Survey Finds 40% Of Colleges Have ZERO GOP Professors

[Dill]

(05-08-2018, 12:59 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: This person gets it!



These people don't. 

LOL what do you mean by "it" ?

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(05-08-2018, 06:20 PM)Dill Wrote: LOL what do you mean by "it" ?

[Beaker]

(05-08-2018, 12:49 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote:
No, he's absolutely correct. The ability to teach people geometry is a very different skill set than the one needed to be an architect. The same goes with teaching anything. People who are bad at jobs often try to become teachers in that area, sure, but they're not good teachers. 

I understand that your character is allegedly a former lawn mowing teacher, but you're wrong here. 

I see where you're going with this. But I disagree speaking from experience. Most of the best teachers in my district are ones who have other experiences to draw from. It doesn't go to the nuts and bolts of teaching subject matter, but more to the ability to relate that subject matter to real world experiences.

You are correct to say that having an outside job doesn't make someone a better teacher. A good architect will not necessarily be a good teacher. I believe that one either has an innate gift to teach, or they don't. But I also think if you take someone with that gift and give them other experiences, it make s a good teacher even better. 

[Dill]

(05-08-2018, 06:27 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote:

LOl    good one. 

[Dill]

(05-08-2018, 03:11 PM)masterpanthera_t Wrote: Teaching high school students is obviously different than teaching early college students and even more different than teaching advanced college students. Even though we call them all "teachers" the roles become different as the level of subject expertise changes and the knowledge of the student changes. In high school, students are being exposed to subjects that they many not be familiar with and/or possess a cursory understanding only. Part of the goal there is to inspire and show them the potential for those disciplines in the real world and also to provide them a chance to learn how to think (at the early stages of this type of thinking). As you get into college, the professor's goal is to teach some specific skills that show how the discipline is applied in the real world (to work more on intermediate stages of learning how to think) and teach some specific stuff. I'm basing this on STEM classes in College. It might be slightly different in other "liberal arts" courses, but overall I think the concept of refining how students learn to think still applies here. As you get further along (say third year or later in College), the courses build on specializing in different aspects of the discipline (again, in my experience in a STEM field), and to build on initial level knowledge about the applications of your discipline.

Just a quick note here--there are some skills students need to learn at the HS level to get on in college. E.g., how to write, a rudimentary knowledge of how to construct research papers.

In Liberal Arts and social science fields, it seems to me that the first two years lay a basis for later work in that one cannot do "depth" without sufficient breadth.  The relation between Masters and PhD work is also like that in some fields, with the Masters aimed at breadth and the PhD a specialization--though that specialization presumes breadth.

Also, liberal arts education isn't all about getting jobs. It is--or should be--about producing a more general understanding of the world and one's place in it.  Thus people learn all kinds of things that will never be job-knowledge--like where Afghanistan is on the map and why there are Catholics and Protestants.

[Benton]

(05-08-2018, 12:17 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: These should never be permanent jobs. To teach you should also have some real world experience. A lot of these people never leave the classroom.

No job is permenant. Even tenured professors can be fired.

But, ultimately, having someone else’s determination of real world experience and being registered with a political party are unrelated.

That’s like saying 40% of cheesecakes have crusts, so everyone should eat more lithium.

[Benton]

(05-08-2018, 03:05 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: No one said you have to do anything. Really good teachers do well, but the rest of them suffer which then they fall on sjw platitudes. The thread is on the lack of conservative professors. There should be a section of the teaching staff that have some experience.

What’s to say there isn’t a section of the staff experienced?

And maybe there is, but they’re... wait for it... liberal.

Lots of people with real world experience don’t believe you should have vague mandates and impose minority views on a majority. Or, in other words, force collleges to hire people of a particular political party based off of some sense of making those people feel better.

[Dill]

(05-08-2018, 04:18 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: The conservative accusations that all private liberal arts schools are run by liberal communist feminist hippy Nazis is pure trash. It doesn't hold with reality. But that has never stopped conservatives from making accusations before.

The NAS has been doing this since the '90s.  The goal is to present a picture of US colleges to people who are not very familiar with them, and so can easily believe that there is this massive 50-state institutional machine churning out liberals and persecuting conservatives.  "Indoctrination" has replaced instruction as conservative ideals come under question.

