Well, I apologize if my 35 years in the profession do not measure up to a Ted talk you heard once.
Yeah, I kinda thought that went without saying; I’m talking about a cubic shitload of jobs to create here.
And moaning about the cost is short-sighted bullshit when you consider the return on this kind of investment; any sort of commitment to evidence-based policy would demand this.
I’m sorry about your superior attitude. I have ten years on you.
If you’ve really been teaching for 45 years then (a) good on you, but (b) I am gobsmacked you are both unaware of the use of peer learning in schools today and unaware of the degree to which “disruptors” like Mitra are wielded today as a cudgel against teachers by people in power over them.
“Moaning about cost” is the entire point. You, me, and a definite majority of people would be fine with actual government spending, rather than tax-rebate schemes that further cede decision-making to capital, but the twin obstacles of Federalism and midterm election dysfunction (cough 2010 cough) make that rather difficult.
Further, there’s this framing, driven by particular ideology, that proposes people can be convinced to support government spending if the spending is explicitly tied to work. This premise is undermined by the fact that the publicly-funded workers that we already have are under constant attack for daring to unionize in any circumstance. On top of this, there’s already a lot of work that people do that is uncompensated, there is good reason to be skeptical about political determinations about what kind of work “counts”, and what doesn’t. So, why not dispense with ideological dispositions about labor, and simply cut every person at least a $10000 check every year, no questions asked? Can’t generate the political will to fund it with taxes? Take the money that we’ve been printing to prop up the banks and give it to everyone else instead! Bold and zesty!
No more than eleven children per teacher, no less than two teachers per classroom.
A cudgel? You are so completely misrepresenting his research, and the others. And you’re wrong about what is wielded as a cudgel. Budget cuts are the cudgel. Standardized testing is a cudgel. Union busting is a cudgel. Let’s live in reality here. Advancements in education research are not the problem, as you are suggesting. You are so completely off base here.
I think that would be wonderful. There is always something that comes up, so it’s good for continuity to have someone right on hand in the classroom, instead of having to call down to the front office.
I’m not suggesting that at all. I support research in education, both discipline-specific pedagogy and by people who study education more generally. I don’t like flash projects where broad claims substitute for careful study and peer review, and I especially don’t like it when this leads to policy. If you haven’t seen the latter where you teach, then you are lucky.
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.
