the shock appointment of conservative trustees to progressive New College
Shock to whom, exactly? Not anyone whoâs been paying attention to him.
I think in this case, they believed that they were going to slip under his radar, as itâs such a small school⌠but it just makes it easier for them to be a target⌠People who have managed to carve out some autonomy and privilege are going to have to realize that the far right is coming to dismantle ALL of higher ed and remake it in their preferred vision - which will be a carbon copy of the right wing, Christian schools that âbetter reflect the values of real AmericansââŚ
After reading this, the only things that were clear to me were that 1) the author doesnât believe learning styles works/is a good approach, and 2) the descriptions of the two studies presented as proof sounded like they were intended to reinforce that view instead of conducting an objective assessment (using terms including âmythâ didnât help). I wasnât in a system that supported learning styles, but wish that Iâd had that opportunity. This was because of seeing the downside of forcing conformity because it was easier for the teachers.
From the extensive background provided on how learning styles came to be accepted and in widespread use (instead of presenting the evidence mentioned in the title), itâs reinforced that thereâs a lot more work involved in assessing preferences and tailoring lessons. The alternative would be a return to rote methods along with emphasis on outcomes instead of fostering creativity or thinking. They make a point of talking about the gap between recall and learning. However, the same could be said for what was described as âsuccessfulâ under the old model - the ability of students to repeat whatever they were told was important to know. Thatâs edging back toward the slippery slope where nobody cares what kids think - or whether or not they can.
Whatâs missing is proof that literacy, aptitude, and standardized test scores are markedly worse in systems using learning styles. There are lots of conclusions drawn from psychological studies that seem to be more about defining styles than truly measuring critical thinking skills, creativity, and performance of those taught using that method. I give high marks for the sauce - full of historical references and citations from like-minded scholars - but it doesnât cover the fact that thereâs not much meat on this chicken. Itâs provocative, so it will probably sell some books. 
Thanks for reading it so I didnât have to. Iâve been leery of Aeon for awhile now. I think those who run it slip in sneakily conservative pieces at times.
This enrages me. Talk about losing the plot. These are public universities witholding transcripts from students over minor debts.
Which leads to a side question: what employers require official transcripts!?! I get it for grad school programs and scholarships, but what kind of psychotic micro-managing employer needs a candidateâs transcripts? They have a degree from an acredited college program. I object to the idea that they should ask for a GPA, much less a whole transcript.
Hi from tâother side of the pond. Because Oxford/Cambridge, we have 1st, 2:1, 2:2 and 3rds here. Vaguely comparible to A,B,C,D. Title of degree and classification is on the cert.
My job hires on âa degree thatâs highly numerate (at least 50% mathsy) and usually a 1st or 2:1â. I helped out on an interview day and photocopied a few degree certificates.
Agree that whole transcript is overkill. If you need âcan explain standard deviationsâ then throw it in the technical test, rather than guessing if a course title has any relationship to what you want.
Yep, and itâs likely a trial run for other states. It could well spread like another virus.
Manhattan Instituteâs wingnut welfare includes Christopher Rufo (CRT), as a senior fellow.
Since itâs part of the State Policy Network, yep, a trial run for other states.
What happens in Florida doesnât stay in Florida.
Yep:
What DeSantis wants
Among his proposals:
Diversity, equity and inclusion: DeSantis said he wants these programs dismantled, along with the âbureaucraciesâ and staff supporting them. The programs are intended to attract and support faculty and students from a wider range of ethnic, racial and demographic backgrounds, but have emerged as a point of attack for conservative politicians and media.
âŚ
Tenure: The governor signed legislation last year that requires all tenured professors to undergo a comprehensive review every five years. Tenure has been around since at least the 1940s and was enacted to blunt political interference and give faculty freedom to discuss and research controversial topics without fear of dismissal.
But Tuesday, DeSantis said âyou may need to do reviews more aggressively,â so he wants to give schools boards of trustees and presidents authority to review tenure at any time.
âŚ
Conservative programs: DeSantis touted the stateâs specialty civics centers already opened at Florida State University and Florida International University. But he said he wants the newly established Hamilton Center for Classical and Civil Education at UF to become its own college allied with the university by 2024, with its own dorms and classrooms.
He said it will help attract like-minded conservative faculty and students.
âYou want these things to be different from what the orthodoxy is,â DeSantis said.
Preeminent universities: DeSantis wants to increase the standards to require that FSU, UF and the University of South Florida, the stateâs preeminent research universities, conduct at least $50 million in research in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) programs, or with business partnerships, to âdirectly increase the ability of Florida students to be gainfully employed,â DeSantis said.
(Please pardon the piggyback.)
Translation: âMe and my cronies want wealth-serving lies injected into young peopleâs heads.â
More wingnut welfare for oligarch fartcatchers, and to give an academic veneer to their âthinktanksâ.
Itâs important to emphasize just how central the battle over bias in higher education is to U.S. political discourse. Entire generations of students with rightwing parents are being socialized as they enter college to be suspicious of professors before they even step foot in a classroom. In my experience teaching the last few years, Iâve seen numerous students in the Trumpian era with rightwing preconceptions that professors who promote critical thought, challenge Republican anti-science propaganda, or value evidence-based reasoning are the enemy.
Not just educators. Iâve had numerous encounters where parents are shocked that i strongly support vaccination, masking, LGBTQ kids, etc. Some have left our practice, a couple even filed complaints about it. UVA, to their credit, has backed me fully on these, but still discouraging to get those âwe need your recollection of this visitâ calls. There are a number of my colleagues who have taken a Donât Ask, Donât Tell approach. We have an anonymous questionnaire we use that asks about sexuality, sexual identity and sexual experience, and several have said they will no longer use it because âitâs easier if i donât know.â I have mentioned before that my seniority makes it easier to plow through concerns about this, but letâs be honest, it also means my future is limited and the ones coming behind me, at this point, all NPâs, no MDâs, are not so secure in their positions and have expressed feeling vulnerable due to patient satisfaction surveys playing such an outsized role in performance evaluations.
Edit. Cause type bad me
Ime anything that uses self reporting to sort peopleâs personalities and thinking in to a number of generic fixed âtypesâ is pseudoscience.
see also, gallery of assholes:
Archive version: https://archive.ph/SMO0G
