tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7815564874722496808.post6008305718347585760..comments2023-04-27T03:36:36.821-05:00Comments on The Periodic Table: Mr. B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/02067666077743889680noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7815564874722496808.post-36333869441939075022009-11-29T22:07:00.604-06:002009-11-29T22:07:00.604-06:00Fire Letter: "discredit the ideas of critical...Fire Letter: "discredit the ideas of critical thinking as a component of education."<br /><br />I didn't take the letter that way at all.<br /><br />These are the kind of thing in the letter that concern me:<br /><br />"The University of Minnesota also should remember the Supreme Court's timeless expression of the important role of our universities in Sweezy v. New Hampshire, 354 U.S. 234, 250 (1957):"<br /><br />"The essentiality of freedom in the community of American universities is almost self-evident. No one should underestimate the vital role in a democracy that is played by those who guide and train our youth. To impose any strait jacket upon the intellectual leaders in our colleges and universities would imperil the future of our Nation."<br /><br />As to CEHD presenting other barriers to enrollment, I'd encourage you to pursue this with Dean Quam. Seems to be a valid complaint. There are places other than the U to receive teacher training and they will be only too happy to fill the void.Mr. B.https://www.blogger.com/profile/02067666077743889680noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7815564874722496808.post-8672000402478488682009-11-29T21:54:08.945-06:002009-11-29T21:54:08.945-06:00I have read the FIRE letter, in fact I read it bef...I have read the FIRE letter, in fact I read it before I saw your tweets and posts. It's rhetorically dishonest. It is designed to do precisely what it has done: distract us with red herrings about supposed litmus tests in order to discredit the ideas of critical thinking as a component of education. <br />Did you know that the U of M's teaching license program require 100 hours of classroomm volunteer time before you can even apply? or that you have to attend as a full time day-school student rather than as a night-school student as you can at U of St Thomas? Each of these things is a greater barrier to some segment of the applicant pool (those who work full time) than any supposed "disposition" assessment.momohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12149328149132703479noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7815564874722496808.post-67959508333342521502009-11-29T21:02:20.108-06:002009-11-29T21:02:20.108-06:00Momo,
I guess the thing that concerns me the mos...Momo, <br /><br />I guess the thing that concerns me the most about this is the disposition assessment and cultural awareness assessment. I've given you a link elsewhere to Margaret Soltan's piece on this. She is a professor of English at George Washington University - hardly a right wing toady.<br /><br />http://www.margaretsoltan.com/?p=19663<br /><br />Fire makes some real points about academic freedom. These just seem to get blown off. <br /><br />I'm sorry, but I seriously DO think that what I read could very well be "a party line telling people what to think."<br /><br />Please read the FIRE letter and tell me where you think they are wrong. Simply saying that the CEHD folks are good people and have their hearts in the right place - as I know you do - is not satisfactory.<br /><br />Your friend, sincerely,<br /><br />BillMr. B.https://www.blogger.com/profile/02067666077743889680noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7815564874722496808.post-35383398208726471842009-11-29T20:47:54.992-06:002009-11-29T20:47:54.992-06:00What is so alarming about that? seriously? This is...What is so alarming about that? seriously? This is not a party line telling people what to think, it's an approach to teacher training that says that we will put the social conditions in which are student live into the picture and take them seriously. What is wrong with that?momohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12149328149132703479noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7815564874722496808.post-46143026838263262512009-11-29T18:55:22.429-06:002009-11-29T18:55:22.429-06:00Thank you for your comments, Momo. You know that ...Thank you for your comments, Momo. You know that I have the deepest respect for your work and your teaching, so I certainly take anything you say seriously.<br /><br />First paragraph. You may be correct that the right wing is using this issue for generally fear mongering purposes. My problem is that my reading of what is proposed is disturbing. I am concerned that it might be used to force some sort of "cultural cookie-cutter" upon students and faculty alike. There is also an issue of academic freedom.<br /><br />Of course I do not want people teaching math who know nothing about math. I would hope that teachers would think about racism, sexism or prejudice during their training. But again, the language of this draft committee concerns me very much. To give just one example:<br /><br />"Every faculty member at our university that trains our teachers must comprehend and commit to the centrality of race, class, culture, and gender issues in teaching and learning, and consequently, frame their teaching and course foci accordingly."<br /><br />Sorry, I just don't buy that. And I have a forty year record of concern and action in teaching to other than privileged white people.Mr. B.https://www.blogger.com/profile/02067666077743889680noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7815564874722496808.post-46954613843283124612009-11-29T17:22:40.599-06:002009-11-29T17:22:40.599-06:00Katherine Kersten fired the first salvo, and this ...Katherine Kersten fired the first salvo, and this letter uses a similar rhetoric of alarm over the supposed ideological brainwashing they claim this task force is proposing. But it is intellectually dishonest for the FIRE authors and Kersten to claim that the task force is recommending some kind of litmus test for teachers. This is the spin they are putting on it, and should be taken for what it is: fear-mongering and catering to an anti-intellectual backlash that assumes that all pointy-head professors are out to turn our poor little children into brainwashed drones. First, that is not what the actual task force document says; you are highlighting their spin, not the facts. Secondly,if it were so darn easy to brainwash my students, they'd all get As because they would learn what I'm trying to teach them! <br />Seriously, this particular campaign is fairly odious.<br /><br />Do you want teachers teaching math who are not mathematically competent? do you want teachers teaching reading who are barely literate? Do we want teachers teaching civic values who refuse to think about the possibility that they themselves may have to examine their values carefully and reflect on how our society is rife with prejudice? Teachers do not come to the classroom as a tabula rasa, and their training as teachers is an excellent place for them to examine, in a safe place, the thorny issues of racism, sexism or prejudices that are going to bite them in the ass when they walk into a classroom with special needs kids, poor kids, kids who do not speak English well, or are don't share their background. If they don't think about these things as they learn about teaching, where will they do it?momohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12149328149132703479noreply@blogger.com