They adopted the model and rhetoric of Women's/Black Studies professors from the 70s and 80s, who argued against the exclusion of their subject matters and professors in white-male dominated universities by presenting demographic data and affirming a need for diversity.

Now "persecuted" conservatives argue for something called "intellectual diversity" which they say is missing from campuses today.  And their methods are those of the previously mentioned groups--affirmative action for conservatives in response to polls and other quantitative data showing that their group is "absent" in certain departments.

[Dill]

(05-08-2018, 12:17 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: These should never be permanent jobs. To teach you should also have some real world experience.   A lot of these people never leave the classroom.

Benton already answered the misunderstanding about "permanent jobs."

I ask how you know that "a lot of these people" don't have "real world experience"?  

First of all, subject matters are very different.   How does a teacher of ancient Greek get "real world experience"? 

And what counts as "real world experience" for, say, a university marching band conductor? 

Where do professors of education get their "real world experience''--except by teaching? Which you think is not "real world experience."

Would you say that a university archeologist with 6 graduate students working on a site in the Middle East is not getting "real world" experience in archeology?   How about a team of university oceanographers with their graduate students doing research on oxygen depletion in the Caribbean?

Then there is the plain fact that many, if not most, college professors DO have "real world experience."  Business and Econ professors regularly work in  the private sector.  Same for many social scientists.  

I know a professional artist who was a college professor on the side.

The nearby Allegheny Observatory--like most around the world--is manned by college professors whose "real world" job is research. An astronomer or an astrophysicist who went work for a private corporation might be degrading his status and knowledge.

Most of the world's basic research is done in universities by professors. And that is where they get "real world experience"--not outside but inside the university.

[Bengalzona]

(05-08-2018, 09:33 PM)Dill Wrote: The NAS has been doing this since the '90s.  The goal is to present a picture of US colleges to people who are not very familiar with them, and so can easily believe that there is this massive 50-state institutional machine churning out liberals and persecuting conservatives.  "Indoctrination" has replaced instruction as conservative ideals come under question.

They adopted the model and rhetoric of Women's/Black Studies professors from the 70s and 80s, who argued against the exclusion of their subject matters and professors in white-male dominated universities by presenting demographic data and affirming a need for diversity.

Now "persecuted" conservatives argue for something called "intellectual diversity" which they say is missing from campuses today.  And their methods are those of the previously mentioned groups--affirmative action for conservatives in response to polls and other quantitative data showing that their group is "absent" in certain departments.

Yes. And intellectual diversity can be only achieved through the exclusions available in the private school systems.

Think about that one for a minute... it truly is as ignorant as it sounds.

[StLucieBengal]

(05-08-2018, 09:28 PM)Benton Wrote: What’s to say there isn’t a section of the staff experienced?

And maybe there is, but they’re... wait for it... liberal.

Lots of people with real world experience don’t believe you should have vague mandates and impose minority views on a majority. Or, in other words, force collleges to hire people of a particular political party based off of some sense of making those people feel better.

The current hiring system doesn’t work. We have universities shutting down free speech in the name of safe spaces and other liberal nonsense. Universities didn’t get here without their staff allowing them to jump the shark.

[Dill]

(05-09-2018, 01:10 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: The current hiring system doesn’t work.  We have universities shutting down free speech in the name of safe spaces and other liberal nonsense.   Universities didn’t get here without their staff allowing them to jump the shark.

What do you know about the current hiring system, which staffs the best and largest university system in the world? 

It sounds like you are pushing a hiring system that favors people who don't think college professors are much good for anything anyway. 

And what do you know about "free speech" at US universities?  Purging "liberal nonsense" from universities would get us free speech?

What can a phrase like "jump the shark" mean with respect to an institution that produces the nation's knowledge workers and most of the world's basic research?

[BmorePat87]

(05-08-2018, 01:46 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Knowing practical application enhances your lesson plans. You do need to know how to teach but you also need the experience of life/job to know how it fits.

Knowing how to engage students enhances your lesson plans too. You do not need to have worked a second career in order to know how to relate the practical application of your content area. If you're incapable of doing this without additional career experience, you're likely not a great teacher. 

