Comments for this field is required

Comment on on the non-normativity of value-added analysis by pamela

pamela — Thu, 09 Sep 2010 22:19:03 +0000

Yep, you’re definitely right about the unions’ “reactionary objection to the mention of anything smacking of oversight” (although the tides may be turning on this as testing-based accountability gains bipartisan support).

I am additionally suspicious of their agreeing to be held more accountable — but only by regulating *themselves*, without external involvement. Where are the incentives for them actually to do so?

Comment on on the non-normativity of value-added analysis by Brendan

Brendan — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 15:18:24 +0000

You raise several critical points that have been overlooked in the public conversation on the report. The reason this story has gained the traction that it has is that there are figures testifying to the fact that an LA teacher with tenure is about as immovable as the Rock of Gibraltar these days. My familiarity with the Ed Lit is admittedly weaker than yours. However, I’ve seen evidence documenting that good teaching can in fact raise test scores. How one would test this is, of course, open to debate. What strikes many as offensive however is that teachers’ unions reactionary objection to the mention of anything smacking of oversight.

Comment on new school year's resolutions by Adam

Adam — Thu, 02 Sep 2010 02:08:37 +0000

I am behind all of these but #3.

You cannot escape the internet, Pamela! One of us! One of us!

Comment on the wrongness of cheating by plagiarism, etiquette, and morality – this field is required

plagiarism, etiquette, and morality – this field is required — Fri, 13 Aug 2010 02:45:57 +0000

[…] in the New York Times lately, and it occurs to me that I have dropped the ball on a series of posts about plagiarism that I started earlier this summer. Although I had planned to write other stuff […]

Comment on "you're only cheating yourself" by plagiarism, etiquette, and morality – this field is required

plagiarism, etiquette, and morality – this field is required — Fri, 13 Aug 2010 02:44:14 +0000

Comment on plagiarism, etiquette, and morality by Andrew Jason Cohen

Andrew Jason Cohen — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 21:21:40 +0000

Well done!

Comment on plagiarism, etiquette, and morality by Saskia

Saskia — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 21:10:43 +0000

Amen to that!
Having recently run into a bad case of plagiarism by a non-western friend of mine who copied and pasted 60% 0f his master thesis from the web, I do wonder about the cultural attitudes to this practice though.
Friend was extremely offended that I got livid about it.

Comment on Teachers College & social justice by Brendan

Brendan — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 17:52:47 +0000

Pam,

I believe your suspicions are well founded. The first is that, as FIRE, NAS and other college watchdog groups routinely attest the notion of “social justice” is freighted with ideological baggage.

No where is this pernicious agenda more strident than in the domain of education. Here we find all sorts of social engineering lurking mischievously behind an ideology.

Furthermore, if you read any of the work coming out of the Manhattan Institute you will find documentation of just how soaked to the bone TC is in this working perspective.

This is a perpetual problem we of differing, and sometimes somewhat radical, thinking face in the academy. How do we pursue ideas that counter the prevailing orthodoxy without offending “liberal” sensibilities?

Brendan

Comment on Teachers College & social justice by pamela

pamela — Mon, 02 Aug 2010 01:11:33 +0000

Yeah, that takes us pretty far afield from the FIRE complaint. The FIRE crowd would probably prefer that the social justice stuff be removed altogether. However, FIRE does take a different approach to private universities than to public ones: in the case of the former, it is more that universities need to provide truth in advertising about their academic climates than protect absolute freedom of academic speech. So the real problem with the TC policy is that it is kind of hidden and mysterious, and might conflict with other statements in TC or Columbia documents about freedom of inquiry, etc.

It does seem likely that it was originally more clearly agreed upon what the terms meant. I agree that TC’s failing to take a stand is somewhat cowardly. It is also kind of bad to refuse to revise the language if such revision is actually warranted, just for the sake of sticking to one’s guns.

Comment on Teachers College & social justice by Matt Brown

Matt Brown — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 23:50:30 +0000

Pamela,

That all sounds rather reasonable, actually, but pretty far removed from the level of opposition I read into the FIRE complaints, right?

One problem may be that it was originally more clearly agreed upon what the terms meant, and now TC is afraid to clarify further for fear of more trenchant conservative criticism. That strikes me as cowardly, though.

Matt