Now Playing Tracks

"Part Time Faculty Crisis" (response to NYT)

http://nyti.ms/1qvcYC8

No comments allowed to an editorial is suspicious clue to the whole truth so help you God.

Page 2.

All first time teaching faculty lack experience, even though they academically show qualifications — nothing new — it’s the same with all jobs, even out of education.

Second, administrators are not qualified in all the teaching fields, and those that are qualified for some fields administrate most of their faculty in field out of their expertise, even at the beginning faculty level.

Third, many retired faculty at community colleges are much more qualified then their superiors.

Moreover, those qualified faculty members teaching part-time know more than their superiors about teaching their subject.  Therefore, the issue of a teaching administrator is a myth at the higher education level.

That being said, realize that the elite universities have teaching assistants who teach while the name on the class professor blurb does research.

The article is based on conjecture with some truth.

There is no crisis in education if things are pretty much the same as before.

Education Reform

Albert Einstein had said it all with one simple statement:

"Imagination is better than knowledge."

Example: Bill Gates had knowledge; his imagination invented Microsoft Windows.

We need to keep teaching imagination in schools; otherwise we will be like China, Korea, Finland and Poland — looking for loopholes in Intellectual Property Laws.

Meanwhile, maybe we should, like them, put the math formulas in the exercise tests — it raises the scores.

Room 4 Debate— Affordable Health Care

I appreciate the facts and the repairs case that will make affordable health care work even more efficiently. The Plan and the Facts are not the problem: it’s attitudinal barriers.

Attitudinal barriers on this subject come in two parts: (1) avarice and (2) envy.

The mental obsession of wanting more and more is much like the hoarders syndrome — the people in it, don’t see it.

Therefore it becomes a mental illness that cannot be fixed without outside help. The private sector can’t fix it; too many of them are part of the epidemic. Second, envy of the avarice inflicted hoarders is much like the spectators in the NCAA and NFL football leagues. House parties, block parties, bar parties and tail gate parties join in to admire that action and vicariously score touchdowns themselves.

The Affordable Care Act is hoard doctor. Similarly, without out it we’ll have more fans of the rich, than actual rich. We may even have the poor believing they are rich — the ultimate national psychosis, with the actual rich picking up their mental health premiums.

 

SAT serves whom?

Elite universities want to keep that reputation, and the best way to do that is to get the best students to prove they have the best professors (which in turn do research and let their students meet the classes)

In the 1970s, I hired a couple of male Harvard Debaters to debate an entertaining topic on our campus against a couple of female debaters from a very successful debate team at a university down the road.

The topic was: “The education of women is a fruitless endeavor.” Afterwards, I talked to the Harvard men about education at Harvard.

They said that they signed up for Henry Kissinger’s class in Government. But they seldom saw the gentleman. His graduate assistance team taught the course while he “researched.”

So much for an elite education.

The S.A.T. got it Wrong

The goal is not to match what is taught in school, but to lead what is taught in school. Skills like fast comprehensive reading, Listening comprehension, writing efficiency, argumentation skills in verbal situations like small group discussion and public speaking are essential to success. Since values are the core of all decision-making, some philosophy; since visual communication is dominating art appreciation is paramount. Leadership, not followship is the valid mandate of the SAT. They got it WRONG

"Stand Your Ground" the perfect crime.

It’s not the “Stand Your Ground” law that shadowed justice: it’s the rules of evidence.

In the State of Florida and some other states, if you perceive yourself as being a victim of mayhem, you can use deadly force to protect yourself — presumably, a knife, gun, or club-like object.

What is clearly the point of controversy in such defense situations outside of your “castle” in states such as Florida is the rhetoric of “Stand your Ground” in the street.

If, for example, a White man attacks or appears to be attacking a Black man and the Black man feels he will experience mayhem, he can shoot to kill the White man, and vise versa, as defined in the Zimmerman case in Florida.

The recent Dunn case in Florida adds insight into the development of the equation: it is not necessary for the defendant prove the propensity of mayhem. The prosecution must prove that there was a real weapon ( a shotgun, in this case) that limited the defendants right to use deadly force as a defense.

In other words, the prosecution had to prove a real gun vs the defense’s “perception” of a real gun: thus the propensity for the perfect crime by the so called defendant.

To Tumblr, Love Pixel Union