[BmorePat87]

(05-08-2018, 07:41 PM)Beaker Wrote: I see where you're going with this. But I disagree speaking from experience. Most of the best teachers in my district are ones who have other experiences to draw from. It doesn't go to the nuts and bolts of teaching subject matter, but more to the ability to relate that subject matter to real world experiences.

You are correct to say that having an outside job doesn't make someone a better teacher. A good architect will not necessarily be a good teacher. I believe that one either has an innate gift to teach, or they don't. But I also think if you take someone with that gift and give them other experiences, it make s a good teacher even better. 

Personally, all of my best teachers were career teachers and not career change teachers, but my anecdotal evidence is no more better than yours. 

What I will say is that knowing how to relate your content area to real world applications does not require first hand experience. I won't discount the fact that there are great teachers who joined the profession after working a different career first, and their experiences play a major role in how they teach, but it's not necessary. 

[StLucieBengal]

(05-09-2018, 08:07 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Knowing how to engage students enhances your lesson plans too. You do not need to have worked a second career in order to know how to relate the practical application of your content area. If you're incapable of doing this without additional career experience, you're likely not a great teacher. 

University professors do not get the same teacher education that k-12 get in their undergrad.

If all professors needed a teacher education to be hired then that would be an appropriate option. You could at least call them teachers.

[masterpanthera_t]

(05-08-2018, 09:17 PM)Dill Wrote: Just a quick note here--there are some skills students need to learn at the HS level to get on in college. E.g., how to write, a rudimentary knowledge of how to construct research papers.

In Liberal Arts and social science fields, it seems to me that the first two years lay a basis for later work in that one cannot do "depth" without sufficient breadth.  The relation between Masters and PhD work is also like that in some fields, with the Masters aimed at breadth and the PhD a specialization--though that specialization presumes breadth.

Also, liberal arts education isn't all about getting jobs. It is--or should be--about producing a more general understanding of the world and one's place in it.  Thus people learn all kinds of things that will never be job-knowledge--like where Afghanistan is on the map and why there are Catholics and Protestants.

There's not much disagreement here, so I will mention this: I don't believe that I implied the part that is bolded, but if I gave that impression, then that was not the intent. I was more speaking about timelines whether they apply the same in STEM fields vs. other fields (i.e. when I draw the line at say two years into college vs. later etc.). I was certain of the general arc moving towards more "specializing" as a college student matures. But this is not a major revelation so I will stop here.

I find this overall thread very amusing (mainly the OP) considering that we're discussing the qualifications to be a good teacher, when we find ourselves in the context of a Betsy DeVos (or Devious like I like to call her), running the Department of Education, when I can't find her in possession of even the rudimentary qualifications for the post that she holds nor the the aptitude to have learned on the job based on her public interviews so far.

[StLucieBengal]

(05-09-2018, 06:11 PM)masterpanthera_t Wrote: There's not much disagreement here, so I will mention this: I don't believe that I implied the part that is bolded, but if I gave that impression, then that was not the intent. I was more speaking about timelines whether they apply the same in STEM fields vs. other fields (i.e. when I draw the line at say two years into college vs. later etc.). I was certain of the general arc moving towards more "specializing" as a college student matures. But this is not a major revelation so I will stop here.

I find this overall thread very amusing (mainly the OP) considering that we're discussing the qualifications to be a good teacher, when we find ourselves in the context of a Betsy DeVos (or Devious like I like to call her), running the Department of Education, when I can't find her in possession of even the rudimentary qualifications for the post that she holds nor the the aptitude to have learned on the job based on her public interviews so far.

Agreed. Let’s just close down the department of Ed and leave the states to it....

[GMDino]

(05-09-2018, 06:41 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Agreed.  Let’s just close down the department of Ed and leave the states to it....

Right.  Just like every time we get a bad manager I insist on burning down the building and making other people suffer because of it.

Good idea. 

[BmorePat87]

(05-09-2018, 03:38 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: University professors do not get the same teacher education that k-12 get in their undergrad.  

If all professors needed a teacher education to be hired then that would be an appropriate option.  You could at least call them teachers.

That's because teachers and professors do not have the same job. Professors do not need the same education as a K-12 teacher.

[BmorePat87]

(05-09-2018, 06:41 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Agreed.  Let’s just close down the department of Ed and leave the states to it....

Leave what to the states?