor at Harvard Business School, but rather that it failed to execute on a strategy to confront it. By the time the company realized its mistake, it was too late.

Kodak is an example of a firm that was very much aware that they had to adapt, and spent a lot of money trying to do so, but ultimately failed. Large companies have a difficult time switching into new markets because there is a temptation to put existing assets into the new businesses.

Although Kodak anticipated the inevitable rise of digital photography, its corporate (企业的) culture was too rooted in the successes of the past for it to make the clean break necessary to fully embrace the future. They were a company stuck in time. Their history was so important to them. Now their history has become a liability.

Kodak’s downfall over the last several decades was dramatic. In 1976, the company commanded 90% of the market for photographic film and 85% of the market for cameras. But the 1980s brought new competition from Japanese film company Fuji Photo, which undermined Kodak by offering lower prices for film and photo supplies. Kodak’s decision not to pursue the role of official film for the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics was a major miscalculation. The bid went instead to Fuji, which exploited its sponsorship to win a permanent foothold in the marketplace.

【推荐2】Philo Farnsworth was a man who made it possible for one of the most important communication devices (设备）－ television to be created. Philo was born on August 19th, 1906, near Indian Creek in the western state of Utah. He attended a very small school near his family's farm. He did very well in school. He asked his teacher for special help in science. The teacher began helping Philo learn a great deal more than most young students could understand.

One night, Philo read a magazine story about the idea of sending pictures and sound through the air. Anyone with a device that could receive this electronic information could watch the pictures and hear the sound. The magazine story said some of the world's best scientists were using special machines to try to make a kind of device to send pictures.   

14-year-old Philo decided these famous scientists were wrong and that mechanical devices would never work. He decided that such a device would have to be electronic. Philo knew electrons（电子）could be made to move extremely fast. All he would have to do was to find a way to make electrons do the work.   

Very quickly Philo had an idea for such a receiver. It would trap light in a container and send the light on a line of electrons. Philo called it "light in a bottle".

Several days later, Philo told his teacher about a device that could capture (捕捉）pictures. He drew a plan for it, which he gave his teacher. Philo's drawing seemed very simple, but it clearly showed the information needed to build a television. In fact, all television equipment today still uses Philo's early idea.

Philo Farnsworth was only 14 years old then. He knew no one would listen to a child. In fact,   experts say that probably only ten scientists in the world at that time could have understood his idea.

On September 7th, 1927, Philo turned on a device that was the first working television receiver. The image produced on the receiver was not very clear, but the device worked. In 1930, the United States government gave Philo patent documents. These would protect his invention from being copied by others.

【推荐3】Sports shoes that work out whether their owner has done enough exercise to warrant (保证) time in front of the television have been devised (设计) in the UK.

The shoes—named Square Eyes—contain an electronic pressure sensor and a tiny computer chip to record how many steps the wearer has taken in a day. A wireless transmitter (发射器) passes the information to a receiver connected to a television, and this decides how much evening viewing time the wearer deserves, based on the day's efforts.

The design was inspired by a desire to fight against the rapidly ballooning waistlines among British teenagers, says Gillian Swan, who developed Square Eyes as a final year design project at Brunel University in London, UK. "We looked at current issues and childhood overweight really stood out," she says. "And I wanted to tackle (对付) that with my design."

Once a child has used up their daily allowance gained through exercise, the television automatically switches off. And further time in front of the TV can only be earned through more steps.

Swan calculated how exercise should translate to television time using the recommended daily amounts of both. Health experts suggest that a child take 12, 000 steps each day and watch no more than two hours of television. So, every 100 steps recorded by the Square Eyes shoes equals precisely one minute of TV time.

Existing pedometer (计步器) normally clip onto a belt or slip into a pocket and keep count of steps by measuring sudden movement. Swan says these can be easily tricked into recording steps through shaking. But her shoe has been built to be harder for lazy teenagers to cheat. "It is possible, but it would be a lot of effort," she says. "That was one of my main design considerations."

【推荐2】In 2011，Amy Chua put out the book，Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother，which is her memoir（回忆录）about the challenges of being a parent and trying to keep to the strict upbringing（养）she knew as a child. Controversy over the book arose because many readers did not get the impression that Chua was trying to be humorous about her parenting methods. There was also miscommunication about the purpose of the book. Many received it as a guide for other parents on how to use strict methods to punish and motivate their children. However，Chua has always claimed the aim of her book was only to share her successes and failures as a parent in a culturally diverse world.

In the book，Chua compares Western and Chinese beliefs and methods of parenting. In general，Chinese parents believe a child's academic success is directly linked to parenting skills. It is common for such parents to take severe measures to make their children do exactly what they say. In contrast，Western parents worry more about their children's self-esteem（自尊），which drives their parenting methods. As a result，parenting methods have become less strict and children are not held to the high standards they were in the past.

Interestingly，in the West，many people agree that Western parenting methods could use improvement. Some even say that the laid-back Western methods can be just as damaging as the overly strict ones Chua connects with Chinese culture because more and more children are not learning how to face and overcome challenges. However，experts also say that being too strict with children can cause rebellion（反叛），low self-esteem and poor parent-child relationships.

What everyone can agree on is that there is no perfect way to parent. What's more a method that works with one child will not necessarily work with another. Parents are challenged with finding the best method that helps each child learn to be a responsible and confident person.

【推荐3】Are you ever tempted to check your phone in class？ It seems harmless enough to take a quick look． But a new study finds that college students don't concentrate as well when devices （设备） are allowed in class． That was true even among students who did not use the devices themselves．

And college students are likely not to be the only ones affected， say Arnold Glass and Mengxue Kang． Both of the study's authors are psychologists who work at Rutgers University in Piscataway， N． J． Glass says he's sure he would find the same results if he had studied middle or high school students． Why？ The effects he and Kang saw are likely due to basic human tendencies ones that don't change with age．

These researchers had noticed their students were using laptops and phones during class． And they suspected there could be a problem with that． The human brain simply isn't wired to do several things at once．

People like to think they can multitask． But the brain actually can focus attention on just one thing at a time． When people switch between tasks， their brains can't keep up with everything． So there will be a delay as their attention moves from one task to another． Someone who is listening to one person talk， for instance， can't also listen to another． They can't even listen and read at the same time．

So what happens when students try to listen to a lecture while they check their email？ Or participate in a classroom discussion while liking a friend's photos？ Glass and Kang thought this kind of multitasking might make it harder for students to learn． Their new data now confirm that it does．